| 7:01 am on Oct 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Not sure if anyone else has noticed this - for keywords I tend to keep an eye on google is returning far less, but far higher quality, results. |
I was a bit bewildered by the above, because I've been noticing just the opposite. Unfortunately, I've been overwhelmed by deadlines this month and haven't been able to monitor closely or across the board for a range of sites.
The increase in the number of pages returned for a competitive two-word phrase I monitor, though, on which we do well, has been so dramatic that I've printed several searches so I'd have a record "suitable for framing."
A couple of months ago the phrase returned something like 6-million results. On Sept 30, it was over 9-million. On Oct 4, it was 115-million (and we'd moved up). On Oct 9, it was 123-million... and right now it's 77-million, and we're still holding. Maybe the move down to 77-million is what you're seeing. Did anyone notice the move up?
I don't know what these numbers say about anything. I can't believe there's been that kind of an increase in pages, so I assume that Google is counting something differently.
Just quickly checking some other searches on which I've kept historical data, I'm seeing that some searches, compared to a year ago, are now returning 2-3 times the number of results (both atw and exact), and some are returning more.
One I monitor is returning 5-6 times the number of a year ago... going from 150K to 900K returns for atw matches, with exact matches going from 2K to 10K. Possibly I might trust this... Can't quite get my head around the 120-million.
I'm not sure, with these figures, how to evaluate competitiveness at the moment, since I use the number of atw pages and of exact matches as a rough way of gauging the competition (one of many gauges I use).
| 11:48 am on Oct 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
The issue of millions of pages being counted is irrelevant nonsense. If I perform a search that states that, say, 200 results have been found, even with the similarity filter switched off, the results often run out between 100 and 150. I've noticed this with other search engines too.
| 3:00 pm on Oct 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|I assume that Google is counting something differently. |
Plurals on three word phrases?
Wasn't there an alarm recently about that?
| 8:01 pm on Oct 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Here are my recent observations
After monitoring a couple of new sites, completed recently, and new pages on our own company site, I can say that a "monthly" update, if there is still such a thing, has not happpened.
Results show new pages have not been showing up and new sites are still popping in and out of the serps.
This "phenomenom" has been covered in many previous threads in this forum and we usually put it down to flux.
| 8:17 pm on Oct 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
The update happened last night. Many people, including mods and administrators, as well as regular members like myself, have noticed that a PR update occurred last night.
If no change happened for you, well... check back next month to see if your efforts are rewarded or not.
| 8:45 pm on Oct 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Google-watching - what an imprecise science. Earwig lays his cards confidently on the table with:- "I can say that a "monthly" update, if there is still such a thing, has not happpened." Only to be grand-slammed by martinibuster with:- "The update happened last night."
As for me - my understanding is no farther forward than when I posted msg# 13 of this thread. I'll keep watching with interest.
| 9:03 pm on Oct 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I'm with martinibuster. A seasonal/weather effect is probably the largest factor explaining the increase (for those whose SERPs didn't change).
As the weather gets colder and the nights fall earlier, people spend more time indoors and on the internet.
| 10:55 pm on Oct 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Hey nice one martinibuster
Just a minor correction, I didn`t mention PR just site updates and guess what? I think I even posted this message in the wrong thread!
Must be all these late nights and the daylight disappearing early.
Tarra 4 now
| 11:41 pm on Oct 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I did notice a large change in the number of internal backlinks showing up when I do a link: check (as in 2000+ vs. 50 a week ago and for the past months).
| 1:03 am on Oct 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Dunno if this has been mentioned in this thread, I just noticed yahoo backlinks are dropping across some datacenters, down from 806,000 to 759,000 - been a while since I saw a change in this
| 4:27 am on Oct 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I concur, martini. Several new sites (6 months old) that I watch got PR last night. On my main site several internal pages saw a PR bump and improvement in serps was noted for several keywords.
To answer TJ's initial question, yes I am seeing less results returned and nothing but good, relevant results on first pages. I am in a service oriented sector so I dont see the mass produced affiliate stuff that many compete with, but the junk results that I have seen for the last 6 months has dropped far enough down to be irrelvant.
| 4:31 am on Oct 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Just noticed a surge in backlinks from 38 to 78, but still no sign of my awol dmoz or yahoo links.
| 3:50 pm on Oct 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I'm noticing that the cache is fresh, but the results are stale!
If you search with site:www.website.com keyword, then the updated result dosen't show up...however, if you look at that page's cache, then the page is fresh.
I've seen no flux in my PRs as well as that of many sites I monitor.
| 4:10 pm on Oct 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Hey Everyone, First Off, Forgive Me, I am new to google issues, and may ask intellegent questions.
Did The Google Update get rolled back? My Site started showing up,night before last, For about 16 hours, I was showing up very well with my key words for just getting listed, and then it was like google went back to the old data from last month, and the google cache shows what was read last month.
| 5:04 pm on Oct 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Yes, I've seen this. Initiated a thread but it hasn't made it through moderation (yet). My site just jumped back ~2 weeks (or more). I thought Google was past this - I was wrong.
| 5:12 pm on Oct 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
It's not a rollback in database terms, just "knob-twiddling".
This is an ongoing thing for google which is good for everyone.
| 5:19 pm on Oct 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for the info! I just built the site, and when googlebot came by, I had frames pages as index, and it cached the index of the frame, and did not get squat. Then I changed around the site with a starting page with links around the frames, and when googlebot came back by a little over a week ago, it got the new page. Google only put out the new info for a few hours, and now back to nothing.
I guess I am now Suffering now from what I hear is GDS (google dance syndrome) ;-)
| 5:33 pm on Oct 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Google-sj not been available for a while - what news?
| 5:42 pm on Oct 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
It looks to me as though sj has been down since perhaps the 17th. To me this prompts the following questions:
1) Is G working to bring it back on line?
2) Could the newly-discovered kr data center be a replacement for sj?
| 5:49 pm on Oct 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
You surely mean mc
| 6:31 pm on Oct 28, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|It's not a rollback in database terms, just "knob-twiddling". |
Whilst I can understand that a rewind knob is useful for use in emergencies, using it routinely is very silly. I defy anyone to come up with a reasoned explanation for this based on the objective of providing best possible results to the user.
Officially, this doesn't exist anymore. Perhaps a new name is required rather than the ultra-boring update. Perhaps we should call it the Google Jig.
| 6:14 pm on Oct 29, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Thanks Plasma. At first I didn't get your meaning and then this morning I caught a mention of MC in another thread and connected the dots. So MC is intended to replace SJ? If so, what about KR. I'm also very curious about the geography. Where are MC and KR actually located? Anyone know? Thanks in advance. BTW, we'll miss you, Marcia!
| 7:40 pm on Oct 29, 2003 (gmt 0)|
IIRC kr 18.104.22.168 is located in ireland?
mc's ip is 22.214.171.124 but that doesnt have to mean anything on it's location.
| 7:56 pm on Oct 29, 2003 (gmt 0)|
So, was there a dance the past few days? I'm new to all this and am wanting to know when the next major change in SERP is going to happen, if it didn't already the past few days.
| 10:23 pm on Oct 29, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I think the general agreement (unless I missread the comments here) is that we technically don't have a "dance" anymore, although there does seem to be a lot of shuffling around and the steps do seem a bit familiar. I've only been watching this go on for about six months and I'm still definitly a newbie, however I've seen big changes in the serps for some of the site I work on and they all got new PR (upwards, thanks G). I'll leave it to the more senior folks here to make it official, but I am of the opinion that the update was on the 25th or 26th. Anybody out there share this assesment?
| 10:43 pm on Oct 29, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Hey Oaktown, I cannot be sure about backlinks, and PR(I still do not have any), but I am sure that last night/ early this morning, it was replicating site information between the datacenters. My site disappeared around the 27th, and was looking good this morning when I checked it.
| 11:01 pm on Oct 29, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|Whilst I can understand that a rewind knob is useful for use in emergencies, using it routinely is very silly. |
It's only been used in the last 6 months in "emergencies". It is not used routinely, and not as far as I can tell in the last 3 months at all.
| 11:57 pm on Oct 29, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|This is an ongoing thing for google which is good for everyone. |
Surely you jest!
| 8:07 am on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Google dance or quick-step, whatever it's called - it happened for me as I snoozed last night. Several sites that I'd been waiting on have been spidered in the last few hours, hoorah!
| 1:44 pm on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Anyone notice something different on EX?
My index page is missing...
Oh no, here we go again...
| 1:59 pm on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Yes, I've noticed some major changes on -ex. The same results are also appearing on Yahoo when I checked. I've lost nearly my entire site other than my index and a few other pages. Curious
| This 92 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 92 ( 1 2  4 ) > > |