| 1:08 am on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
> I know that Google reverted to an old set of backlinks quite some time ago, but these still appear to be in place. I had assumed that this was an emergency measure after a failed crawl. By my reckoning the current backlinks are at least three months old. I may be wrong on that, but it certainly seems that way.
Yes, I'm still seeing 3-month-old backlinks on a couple of low-TBPR-sites.
> I still have links recorded that were removed a long time ago, and other new ones that have been waiting for an age to be factored in.
> Interestingly, Googlebot has spidered all the offending link pages several times, and the cached versions of the pages show the new links and the absence of old ones.
> Should we be worried about the increasing disparity between the very fresh Google results and the very out of date Backlinks/PageRank? Does this impact upon the quality of the SERPs?
I let Google worry about the quality of their SERPs in order to avoid having any more health problems. However, even with these outdated/missing backlinks, both sites are doing well - top 3 for any related sufficiently-focused search. I have occasionally wondered if perhaps it is only the display of the backlinks that is outdated, not the backlinks themselves. I dunno - hard to figure out how the sites are doing so well with their best backlinks missing, but then again, they're not in ultra-competitive "areas."
Other weirdnesses I've noted are that the Google directory backlink is present, but the ODP backlink is not; the sites have been listed in both for years.
Mostly just wanted to let you know you're not alone... I'm just going to site tight and watch for it to straighten itself out some time soon. I believe we're about due for another update, assuming that there *will* be another monthly update.
| 3:08 am on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I also am seeing old backlinks, But there are new ones that are being updated also the trick is to figure out why certain backlinks are not being updated and others are being updated.
| 5:38 am on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Remember that we don't show all links, so we can often process newer links without them necessarily showing up for a link: search. I think almost all links should be pretty recent now. If you're still seeing a link show up that has been gone for a while, you could check on If-Modified-Since and make sure your server is responding correctly.
| 5:42 am on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
i am showing all new links for my sites as of the last dance.
| 8:10 am on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Google search engine is only just starting (3 days ago) to show Google Directory categories for sites added to the ODP in mid-April. However, the Google directory doesn't yet list the new sites once you click on the directory link, so the update still has some way to go. No sign of directory links for sites added to the ODP in May or June yet.
Beware too, that link://www.domain.com/folder and link://www.domain.com/folder/ will give different results.
| 8:23 am on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
"No sign of directory links for sites added to the ODP in May or June yet."
Some sites added to dmoz in early June are showing their correct Google Directory category link, even though the Google directory category doesn't exist yet.
| 8:40 am on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
what i am seeing is that google takes each month some more time to show no-english listings in Dmoz. I have been waiting for ages to see Dmoz listings to show up in the Google Directory?
Can anybody relate to that?
| 1:55 pm on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I'm still seeing old backlink data. One site I stopped using because it lost it's only backlink months ago is showing the backlink for link:. This link was from a PR6 site which had only a couple of links on it.
My site is doing well in the SERPS again and the toolbar shows PR5. My conclusion is that the algo is using this backlink.
I'm not exactly sure what 'If-Modified-Since' is. The site that used to link to me has Last-Modified:·Thu,·19·Jun·2003·11:09:39·GMT in the headers. The link was removed at least a month before this though, probably 2-3 months ago.
| 2:15 pm on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Can anybody relate to that? |
I can--site added to DMOZ in April still a no-show in the Google directory and still no category listing in the normal SERPs.
-took 2 months to get into DMOZ
-now pushing 4 months since appearing in DMOZ and still nothing in the G directory
-it feels like Google's crediting me for my DMOZ association although it doesn't show in the backlinks yet.
| 2:21 pm on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I now understand how If-Modified-Since works. I searched but didn't find any way of testing servers with their response though.
