homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
Forum Library, Charter, Moderator: open

Google News Archive Forum

This 306 message thread spans 11 pages: 306 ( [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 11 > >     
Update Dominic - Part 4

 2:16 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

Continued from: [webmasterworld.com...]

www2.google.com and www3.google.com have the new -sj results.

Update is on :)



 2:19 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

You're right I see a change. Google seems to be dancing.


 2:20 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

This is NOT good for my lil site.

I went from #5 to the 4th page!

*cries hysterically*

*runs off to play the Google drinking game*


 2:22 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

Yuk! Now I will be looking forward to the serious thread to try to figure out what the heck we have do change in our SEO.

Backlinks arent worth a crap anymore?


 2:26 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

Backlinks arent worth a crap anymore?

Well, on a phrase important for a client the only changes that were made were additional backlinks and went from #34 to #11 and #12 on www2 right now.

Sorta odd to figure this update out.



 2:28 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

Looks like 661K on www and 384K on www2 and www3 from here, mixed feelings on this one.


 2:30 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

>Yuk! Now I will be looking forward to the serious thread to try to figure out what the heck we have do change in our SEO.

I was the one who was starting those. Things are so weird this update, and so uncertain, I dunno how useful such a thread would be in this case? If at the end of the dance the results are like they are now, this will be the most startling algo change Google ever did. I see some weird SERPs.


 2:31 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

Something odd Marcia. Our main site, from 1250 backlinks to 384 but remained (give or take one position) in same spots. Newer site, last month 90 backwards links - this month NONE jumped from page 30 to page 7... I need a Valium...


 2:32 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

Tell me about it! For no reasons sites less optimal are beating more optimal sites with more backwards links! Very sparatic/odd results..


 2:32 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

>Looks like 661K on www and 384K on www2 and www3 from here, mixed feelings on this one.

Anyone remember that trick someone posted before to get the toolbar to show the new PR of a page before it moved to www? Might indicate a lot if I could see the new PR values.


 2:35 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

I think the google drinking game is the best bet tonight.... just made a beer run and got a bottle of Champagne and a bottle of mad dog twenty twenty. Lets just hope the Dance works well for me so i can poor that MD 2020 down the drain.

on a more serious note if the SJ is the new index it will be interesting to watch the Spam filters being turned on and the back link pressure poured in.


 2:35 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

Hmm, I am not convinced on this one it seems to be a very different pattern to the last few updates, I notice that the -ex results have not changed.


 2:36 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

One page has gone from 500+ backlinks to 11. Some of the backlinks not showing now are Yahoo, DMOZ and Paypal- all PR 7 and above links still in place.

Is this what GG meant by an exciting new algo? Awesome!


 2:36 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

Come on, don't you hear all the sites that disappeared?....mine did pretty much, it looks like I'm barely indexed....too many sites have disappeared, this isn't over...you can't have this many sites disappearing into thin air and call it an update...it's only just begun...I'd be interested in comparing notes with anyone else who dropped dramatically or disappeared, I'll bet we could find a common thread that might make sense of this...(for example my site just got indexed in February, and I'm seeing Feb results in terms of my backlinks and where I ranked back then...I think they just need to bring in the other factors...I expect to be back at number 1 when this finishes...anyone else see anything in common with my story? I want to find the common thread to make sense of this.

Alec Doggone

 2:40 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

The mere possibility that this could be the real update is simply too hideous (to me, anyway).

I'm off to bed in the hope that, when I awake, the world will be normal and beautiful again... :(


 2:40 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

I'm not going to gripe too much because it looks like the "quality" of the index will be increasing.

Plus, I worry about the update before the deep crawl and once that crawl has been used. Don't sweat what you don't know.


 2:41 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

I have spent a lot of time and effort in improving my rankings using ethical techniques and hint and tips I have learned in Webmasterworld over the last year or so. This update has really slogged me in favour of sites using not-so-ethical techniques, with less backlinks, with lower pagerank and less relevant content.

I must admit to being very disillusioned with this update.


 2:42 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

/me pour's WebMistress a shot. I think the key is to relax and watch it all come in to place


 2:45 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

Anyone remember that trick someone posted before to get the toolbar to show the new PR of a page before it moved to www?

