homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 174.129.74.186
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi

Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

This 610 message thread spans 21 pages: < < 610 ( 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 > >     
Update Allegra Part 2 Update 2-2-2005
Macro




msg:752948
 11:51 am on Feb 9, 2005 (gmt 0)

complain about a real problem

Can't see the sandbox being a "real" problem, or a problem at all. It's there to stop the SPAM. If I start a new company called Mesothelioma Lawyers Ltd you reckon I should show up in the top 500 purely because that's my company name?

Sure, the "sandbox", whatever it is, hurts some. It hurts people who are creating sites for free traffic. Many of them are spammers/freeloaders. It also hurts others. They - particularly anyone starting a new business with a business plan that relies on free SE traffic - are probably better off staying unemployed (or employed if they can find a job). Any new site starting off on the premise that free traffic will sustain it deserves to fail.

So, if you remove the sandbox as a reasonable cause for complaint, and remove most of the other whining, we'd reduce this thread to one page and those that can't even be bothered to read it will get a personal reply from Googleguy because he owes them.

 

max_mm




msg:753458
 5:08 am on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

Thanks walkman. I just hope it lasts.

Re what DC's:
The hits data in my post is from my server logs. I gave up checking any DCs for my keywords. They still fluctuate alot...waste of time/no point.

Simply follow your server logs closely for google referrals...they should (hopefully) start to peak slowly as your keywords move up the dial and G continue to crunch the PR numbers and finalise this update.

Hope you (and everyone else affected) will experience return to normal business soon!

Jalinder




msg:753459
 5:56 am on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

How to remove from email notification of this thread? It somehow seems to be related to the old thread that is closed. I am not checking the "Do you want an email notification of replies?" but still getting emails. I had checked for messages in the old thread.
Is there a common place where I can change my email notification settings ... did not find in control panel.

McMohan




msg:753460
 6:59 am on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

The 66.102.7.* & 216.239.53.* are the same right now

Very interesting. Now I am seeing some suttle differences between these two. 216.239.53.* looks almost the same as 66.102.7.* in terms of order, but with some new sites, sandboxed sites featured in between. 64.233.189.* looks same as 216.239.53.*, whereas 66.102.7.* looks like pre-allegra. Wasn't the case the last time I checked.

Walkman, it may be a case of 0,1,2 for you :).The representative IP blocks for these 3 sets of results would be - 66.102.7.* (Pre-allegra), 216.239.39.* (post-allegra) and 216.239.53.* (in-between pre and post or rather better of the 2)

Mc

larryhatch




msg:753461
 7:20 am on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

RichTC:

"Either a high PR means better content or it doesnt?."

PR has NOTHING to do with content.

You could have the Gettysburg Address for content,
(scraped obviously) and PR = 0.
You could have absolute cr** for content and a great PR. - Larry

BeeDeeDubbleU




msg:753462
 8:25 am on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

A few people in this thread are saying that they have emerged from the sandbox. So you think that this is as a direct result of Allegra?

Have you just been sitting it out or have you made other changes that may have caused this to happen?

xcomm




msg:753463
 12:53 pm on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

BeeDeeDubbleU,

For my site its the same as with Max_MM. The site is from March last year and I'm now fully out since some (4-5?) days at the end of Allegra. It began in the middle of Allegra for more obscure pages of this site now for top pages too.

I would definitely regarding this to Allegra. And I would hope this is due a new bigger (64Bit?) index and not for penalizing others in exchange.

So hope the end of sand is near for all as this Google glitch is fully brain damaged!

I did sit it out. This was easy last time as Yahoo is loving this site since their algo change last November.
Would like to know if other sites running great on Y! are out of the sand now - Max_MM?

gerd




msg:753464
 1:07 pm on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

66.102.7.*.....
can you put nr's instead of *
please!