Anyone know how to do this?
| 3:37 pm on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Remember that we don't show all links, so we can often process newer links without them necessarily showing up for a link: search. I think almost all links should be pretty recent now. |
Would they show up for allinanchor searches? I have some new links with new anchor text where the linking page is up to date in the cache, yet the links don't show up in either link: or allinanchor:
Bobby_Davro and jdMorgan I can confirm your observations as well.
| 3:45 pm on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
The simplest thing to do is to go through your logs and look at Googlebot fetches of the same page on your site over period of several days. If you see a 200 response when the page has changed betweeen fetches, and a 304 response when it has not changed and is being requested by the exact same googlebot, then your headers are set up properly.
You can play with your browser settings to achieve the same thing, but it can be tricky/confusing if your ISP caches pages or if you are behind any kind of proxy. In these cases, you're at their mercy to have things set up correctly.
I'm sure there are test tools available to force GET and CGET requests, but I don't use any, and so can't recommend.
| 4:08 pm on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I checked one of the site using "link:" and can confirm the "out of date" claim. On the first result page, if I click "Cached" button, most of them don't have that site in the link. Since the "Cached" already have the new data, can I assume if-modified is working?
| 4:42 pm on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
It's the page that links to me that I want to test, I don't have the logs for this.
I'm also seeing other problems with the data not being current. Sometimes the cache, snippet and title revert to old snapshots. Sometimes it's just the title that's old.
Also when I do link: for a page, pages from the same site are displayed but don't have any snippet or cache (it's been like this for over a month but the pages are spidered frequently). When I do allinurl: for my site I see snippet and very recent cache.
Until GG said that almost all links were current I was happily being patient waiting for things to return to normal. Now I'm depressed.
| 5:27 pm on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Actually the site I am referring to has been on a PR4 DMOZ page since last July of 02 and a PR4 Yahoo Directory PR4 since last August of 02 as well.
| 5:40 pm on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I confirm with my sites that all backlinks are not showing but I know they are being counted. I have a very specific, relevant, one theme site that was hopping between page two and three for the primary search term. Three more links were added and I jumped to the number two spot. To me, this verifies that links are counted whether they show or not.
| 6:32 pm on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Current experience with a large number of client sites is that backlinks are NOT up to date, neither are old/non existant links being removed.
Only a very small amount of new links to a small number of sites are being added.
NEW sites (over the last couple of months) are definitely NOT showing backlinks.
Old pages with "noindex" tags are also not being removed from the index despite being in place for over 2 months.
Manual removal via the Remove URL tool appears to be the only way to remove some pages.
Looks like the continuing update at Google is still ongoing.
| 9:00 pm on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
The backlinks are definately old. I have a new site and am getting backlinks from the previous website with my URL. I have not gotten ANY backlinks myself. My website is a PR0 and googlebot will not stop by. I've submitted mt site manually twice. i got the white bar a few months ago, but no Googlebot since. Is there a way to tell if the site was previously penalized? I sent an e-mail to Google, but never got a response. GG?
| 9:11 pm on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
MyWifeSays - that was very funny, yet unnervingly accurate. It does appear that the Google stated perception of the state of their backlinks doesn't correspond with the 100% accurate sampling of WebmasterWorld members.
GoogleGuy, it seems that the reports from the front line don't match up with what you are saying. Is it possible that the backlinks aren't actually as up to date as you think they are? Or are we seeing older information than is actually being used?
| 10:21 pm on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
It seems its a little of both some of my pages are up to date and others aren't like maybe googlebot is updating sites here and there somewhat like altavista , instead of one deep crawl the first week of the month and one update it's working like a random crawl with corresponding random update and some domains are getting missed for whatever reason.
| 11:03 pm on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
The problem I've experienced could be related. About 3 months ago I moved a site from .html to .asp extensions. Within a month, all the new asp pages were in the index with similiar rankings. However last week about a third of these asp pages disappeared from the index and do not show any cache. I can't figure out why but I'd sure like to seem them get indexed again.
| 11:12 pm on Jul 20, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Backlinks still out of sync.
