homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
Forum Library, Charter, Moderator: open

Google News Archive Forum

This 680 message thread spans 23 pages: < < 680 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ... 23 > >     
Update Florida - Nov 2003 Google Update
Looks like an Old Fashioned Dance Baby!

 2:29 pm on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

www-in is showing some major shifting in all the serps I follow.. anyone else seeing this? These results were showing yesterday as well, but synced with the others late in the afternoon.

The results look really good.. hopefully this will reflect across all the datacenters soon. Seems like the spammier sites I compete against have moved down while the good honest pages have moved up.



 11:05 pm on Nov 15, 2003 (gmt 0)

LOL - the adwords thing crossed my mind as well


 11:16 pm on Nov 15, 2003 (gmt 0)

Welcome to WW, Gabor. You read the entire thread before posting... good stuff, that must have taken a while... :-)


 11:18 pm on Nov 15, 2003 (gmt 0)

Three word query, 162,000 results. Results 10, 11, 12, 13 are of this format:

None of these pages show any backlinks, and they have no Meta title at all. They do however have the three keywords in the phrase hyperlinked about fifty times on each page.

Oh, and of course they belong to the family of sites that has 72 in the top 100 for a search terms... and all the links on these pages point to sites in that family and nothing else.


 11:21 pm on Nov 15, 2003 (gmt 0)

I was surprised to see an update thread here. I haven't noticed any significant chages in results. Some datacentres have a lot of supplemental results which represent snippets of old content that is no longer actually on the site in question (and I have seen a few of these at #1 at times on some datacentres).

I guess that Google has to factor in some data from the recent Directory update (which is still in progress as the new directory cannot be seen in all datacentres yet).

Hmm, I had downloaded this entire thread, then went offline to read it. Three hours later (without reloading it) I replied after what I thought was post 314 on page 21 of this thread (posted 2003-11-15 20:13), but having replied I see that moderation has taken that post back to being post 267 now, with 50 more posted while I was reading, making this 318.

[edited by: g1smd at 11:40 pm (utc) on Nov. 15, 2003]


 11:22 pm on Nov 15, 2003 (gmt 0)

I am too noticing and regularly tracking a group of websites, where numerous all the sites are like Link farm to the other websites of that Group.

They are just created to get some PR and and to pass it on further. There is no (alomot) conten as such to justify the position.


 11:31 pm on Nov 15, 2003 (gmt 0)

g1smd, I don't see any significant changes either! I would never have known there was an "update" if I hadn't stopped by WebmasterWorld!


 11:32 pm on Nov 15, 2003 (gmt 0)

I checked several SERPs and I think it is a step into the right direction.
Nevertheless there is still a lot of rubbish out there (GoogleGuy, check my feedback - I hope the dissatisfied-form was ok, too) which will be cleaned in the next weeks.


 11:47 pm on Nov 15, 2003 (gmt 0)

I go off to an auction today, leave the computer, miss the gizmo quiz, and then Google updates - what's the deal? ;)

Overall, I'm pretty pleased, the main thing I noticed: overall positions held or gained but some with different pages than before. Not bad at all.



 11:56 pm on Nov 15, 2003 (gmt 0)

Well the Google Directory thing seems to have fixed itself. I wonder what that was.


 12:06 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

I'm starting to see changes on -cw, my site has 4000 more pages in it then -in and my site is ranked #1 for many queries that it isn't even in the top 1000 for in -in... lots of flux...


 12:10 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

needed a male name starting with F..

You learn new things everyday. Florida is a male name? Sounds more like a geriatric name. :O
It is a girl's name btw:
[baby-names-plus.com...] (if that link is allowed. if not pls delete it.)


 12:13 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)


Many postings back I drew attention to this update (whilst America slept). But suddenly it is called 'Update Florida'

I respectfully request, on the basis of precedence, that it is called: 'Update Filey (North Yorkshire)'


 12:24 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

GG might not be able to spell that!


 12:27 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)
I wonder if this is a new "feature" in the filters.

For one of my sites the index page appears indexed as


what troubles me is I have the feeling I was penalized for duplicate content as those three url are exactly the same.

Can GG comment on this?


 12:32 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

This update to me seems terribly wrong. Some searches seem a bit better, but the majority of the positions are less relevant. I am also seeing many more sites showing up that are in a different language and titles that are using unreadable characters (such japanese characters). These are for the top spots for some generic terms. Hmmmm. Hopefully over next few days things improve. There is no way I can see them keeping this index. This definetely reminds me of that really messed up Google Dance we had many months back.


 12:35 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

This is because someone has linked to you without the www on the the domain name. Check your backlinks and ask them to change it.


It ends up being seen as dupe content... Google will list one version of the three, (unless you use &filter=0 in my experience), and not show the other two. You might want to work on it.


 12:37 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

ugh, this is happening again... I almost forgot the names of the datacenters since Esmeralda (or whatever name it had). Do not think the serps shift is about new spam filters, I have been examining the serps for few hours, there are plenty of spam and irrelevant staff ranking 1-3, even more than before this update. What I see now... www-mc has just absolutely the worst serps, and pagerank seems to be the dominating factor - an irrelevant page with 7/10 pagerank (with the keyword mentioned once in outbound link text) is most likely to be found higher is serps than the most relevant page with 6/10 pagerank...

I do believe the serps are to be changed significantly during the next week. I do hope it's just another old-style dance and our site will be back to the place it deserves soon (keeping my fingers crossed)

And G, there was no need to do this right before Christmas :(


 12:42 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

You're not alone Furmanov. My site went from page 3 to page nowhere on one keyword... Lord only knows where it's showing up for others but I really do hope this isn't stable yet! :(


 12:42 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)
Thanks a lot Stephan. Makes perfect sense.

The funny thing is Google dropped all my backlinks. All other search engines list at list 300, Google use to list more than 100. I know the backlinks are still there.

Google shouldn't be penalizing this!

http://site.com PR 0
http://www.site.com PR 6
http://www.site.com PR 3

interesting. no?


 12:45 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

Seems like we're getting a major update about every 6 months. Last October...May...now....


 12:49 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

Like May, "update" isn't the right word really. The serps have changed, but the data we are being shown is very old, rolled back to before the November 1st update. The -mc backlinks are about the same as two updates ago.


 12:51 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

Bucaro, I had our index page get nailed by that back in Dominic. We had a link in on "site.org" and a link in on "www.site.org/?theirsite.com". It took about two months to get it all straightened out in Google, and about 5 months with Ink... fortunately most of our traffic comes in on other pages but it was a total pain nonetheless.


 12:52 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

I believe the Hats go like this.

White - Joe non knowing just makes a site, know nothing except keywords in the meta.

White with some grey showing - Get links, does on page SEO work like keyword stuffing.

Black - Cloaking, Blog Spammer, anything goes.

From my observations, Google has tried to take out White with Grey and Black. Thus promoting adwords.

SEO = No Adwords.

Its only in their best interets, however they cranked the knob a bit too far this time. Taking out a lot of innocents.

For google to do this sorta MAJOR Index changing twice in 1 year is extremely risky IMHO, due to the Average user consumption.

However if we were all to see the sudden Spike after the last time we would all know its about the all mighty dollar, and possibly to get rid of SEO techniques.....

Just my opinion.....not forceing it on anyone.


 1:05 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

From my observations, Google has tried to take out White with Grey and Black. Thus promoting adwords

I dont quite understand what you mean here, are you saying google is getting rid of the no-idea joe sites and replacing them with spammy sites? How does that promote adwords?


 1:06 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

As someone who put three sites online the middle of last month, the scary thing is how backlinks shown are now older than previously, so those sites still show no backlinks, and have basically dropped today in the serps to the point when they were brand new (after working themselves up the serps the past month). -mc is even showing a grey toolbar where other datacenters are showing a white one for these new pages.

If May is any guide, and we can hope not, it may take three more months for the algorithm to be in sync with current data, meaning new pages will be in that blackhole again that they were earlier this year.


On the other hand, pages I removed weeks ago are ranking okay!


 1:08 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

No Google is getting rid of "White with Grey showing" and "Black" my observations show white flurishing!


 1:09 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

Ahhhh. Makes sense with the quotes ;)


 1:09 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

>>Thus promoting adwords.

Google makes plenty on AdWords and way more being the best SE. I can't imagine anyone there saying, "Hey, let's foul the index so we can make more dough on AdWords". Furthermore, they lose revenue from AdSense publishers as these typically SEO'd sites take a hit if G goes after the white & grey stripe hats.

I'll never buy into the AdWords conspiracy theories; Google's too smart and too good at looking at the big picture. It's just an unattractive index from my subjective perspective.


 1:11 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

Have there been any PR changes noticed?


 1:17 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

<personal opinion>
Drop the hat analogy already guys - it just puts you in the lot with scammers, real spammers, and hackers. It is unbecoming of what webmasters and most seo's are about and do. It just gives the majority of seo's a bad name. hats are for hackers.


 1:18 am on Nov 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

No PR changes on our one site, but the PR updates don't run in sync with the updates like they did prior to Dominic/Esmerelda...

Interesting though, remember a day or two ago the strange problems with PR not showing on the toolbar at times? Maybe PR updates are about to change too.

I'm wondering if we'll see a regular deepcrawl in the next few days.

This 680 message thread spans 23 pages: < < 680 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ... 23 > >
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