walkman




msg:753465
 1:26 pm on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

here they are. The ones with "1" are where I still show up (warning, use a tool, checking them by hand is a nightmare, and the results have been like for weeks):
[216.239.37.104...] 0
[216.239.37.105...] 0
[216.239.37.106...] 0
[216.239.37.107...] 0
[216.239.37.147...] 0
[216.239.37.99...] 0
[216.239.39.104...] 0
[216.239.39.106...] 0
[216.239.39.107...] 0
[216.239.39.99...] 0
[216.239.53.104...] 1
[216.239.53.106...] 1
[216.239.53.107...] 1
[216.239.53.99...] 1
[216.239.57.104...] 0
[216.239.57.105...] 0
[216.239.57.106...] 0
[216.239.57.107...] 0
[216.239.57.147...] 0
[216.239.57.98...] 0
[216.239.57.99...] 0
[216.239.59.104...] 0
[216.239.59.105...] 0
[216.239.59.106...] 0
[216.239.59.107...] 0
[216.239.59.147...] 0
[216.239.59.99...] 0
[216.239.63.104...] 0
[64.233.161.105...] 0
[64.233.161.107...] 0
[64.233.161.147...] 0
[64.233.161.99...] 0
[64.233.167.104...] 0
[64.233.167.99...] 0
[64.233.171.104...] 0
[64.233.171.105...] 0
[64.233.171.107...] 0
[64.233.171.147...] 0
[64.233.171.99...] 0
[64.233.183.104...] 0
[64.233.183.107...] 0
[64.233.183.99...] 0
[64.233.187.104...] 0
[64.233.187.106...] 0
[64.233.187.107...] 0
[64.233.187.99...] 0
[66.102.11.104...] 0
[66.102.11.106...] 0
[66.102.11.107...] 0
[66.102.11.99...] 0
[66.102.7.104...] 1
[66.102.7.105...] 1
[66.102.7.106...] 1
[66.102.7.107...] 1
[66.102.7.147...] 1
[66.102.7.99...] 1
[66.102.9.104...] 0
[66.102.9.107...] 0
[66.102.9.99...] 0

gerd




msg:753466
 1:30 pm on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

thanks walkman

gerd




msg:753467
 1:35 pm on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

walkman my lost page is #1 or #0 like yours in the DC's you posted....
funny.......hmmmm.......

leoo24




msg:753468
 3:00 pm on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

Yes Walkman,

exactly the same results for me, on those dc's my affected site is #1 and #2 , but there are a lot more results which would mean there are filters not in place filtering out results.

walkman




msg:753469
 3:21 pm on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

"exactly the same results for me, on those dc's my affected site is #1 and #2 , but there are a lot more results which would mean there are filters not in place filtering out results."

I think the recently released sites aren't there. Sandboxed ones...

idoc




msg:753470
 4:37 pm on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

Walkman,

On your URL's with the 1 we too are back at 1 and out of 17000+ results for our unique name.

On the URL's with the 0 we are 38 and 39 out of 3600+ results for our unique name.

I think the 0 results sets have filtered alot of scraped junk and redirect link sites. I have no issues with that whatsoever. Why we drop to 38 I don't know except maybe because Adwords is selling hits on our unique name now, maybe the money word filters hurt us as the unique name term is on the index page 5 times. There is BTW am embedded common financial term within the unique name.

wonderbread




msg:753471
 7:13 pm on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

With Allegro, my site recently emerged from the sandbox, a very good sign for me. In the past few days it has been toggling back and forth from being on the first page to being nowhere. I checked out Walkman's list of DCs. All of the sites he labeled as "0" (the DCs where he is not in the SERPS) are the DCs where my recently de-sandboxed site IS showing up. This makes me think that those labeled "0" are the newest results because all of the "1" DCs are looking very pre-Allegro to me. The number of "0" DCs also leads me to believe that these are the ones Google is migrating too.

It seems that the google.com serps are toggling back and forth between these data centers for now...hopefully it will eventually settle down, and when the dust clears maybe my unjustly sandboxed site will start to emerge...think positively I suppose.

- Nick

Meta_Vision




msg:753472
 7:51 pm on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

Thanks again for the IP DATA, walkman. Here's what I see for one keyword of interest to me Googling with those IPs.

======================================================
walkman's IP set "case study" follows
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: 115,000 (e.g.) means the total number of results returned
NOTE: Googling a keyword I watch. ("-2" means site of interest to me "fell two spots in results")
NOTE: This "case study" was slowly {smile} performed "by hand" (no script automation)
NOTE: After data collected, random checking for differences due to time.
(Any change in number of results is indicated following "->")