Have a site with 700, and can display them in Google , but toolbar says 7.
No prob, I am sure it will sort itself out, in the meantime I remain convinced that the site is getting the credit for the links in PR. e.g No.1 out of 375,000 for one keyword that is not in tile, desc, alts nor link anchor.
So why complain?
| 12:09 am on Jul 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
My 2 cents,
We just had an affiliate achieve a top ranking on a keyword phrase. The wierd thing is that they rank top three for the allinanchor but nothing shows for backlinks for this page. I know where the backlinks come from and they are all PR5/6 pages (so you would assume they show). To ad more mystery, the other allinanchor pages ranking below them have multiple backlinks showing in Google but the affiliate page does not. Is it possible Google is taking out the displaying of backlinks so it is a mystery to all competing?
| 3:41 am on Jul 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|I think almost all links should be pretty recent now. |
That's not my perception.
|Current experience with a large number of client sites is that backlinks are NOT up to date, neither are old/non existant links being removed. |
That's my perception as well. I've been working really hard at acquiring top quality backlinks for three sites, two established, one new. And, we're getting some traffic from the new links (Whoopie!)
But zero results in terms of Google. (Fresh date, old cache.)
| 5:36 am on Jul 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Google added about 70% of the backlinks that i should have from april. Of the ones that where counted it doesn't seem as if their PR was taken into account, as i don't rank all that high for most of my words. When all is said and done i'm getting more traffic from MSN then google for the same phrases. Nothing we can really do but wait.
| 6:11 am on Jul 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
One thing we must remember is that GG has, I believe, mentioned that the toolbar should not be relied on.
My information is based on a www.widgets.com site search and:- Find web pages that link to "www.widgets.com"
These are definitely out of date and have been for the last 2-3 months as are the:- Find web pages that contain the term "www.widgets.com"
Whilst it appears some people believe inbound links are being counted, this can, IMHO, only be guesswork as there is nothing to subtantiate this theory (unless someone has any proof)
Some client sites show a mixture of results for both the above with one or 2 new pages, mixed with pages that either haven`t existed for a couple of months or have been updated for some considerbale time. (even though they show fresh tags)
Under the:- Find web pages that link to "www.widgets.com" results, even the cache does not show any "links to" yet they are giving this incorrect result.
Am I missing something here or does the above not make sense?
Slightly confused but definitely no paranoid.
| 6:28 am on Jul 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I have 2-3 hundred sites each of which i have gathered between 300-500 new solid, related, high PR (3-6) and many PR(7-8) links. That is for each of the sites. Our sites have shown no new link data in the GG SERPs since its last update and then only about 2 or three links each dating back to late May. Again hundres of sites on many different topics, selling many different products, with hundreds of new links from hundres of different sites. They are not showing, however many of the sites have made slight improvments in the SERPs. However all are definately not where they should be with that type of linking and promotion. There is no doubt Google is not calculating new backlink data and wont until Yahoo's links change from 799,000. Google is not working as it should it's obvious, when will they flick the switch who knows, but please hurry I've been holding my breath for a over a month. IMO, GoogleGuy you are either not being informed by the techies at the Google Plex or your afraid of the bad PR in having a search engine running on only half it's cylinders.
| 6:28 am on Jul 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
As a follow up to previous post can anyone answer the following question?
If there are a large number of results for:- Find web pages that contain the term "www.widgets.com" and the pages listed in these results contain the url "www.widgets.com" (not just the text www.widgets.com) and link to www.widgets.com why do they not all appear also in the:- Find web pages that link to "www.widgets.com"?
Or there again am I not fully understanding these results
| 6:42 am on Jul 21, 2003 (gmt 0)|
In the past, Google typically did not list backlinks from sites which showed a TBPR or less than PR4. That may still be true - probably is still true - and that's one reason *all* backlinks don't show.
| This 108 message thread spans 4 pages: 108 (  2 3 4 ) > > |