Yidaki
msg:125022 | 12:12 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
I vote for a virtual-hot-dog-shop that opens automatically every time the words "update started" appear in a subject ... ts ts ... relax, drink a coffee or/and a beer and take a hot dog!
|
vitaplease
msg:125023 | 12:13 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
Strange less pages in the new index?: Google on www - 14,100,000
Google on www2 - 12,800,000 Webmasterworld on www - 15,100
Webmasterworld on www2 - 12,400 but: Yahoo on www - 71,200,000
Yahoo on www - 77,400,000 or is it only me?
|
ciml
msg:125024 | 12:14 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
You're forever banned, rfgdxm1:). Everyone recite with me, please... * Some of us will see different things at different times. * Sometimes in the past, the update has been unstable for a while. The 'new' index may change over the next fews days. * The Toolbar does not show PageRank until www.google.com has settled with the new index.
|
chiyo
msg:125025 | 12:15 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
hmmpff... google update thread.. this spells the death of the indian and chinese food threads...
|
brotherhood of LAN
msg:125026 | 12:17 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
yep, I see it, and it aint the best ive seen yet :( Hope theyve messed up the algo and roll out a new one in the next few hours :)
|
chiyo
msg:125027 | 12:18 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
OK then .. a serious contribution.. From my experience. One point. 1. new sites and pages perform well early on in the update. Later they slip back as Pr gets factored in (I think) thats my only post in this thread promise! (I think)
|
ikbenhet1
msg:125028 | 12:21 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
ow my gawd,
i rank rank rank soo soo soo fine. Thank u Webmasterworld and I also thank The Exelent Webmasters here, it like seems i'm gooing to the bahama's. ;)
|
foy
msg:125029 | 12:21 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
for me it's showing the index from last month for 2-3 projects, for the others the new indexed pages? how can this be? hmmm.
|
nicebloke
msg:125030 | 12:21 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
Updates on, but i think this one has to go back for some radical bug fixing. For the most popular UK SEO phrase, for example, four out of the top ten sites appear to have cached data from the correct sites, but urls and links to completely unrelated sites. The snippets come from the site being linked to and show no words being highlighed from the search term, but the ODP description is correct for the site that is in cache, but has nothing to do with the site being linked to, or in the title. Our site, for example, has been link-jacked by a major organisation, completely unrelated to SEO.
|
Yidaki
msg:125031 | 12:21 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
| thats my only post in this thread promise! (I think) |
|
... you lost - it's allready your second ;)
|
indigojo
msg:125032 | 12:22 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
bit dissapointing i reckon site:www.webmasterworld.com webmasterworld even shows a decrease. oh well next time :( [edited by: indigojo at 12:23 pm (utc) on Sep. 26, 2002]
|
HollyHats
msg:125033 | 12:23 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
I am jumping up and down right now because I also noticed that my listing appears in www3 and www3. #1 in my catagory at that. But, what does this mean. Does it mean that it's on the way to being indexed into google? Or that you will always have to put in www2 or www3?
|
Mr_Tickle
msg:125034 | 12:26 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
I hope this one is rolled back too. I've dropped quite a few places on quite a few keywords. It seems that page title and content has less weighting than PR. Comments?
|
nicebloke
msg:125035 | 12:27 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
Hmm, the 'bug' seems to have corrected itself now.
|
progen
msg:125036 | 12:31 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
A search for my site on www seems to show the results www2/3 were showing yesterday.
|
vitaplease
msg:125037 | 12:31 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
Looks like this update has more dramatic changes than previous ones. Anyone see general tendancies?
|
dazz
msg:125038 | 12:32 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
The results are gonna change sooooooooooooo much before they settle im gonna sit down and chill out...my sites in and looking good so im happy. :) lol @ chiyo.......damn that no more food threads!
|
semick
msg:125039 | 12:32 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
I get
634,000 links on www for link:www.yahoo.com
657,000 links on www2 and www3 18,000 links with site:www.yahoo.com "www.yahoo.com" on www
13,600 links on www2 and www3 I don't know if this consitutes an update..I am nervously awaiting the update....Trying to get a dynamic site indexed (deep links) in google... Scott
|
john5
msg:125040 | 12:36 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
Looks like a major change in algo. My pages dropped from 8,000 to 7,000, backward links dropped from 2,240 to 990. Same observation as Dino_m reported.
|
vitaplease
msg:125041 | 12:36 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
It looks like titles are more important. It looks like internal anchortexts are less important.
|
Marcia
msg:125042 | 12:37 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
A bunch of new links are now showing up for one site, another looks like it fell out altogether, and a new site had 3 pages added. Some of the searches are skewed with some totally off-topic sites, but it looks like a major change.
|
lazerzubb
msg:125043 | 12:38 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
[directory-ex.google.com...] For a updated Directory.
|
lavapies
msg:125044 | 12:39 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
/lavapies worries as he sees himself drop out entirely for some important keyphrases and get to number 1 for others.. very odd :-( I hope it changes a lot
|
SlyOldDog
msg:125045 | 12:43 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
Big drops for some of our sites. Actually 2 dropped out completely. MAJOR reshuffle as previously penalised sites from our competition return to top positions. Hmmm. Not the best month
|
SlyOldDog
msg:125046 | 12:44 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
Setting up my Google Adwords account right now :(
|
zeus
msg:125047 | 12:47 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
[directory-ex.google.com...] - it does not show new results, the new directory will take its time to be updated. zeus
|
rfgdxm1
msg:125048 | 12:47 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
If anyone wants to examine new weightings, consider if keyword in domain name is given more now. That one keyword that I temporarily shot from #4 to #1 happens to be my domain name keyword. My main domain name is keyword.ws (YES, because of domain name speculators my main site is in Western Samoan namespace.) There haven't been any really notable changes on the page that should kick it to #1. However, I notice the 3 sites that I jumped ahead of lack that keyword in the domain name. In fact that keyword isn't in their URL at all, as in the case of www.theirdomain.com/keyword.htm, etc. Of course, it is early in the dance and I might drop back. In particular, one of the reasons that I believe these sites were higher than mine on this keyword was anchor text on the link from other sites. If anchor text gets factored in late in the dance, then I should drop. However, never in past dances was I anywhere near #1 early in the dance.
|
vitaplease
msg:125049 | 12:47 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
This update needs some fixing. I am seeing a Japanese page in full Japanes turn up top three for a dutch keyword.
|
sw8296
msg:125050 | 12:49 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
"http://directory-ex.google.com - it does not show new results, the new directory will take its time to be updated." Then how come my new site is in there, but not in the ordinary directory?
|
lavapies
msg:125051 | 12:50 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
from what i can see for my keywords.. page title seems to be EVERYTHING! I think this must be some problem with the update.. I can't have gone from 12 to nowhere just cos I slightly modified one page title! And vitaplease.. i too am seeing some japanese pages for totally off-topic queries.. very odd!
|
zeus
msg:125052 | 12:51 pm on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0) |
Some of the new results are already hopping in and out of www3 -www zeus
|
|