=====================================================
[216.239.37.104...] 0 -- 115,000 [rechecked] (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[216.239.37.105...] 0 -- 115,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[216.239.37.106...] 0 -- 115,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[216.239.37.107...] 0 -- 115,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[216.239.37.147...] 0 -- 115,000 [rechecked] (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[216.239.37.99...] 0 -- 115,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[216.239.39.104...] 0 -- 115,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[216.239.39.106...] 0 -- 115,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[216.239.39.107...] 0 -- 115,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[216.239.39.99...] 0 -- 115,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[216.239.53.104...] 1 -- 114,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[216.239.53.106...] 1 -- 114,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[216.239.53.107...] 1 -- 114,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[216.239.53.99...] 1 -- 114,000 [rechecked] (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[216.239.57.104...] 0 -- 119,000->117,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[216.239.57.105...] 0 -- 119,000 [rechecked] (no position change pre/post allegra)
[216.239.57.106...] 0 -- 119,000 [rechecked] (no position change pre/post allegra)
[216.239.57.107...] 0 -- 119,000 [rechecked] (no position change pre/post allegra)
[216.239.57.147...] 0 -- 119,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[216.239.57.98...] 0 -- 119,000 [rechecked] (no position change pre/post allegra)
[216.239.57.99...] 0 -- 119,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[216.239.59.104...] 0 -- 120,000->115,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[216.239.59.105...] 0 -- 120,000->115,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[216.239.59.106...] 0 -- 120,000->117,000->115,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[216.239.59.107...] 0 -- 120,000->115,000->117,000->17,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[216.239.59.147...] 0 -- 120,000->115,000->115,000->115,000 (no position change / [recheck #3] -2 post allegra]
[216.239.59.99...] 0 -- 120,000->115,000->115,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[216.239.63.104...] 0 -- 122,000 [rechecked] [rechecked] (no position change pre/post allegra)
[64.233.161.105...] 0 -- 117,000 [rechecked] (no position change pre/post allegra)
[64.233.161.107...] 0 -- 117,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[64.233.161.147...] 0 -- 117,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[64.233.161.99...] 0 -- 115,000->117,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] / [recheck] **: no position change pre/post allegra)
[64.233.167.104...] 0 -- 122,000 [rechecked] (no position change pre/post allegra)
[64.233.167.99...] 0 -- 122,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[64.233.171.104...] 0 -- 115,000 [rechecked] (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[64.233.171.105...] 0 -- 115,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[64.233.171.107...] 0 -- 115,000 [rechecked] (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[64.233.171.147...] 0 -- 115,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[64.233.171.99...] 0 -- 115,000 [rechecked] [rechecked] (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[64.233.183.104...] 0 -- 115,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[64.233.183.107...] 0 -- 115,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[64.233.183.99...] 0 -- 115,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[64.233.187.104...] 0 -- 115,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[64.233.187.106...] 0 -- 115,000 [rechecked] (no position change pre/post allegra)
[64.233.187.107...] 0 -- 115,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[64.233.187.99...] 0 -- 115,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[66.102.11.104...] 0 -- 115,000 [rechecked] (no position change pre/post allegra)
[66.102.11.106...] 0 -- 115,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[66.102.11.107...] 0 -- 115,000 [rechecked] (no position change pre/post allegra)
[66.102.11.99...] 0 -- 115,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[66.102.7.104...] 1 -- 114,000 [rechecked] (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[66.102.7.105...] 1 -- 114,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[66.102.7.106...] 1 -- 114,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[66.102.7.107...] 1 -- 114,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[66.102.7.147...] 1 -- 114,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[66.102.7.99...] 1 -- 114,000 (-2 post-allegra[?] position change)
[66.102.9.104...] 0 -- 120,000 [rechecked] (no position change pre/post allegra)
[66.102.9.107...] 0 -- 120,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)
[66.102.9.99...] 0 -- 120,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)

==========================================================

NOTE: "Normal" {smile} Googling via www.google.com this morning
is "rather consistently" (oops 122,000->115,000) {grin} producing ...

[google.com...] -- 122,000->115,000 (no position change pre/post allegra)

... but what any of the above "means," depends, of course, on what is "meaningful" to you. {smile}

Back to watching the flip-flopping-flow ...

FOOTNOTE: Yes, I am too busy to do this by hand ... so I had one of my [altered]clones do it -- they have more hands.

Oliver Henniges




msg:753473
 8:18 pm on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

Your list indicates that there are about four different result-sets. I was thinking about letting my clones do a similar job and list those as a table, but once yours have done most of the job already, could you probably do that for us?

I guess you know that there is an I think more concise list of the various data-centers in
[webmasterworld.com...] , which for itself provides reason enough to donate to those who maintain this ever getting better website(*g*).

dickbaker




msg:753474
 10:41 pm on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

Thanks for the DC links, walkman.

When I just check for my unique site name, it doens't show up on the first page of the "0" datacenters out of 2,400 results.

When I check for my unique site name on the "1" datacenters, it shows as #1 out of 1,070 results.

If I click on the "show omitted results," both the "0" and the "1" datacenters are showing over 5,000 results.

I don't have a clue as to what this all means.

Newman




msg:753475
 10:56 pm on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

I see Mediapartners-Google/2.1 bot in my log, but I don't have any Google Adwords/Adsense ads on my web site.

Meanwhile, I have some others ads. Maybe that is the reason that I'm losing my position in top 10.

valeyard




msg:753476
 11:09 pm on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

I see Mediapartners-Google/2.1 bot in my log, but I don't have any Google Adwords/Adsense ads on my web site.

That could be because someone has browsed your site using the free version of Opera with context ads enabled.