This One? [webmasterworld.com] - message #9

- Chad


 2:47 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

It looks sad on my end :( I don't even get #1 for my own domain name. I was highly listed for most relevant searches and now around #60-70ish. The party is over, for now at least.


 2:47 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

something is really wrong with the update if what we see on www2 and www3 is the new index. A site linking to one of my domains was edited and the link to my domain removed well over a month ago but when I do a back-link check on my domain that link to my site is still seems to be there...


 2:48 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

Please, please, don't let this update be for real. Okay Googleguy you had your joke... Ha!Ha! Really funny ;) Now let's have the real update. You know the one where my sites should improve their top 10 position due to increased content and added backlinks, instead of dropping out of the top 100.


 2:49 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

One of my clients, a major ecommerce site - Comscore and Neilsen rated lost between 25 to 50% of backlinks to various properties - Serps have fallen somewhat. Two clients that I've checked so far even moved up for extremely competitive keyword phrases while losing 50% of backlinks. Wierd.



 2:50 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

I agree something is wrong

One of my web site has 72000 pages crawled befire now there are only 1400

Another went down from 32000 to 300.



 2:51 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

It's real Alec_Doggone. You can always pray by the end of the update things will improve for you. As to Krapulator, perhaps next round you'll beat the spammers. My main site fell to #16 from #4, and a spammer with *no relevant content* to the keyword, with not even the keyword itself on the page, moving up to #9 by using a redirect from an bought URL. Only consolation is that my other site is relevant for that keyword (including backlinks), and miraculously with no changes jumped from #19 to #7?! I never expected that site to do well for that keyword search on Google. And, the first site is still doing well for the other important keywords. (rfgdxm1 scratches his head.)


 2:53 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

Guess I'll weigh in on this. I have some definite mixed feelings. Some of the my searches I am up and some are down.

A spammer that I reported and seemed to get cleaned up is back in with different sub-domains. They now have a few results on the front page, but yesterday they had most of the front page in -sj, so I am hoping that they are getting caught by the filter. They are more of a cloaking problem than a hidden text problem though. I will report them agazin if they are still there in a couple of days.

When I tried searching on -sj for things unrelated to my site, I would have to say that I was still able to find relevant information on all the searches. Many of them even compared favorably to www.

I sinking feeling that I am not going to be doing as well in this update as a couple of months ago, but I honestly don't have any problems with the update as a searcher.


 2:58 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

>This One? - message #9

No. The one that involves modifying the Hosts file to find out the new PageRank.

Think I found it using the site search here:


NOTE #1: I show as the IP for www-sj.google.com
MOTE #2: DON'T play around with your hosts file unless you really, really know what you are doing.

[edited by: rfgdxm1 at 3:11 am (utc) on May 6, 2003]

swampy webber

 2:59 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

Not one to usually look at things in a negative light but I still have the same question I had in the -sj thread.

I believe GG DID indicate that backlinks would still be slowly added back in and when I asked about a large number of pages I had crawled, he did indicate that if they had been crawled before they would probably be able to be included again in the future. He also did indicate for some that data may be included in the 'next iteration' (whenever that is) but where in that thread or otherwise did he indicate that new content would still be added to the -sj results for inclusion in this update? Some of you keep saying this is the case but I can't put my finger on a post that really says that.

Going to bed now. Hey, maybe I already am and this is a dream. One can hope.


 3:01 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

My site has gone from #4 to #1 for keyword keyword search.Great.
So I decide to check link:www.mysite.com.
I've added 2 links.
1.PR4 -hidden text white on white stuffed on index page.
2.PR5 -searcher redirected to affiliate site. Cache shows keyword stuffed into some literary text?
Neither solicited by me!
Oh well.
BTW the perfect SE would allow all spamming techniques and have a great algo.
BADSITES -have spam going for them
GOODSITES -have spam going for them
-have good content
-have competent webmasters (hopefully)
They rise to the top!


 3:01 am on May 6, 2003 (gmt 0)

"sj = salty jello
sj = SERP Jungle
sj = slow jubilation"

C'mon, it's a softball..........

sj = spamjunk


[edited by: steveb at 3:01 am (utc) on May 6, 2003]

This 306 message thread spans 11 pages: 306 ( [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 11 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved