new with google?
| 11:38 am on May 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
From SJ to FI, then CW and now DC, i have confirm a new things happened with the new algo.
In FI, CW and DC, my site is in the index. Most search terms performing the same as usual, EXCEPT the top keywords.
Top keywords are keywords used a lot in anchor text and contained in the title of my page.
The reason I am posting this is not to blame google or what. I need to at least find our the reason why this is happening.
Anyone here having the same experience? Maybe we can discussed here and find out the reason. Maybe there is a new filter working againt us.
| 6:13 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Just now coming into this discussion, so apologies for the late comments.
"Hmmm, I think this is the first time Google take actions against ZEUS and Linksmanager."
I gotta chime in. I do use Linksmanager, and can attest that it does not harvest links or email addresses. Each link submitted has to be approved manually by a human (me!). It checks for reciprocation, and allows me to create static HTML links pages without having to continually be coding new links, changes, deletions, etc. I take those HTML pages and upload them to my web server under my own domain just like everyone else does. Linksmanager is a tool, not a PR boosting scheme or program. I have links pages for my website visitors to check out - it adds value to my site.
Just wanted to defend that program, as its been a real time saver and improved the quality of my site.
Can't attest for ZEUS as I've never used it, don't plan on it.
Hope this Google thing gets resolved soon.
| 6:31 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
DarkFriend and all who confuse about the semi-penalty talk,
Let me explain a bit, I am not pointing my finger to LinksManager. The main point I want to pass along is Google are working on handling sites/webmaster which try to manipulate ranking through the use of excessive links/anchor text. LinksManager might be one that would lead to activating this filter because it is a link exchangling scheme. Your link partner will always link to you using the same anchor text, where you should be careful so it won't trigger the semi-penalty.
It's quite hard to believe on the semi-penalty and the excesssive anchor text talk if you are not caught by it in this update.
Here is what you can do. Search in Google using allinanchor:Keyword Phase. Open another window and search only the keyword phase without allinachor. Compare both SERPs and see which sites are missing. Now, check for the exact ranking for the missing sites. If these sites happened to drop over 100 or you saw their inner page appear instead of their main page - they have been caught by the semi-penalty that I am talking about.
Hopefully this make the discussion clearer. Of course there are just too many opinions on why a site could trigger such filter/penalty. But at least I am showing you there are really such a situation happening in this update, which I have always refer it as the semi-penalty. Just do the test I mention in the last paragraph.
| 6:59 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Have you seen other websites that appear to have been penalized because they used the same website description for recip linking on many other websites?
So you are saying, that if my site appears in the same place it has for the past few months for a particular keyword, but got dropped on another keyword, then my website description that I use when swapping links must contain that keyword that I got dropped from?
Makes some sense, but seems a bit silly. If someone asked me to describe my website in 15 words, I'd choose 15 words and use that whenever I swapped links with another site. There might be multiple ways to describe my website in 15 words, but there's only one "perfect" way - and that's what I've used when swapping links.
Thanks for the clarification..
| 7:39 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Description has nothing to do with ranking at all, it is the anchor text - the text inside the link tag <a> HERE </a>.
We are trying to explain what is happening with this new update and all of us are welcome to share our ideas.
| 9:26 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I'm seeing a similar thing AthlonInside with my site.
Allinanchor show my site at #2, www search shows it at #27 (same pattern across a number of keywords). What I haven't figured out yet is if this is a semi penalty on me or if this is due to a penalty being added to the sites that link to me. Having checked the sites that link to me, my biggest linking partner (who previously had good PR on all his linking pages) is now showing white bars (PR0) on all his link pages across all his sites.
What d'you think, semi penalty on me (for some reason), or reduced ranking due to a lot of my external links now being effectively useless?
| 9:33 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
We, like many others I'm sure, have also been trying to better understand what occured with this last update. After reading through this thread, I too see many similiarities to what is now showing with our site. I'll try to briefly and clearly share the info:
say our site is abcforeveryone.com
We have been in the #1 position for keyword: abc for many months now. Now we have dropped to #32.
A quick descpription of our site is: internet customized blue widgets
We have been in the #4 position for keyword phrase: internet customized widgets. Now we have dropped to?, very low -- can't find us in top 300.
Naturally, most of our backlinks say: abc for everyone -- internet customized blude widgets.
For other keywords that do not include the ones mentioned above, we have remained in the same top positions. Does seem like more than coincidence.
Also, for allinanchor:abc we are still #2
For allintitle:abc, we are very low, not in Top 100
Does that mean anything? Is that uncommon?
Hope together we can figure out more about this new "filer" or "semi-penalty" whatever it is that we have in common. This thread is getting very long. Hopefully once someone thinks they have more answers they can start a new thread with more concrete info.
| 9:47 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
aha...I posted about the allintitle correlation with low in serps...that's where we should start seeing if there is a correlation. What would be causing us to not show up in allintitle with our index page? That is the better question, because that is a common theme. Or is it? Anyone else seeing this correlation?
Newtoseo, when was your site indexed? Maybe there is a correlations there.
AthlonInside: Hope this helps for your research: I did what you suggested in my category, and checked to see if those high on allinanchor were dropped in serps. And what I see is the serps are almost an exact replica of what is in allinanchor, if sites are also in allintitle. Where sites are not in allintitle, but rank high in allinanchor, they are lost in serps. Allintitle seems to be a correlation in my category, and it sounds like in newtoseo's category, also.
| 9:57 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
One very optimised site, no tricks of course, key words in anchor text on about 10 quality links, key words in H1, title etc.
Was No5, now No.15
Just tried changing h1 and some on page content. Is it too late to see a change till the next update?
| 10:09 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
My own experience - finding some interesting things - fortunately, none of it has negatively impacted my revenue generating pages - yet.
On one of my sites, my site navigation is the same on each page, and there are around 3000 pages to the site. One of the two word phrases for navigation, say "red widgets", has the target page gone for the search "red widgets". It obviously is a phrase I don't need to optimize too much for, as one of my internal pages that link from that target page is showing up as #1. A search of allinanchor shows my target page as #1. Search allintitle doesn't show it, yet it is in the title. "Red Widgets" is in most of the anchor text. It is also the page title and in H1 text on the page. Clearly seems to be some type of filter for overoptimized pages.
The strange thing, though, is I have another section of my site, "Blue widgets", also in my site navigation found on every page, with "blue widgets" as anchor text, found in the title, and in H1 text. Yet this page still shows up in both allintitle and allinanchor.
I feel very fortunate that this hasn't significantly effected my revenue generating pages, but I wouldn't be surprised if that's next. It's a good thing I have a day job just in case.
| 10:10 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
kapow, I'm of the opinion that we shouldn't react to what is happening by making changes to our site. And this is why theories that don't pan out but only incite fear are so dangerous and should not be stated as fact unless it can be highly proven. You might very well make those changes based on an unproven theory, get deepcrawled, and suffer next update when had you left your site as is, you'd be doing well. But it's your site, and so you should do what your intuition tells you to do.
In line with my last posts, I've done some further research, and found that sites MIA are also not showing index pages in allinurl.
So, here's what I see in common between MIA index pages:
index page not in allintitle
index page not in allinurl
index page ranks fine in allinanchor
| 10:14 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
"Linksmanager is a tool, not a PR boosting scheme or program."
Linksmanager sets up garbage links pages often not even housed on a site's domain but on linksmanager itself. The program is THE VERY DEFINITION OF SPAM according to Google's guidelines. These links should carry no weight at all, and should carry a mild penalty. This is the crap part of seo at its most blatant.
Google as yet does nothing at all to ignore or paenalize linksmanager, and if anything the current algo of "a link is a link" is rewarding this free for all, no content, no value, no voting, spam.
As long as programs like this are not PR0, then the entire concept of linking as valuable is extremely flawed.
[edited by: steveb at 10:28 pm (utc) on May 25, 2003]
| 10:17 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Let's do a little survey here about how many people have their keywords in anchor text, H1, and title. I would bet the majority. Yet, not all of them are being so-called penalised. Something else must explain this drop from serps, and this common theme of MIA in allinurl and allititle. I'd like to try to find that little somethin' somethin' by being more open minded, and steer away from a semi-penalty that doesn't affect everyone who has excessive anchor text, H1 and kw in title. If it affected everyone the same, then the theory would make sense. But let's face it if there is a filter for penalizing sites who have too much anchor text the same, H1 and kw in title, the SERPS are gonna get really bad if they all get hit with a penalty, because that would be a lot of sites. Besides, those are all very legitimate ways of letting visitors know your site is about the kw in question. Are we to take it all out, and let people guess what are site is about? lol
| 10:23 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
"So, here's what I see in common between MIA index pages:
index page not in allintitle
index page not in allinurl
index page ranks fine in allinanchor"
Ditto to what I am seeing with our site too.
Although, for our competitor who has taken over our #1 ranking, they too are showing exact results as mentioned above.
Your question about indexing... I believe it was October.
| 10:26 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
"Something else must explain this drop from serps, and this common theme of MIA in allinurl and allititle."
I personally have no idea what people think they are talking about in this thread. In my area the serps coincide very closely to allintext allintitle and allinanchor. The problem is some sites, like mine, seem to have been penalized in a way that doesn't count our text/title/anchor fully. I've dropped from top five on all these to about twenty, just like I have in the serps. There certainly is no penalty for sites that are ranking high for text/title/anchor. In fact, that is one of the keys to these icky results, keyword guestbook or freeforall links.
| 10:35 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
One of my 2 sites WebMistress in the last 24 hours seemed to have the home page drop for some main keywords (but not materially for the most important one it was designed for.) Certainly consistent with this semi-penalty, although I wouldn't be surprised this is due to "something else" wacked at Google. If this theory about a semi-penalty here about a semi-penalty involving pages with keyword in title, H1, URL, on page text, and in backlinks has any validity, this would mean Google is penalizing pages for following Website 101 design practices. Doing those things isn't SEO trickery. Webmasters who don't even know what SEO means design pages that way because that is what the standard texts say should be done. Putting keyword in page title and URL makes sense so that a surfer using a search engine will see that this page is about what he is looking for. And, H1 tags should have text which isn't what the page is about?
| 10:40 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
If this theory about a semi-penalty here about a semi-penalty involving pages with keyword in title, H1, URL, on page text, and in backlinks has any validity, this would mean Google is penalizing pages for following Website 101 design practices. Doing those things isn't SEO trickery. Webmasters who don't even know what SEO means design pages that way because that is what the standard texts say should be done. Putting keyword in page title and URL makes sense so that a surfer using a search engine will see that this page is about what he is looking for. And, H1 tags should have text which isn't what the page is about?
Exactley what I've been saying for the past week except you've just explained it a lot better than I ever did.
| 10:59 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
You're welcome needinfo. ;) If this theory is valid, one of the consequences of this would be that trying to combat SEOs this way would result in massive collateral damage to tons of amateur sites. These are people who commonly design pages according to textbook guidelines about best practices. The overall implications of what such a semi-penalty would do to overall relevancy of Google SERPs isn't that it would make them better.
| 11:08 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
"this would mean Google is penalizing pages for following Website 101 design practices."
This is not happening. Many electrons have died needlessly.
| 11:31 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I could only see a "ban" or "filter" on <h1> if it was determined to be directly changed by CSS. It would be very easy to filter something like this <h1><span class="smalltext"> vice the H1 inside the span. Even more importantly google could just analyze what the CSS was doing.
If anyone here who was filtered and is now not is saying that just an <h1> tag with no CSS re-size caused this than I would bet there was something else that moved as well or just flux in the SERP's
| 11:34 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I have a site that is titled "Word1 Word2 Word3". My inbound anchor text usually is in that form (though sometimes it'll be the URL or the three words scrunched together). Most of my own pages use "Word1 Word2 Word3 Main Page" for navigation links, but some just say "Main Page".
For the various allintext, allinanchor, allintitle AND a normal search I find that:
For Word3 I rank about 20 out of 5,400,000
For Word2 I rank about 6 out of 11,000,000
For Word1 I rank about 50 out of 50,500,000
Of course Word3 is my main keyword, but it is simply mind-boggling to think that my main page ranks 6 for an extremely common keyword, and fights it out with every site in the world to be top 50 for an extremely EXTREMELY common keyword, but that I sink to #20 for the word that is the focus of my site.
It is simply impossible to be #6 for the one and #20 for the other.
Is Google ignoring the third word in anchor text?
It sure seems to be. If only the inbound links I have that are the single "Word3" as a link, that might explain why I'm only #20.
Do people who think they are being penalized have multiple word keyword text?
(The alternate possibility for this is that Google is just really messed up.)
| 11:57 pm on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)|
One keyword, which is also my domain and a well-known brand
normal: #8 (not index) #9 index
allinanchor: #7 (not the index) + #8 (not index)
allinurl: #1 (not index) + #2 index
allintitle: #7 (not index)
I was experiencing what I believe to be the semi-penalty when I posted earlier and I changed the title of my index and added a line of text with my keyword (which is also my brandname) and my index page jumped from > 100 to the top ten.
thanks for the advice! (and to freshbot..)
I am still a bit bummed that amazon's page which sells my product is #1. The product reviews pepper that page with my keyword which is what I think is causing its high rank even though it has only 17 back links. None of our competitors brands have had the same drop which makes me think it is something we are doing.
| 12:17 am on May 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I am not using CSS on the page that doesn't show now for alllintitle. I also don't resize the H1 text. The inbound anchor text is almost entirely "red widgets", as it is part of my site navigation. The title is "Red Widgets and Pink Widgets" which is the same as the H1 text.
Good guess though.
| 2:04 am on May 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I, too, do nothing to my H1 like CSS resizing. It's just simple H1 with my keywords.
Newtoseo, am I understanding you correctly? Your competitors who are beating you out also do not have their index page in allintitle or allinurl?
| 4:04 am on May 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
That was correct earlier when I was searching. Now when I run the searches they appear in the allintitle, but NOT in the allinurl.
| 4:10 am on May 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Are you using theirsitename.com in the allinurl search? And their index page doesn't show?
| 4:52 am on May 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Of course Word3 is my main keyword, but it is simply mind-boggling to think that my main page ranks 6 for an extremely common keyword, and fights it out with every site in the world to be top 50 for an extremely EXTREMELY common keyword, but that I sink to #20 for the word that is the focus of my site....It is simply impossible to be #6 for the one and #20 for the other...Is Google ignoring the third word in anchor text?...It sure seems to be. If only the inbound links I have that are the single "Word3" as a link, that might explain why I'm only #20....Do people who think they are being penalized have multiple word keyword text?...(The alternate possibility for this is that Google is just really messed up.) |
Your sort of example is in line with some of what we are seeing. The irrational nature of it has to do with why I believe there is some sort of seo adjustment going on. I see little else (other than the possibility that Google is temporarily burping) that would cause this. But of course IF that is the case, figuring it all out is a bit of a challenge.
My question would be: Is it possible that the word you're doing least well against (but feel you should be doing better with) is somehow being given *more emphasis* than the other two keywords? If so, and IF the seo adjustment exists, it's possible that some of the appearances of that most important word have been discounted.
I ask it that way in particular because if anything, with our sites, it appears that shorter inbound anchor text is being ignored, in favor or longer phrases...sort of the opposite to what you're describing, if I understand it.
The thing that baffles me are the few comments in here from people who have made short term "fixes" in H1 tags or whatever and have seen better rankings, supposedly as a result. Hard to believe that Google is now making that kind of adjustment on the fly - instantaneous removal of penalties?
| 5:44 am on May 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I got a question, is having 4 <h2> tag on a single page could mean spamming? This new algo really got me thinking.
| 6:29 am on May 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
do all h2 tags have same text? I don't know the answer to your question, but I would assume if they were all different text, that it shouldn't be an issue at all. H2 is legitimate html with a purpose, hardly could penalise using it too much, but maybe if same text, might seem spammy.
| 6:40 am on May 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|I have trouble believing that the H1 tag removal is responsible for your improvement (and I'm a believer in the likelihood of MHes' seo algo theory). |
That's all I did. For half a year I used to be #2 - then 1½ months ago I added a H1-tag. A week ago I was hit by the semi-penalty. After removing the H1 tag I'm back (but still waiting for www-fi). So now I'll never know if it was a Google burp :)
For the record, the site is handcoded HTML without any tricks. I use <B> and <I> tags very sparingly and not for keywords.
| 6:50 am on May 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
There is no semi-penalty. It's called wacky Dominic. You changed the H1 tag and wacky Dominic didn't something at the same time, and that's why you can back, not because you changed an H1 tag. If I believed that, I'd be taking mine out, and would be optimistic that if I take it out tonight, byt tomorrow, I'll be back in the SERP's. Maybe it's just me, but I just can't wrap my brain around that idea too seriously.
| 6:56 am on May 26, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Well, I am in the same boat. For years I had been ranked around #10 out of about 900,000 matches for my term. Last week I popped up to #6 for about two days -- and then I dropped to about #250. And the entry at #250 is some oddball page in the middle of my site. My home page is no where to be found! I asked Google about it but no response.
Part of what has me concerned is that there are sites in the top ten now (for my term) that are garbage like a one-page server notice: "Your Apache Site is Installed". This shouldn't even be in the database and yet it's ranked in the top ten.
This really scares me!