Newman




msg:753477
 11:35 pm on Feb 16, 2005 (gmt 0)

Thanks, valeyard
Maybe that is true, I see also Opera there.

2by4




msg:753478
 1:17 am on Feb 17, 2005 (gmt 0)

" that they have emerged from the sandbox. So you think that this is as a direct result of Allegra?"

Yes, absolutely, zero doubt. Also some other pages, not sandboxed, which had some other vague penalty on them, were released into main serps. Given the time differences in sites released versus when they were first launched and sandboxed almost no doubt at all that some fairly major change released them, though it's still not clear to me exactly how that release happened, some oddities that are not explained yet. Maybe still a second index, hard to say.

Kangol




msg:753479
 1:12 am on Feb 18, 2005 (gmt 0)

I am sad to announce that this update may be over. My site its noware to be found in the few DCs that were active.
There are still 2 sets of results but the #13DCs are no longer showing MIA sites.

metrostang




msg:753480
 4:46 am on Feb 18, 2005 (gmt 0)

Just did a very specific 4 word search for an auto part, year, make, model and part name. The results should be embarassing to Google.

There were only two on the first page that sold that part or had any meanful reference to it. The top four had the part name on the page once, each in a PPC ad linking to another site.

The all had many instances of the year, make and model. In the past, a search like this would have yeilded many pages devoted to the part I was seeking.

In this case LSI appears to have been used to return results disregarding the search words, at least the last and most specific word. The part I named was was what I was after, the year, make and model were used to describe it.

Now I know why my referrals from Google have increased by 50% while sales have declined. Searchers are not being shown relevant results. I wonder what the folks who are being fed my site in the results are actually trying to find.

Most one a two word searches I've done appear to be returning decent results. At least the majority of the pages match the search. When I get specific with 3, 4 and 5 word phrases, the results are bad enough that Google must know it has a serious problem. Let's hope they can get a handle on it.

walkman




msg:753481
 5:10 am on Feb 18, 2005 (gmt 0)

yp,
update seems to be over, Great results google!
what a freaking joke

McMohan




msg:753482
 5:40 am on Feb 18, 2005 (gmt 0)

yp,
update seems to be over

Not over yet, 66.102.7.104 shows some interesting and refreshing improvements this very moment.

Mc

Robert Charlton




msg:753483
 5:52 am on Feb 18, 2005 (gmt 0)

Not over yet, 66.102.7.104 shows some interesting and refreshing improvements this very moment.

I guess it depends on how you look at it, because for me 66.102.7.104 puts a client site (a very legit site whose only crime was to change its domain name) back into the "sandbox."

One thing I'm noticing about 66.102.7.104... it seems to predominate in the morning, at least in the San Francisco Bay Area, and not to show up much the rest of the day. Again, I'm thinking A-B testing.

navneet




msg:753484
 8:00 am on Feb 18, 2005 (gmt 0)

I am seing consistent results accross all dc, apart from minor changes. Looks to me that the update is finally over

suggy




msg:753485
 8:45 am on Feb 18, 2005 (gmt 0)

Well, what the Dickens was all that about Google?

You send me off in to the wilderness for a week, then you let me back in to play, but only in some places. And, when it's finally done, I am right back to where I started (or perhaps a bit better)!

Huh?

Suggy

phantombookman




msg:753486
 8:58 am on Feb 18, 2005 (gmt 0)

Using the DC 66.102.7.104 , as mentioned above, is providing different serps for my searches.
MIA names still gone, my overall company name has slipped further down the list on this DC, secure servers foe my other sites are now above it

Marval




msg:753487
 11:12 am on Feb 18, 2005 (gmt 0)

that datacenter you're looking at does not have a lot of results in it for the SERPs - one keyword I look at a lot is missing around 210 million results compared to normal SERPs and all other datacenters.

Newman was asking about the MediaPartners bot - lately Ive seen that bot being used to get images for the image search

rehabguy




msg:753488
 11:39 am on Feb 18, 2005 (gmt 0)

metrostang said:
The results should be embarassing to Google.

I couldn't agree more. I've actually found myself going back to Yahoo to find stuff I'm looking for. Their results are currently BETTER than Google! Especially for 3-4 word phrases like metrostang mentions.

As I posted earlier: a search for "active server pages determine age" related query produced results on breast cancer, vitamin E and concrete. Hardly relevant results.

I can't believe that Googleguy hasn't showed up to defend the Google SERPs other than to say "we test thouroughly before updating" - that's BS - maybe the public is collectively stupid, but the people posting in these forums aren't!

Click your mouse and repeat three times:
Google is broken
Google is broken
Google is broken

I'm frustrated not only as a merchant, but as a user!

rehabguy

This 610 message thread spans 21 pages: < < 610 ( 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
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