illusionist
msg:756604 | 3:18 pm on Mar 19, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I removed that noindex as soon as i submitted the 302 redirect url and got a pending statement. I was searching for my unique site name and it came up in the third page before i used the url remove tool it came up as the first result.
|
Reid
msg:756605 | 5:24 pm on Mar 19, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Illusionist Search site:yourdomain.com If your homepage is there (doesn't need to be top) and the other one is not, then it's fixed. done.
|
Reid
msg:756606 | 5:45 pm on Mar 19, 2005 (gmt 0) |
For you guys like Claus and others who had a bunch of pagejackers and got rid of them but your site won't recover since. I'm wondering if somehow google has associated you with a 'bad neighborhood' and that is why googlebot wont find you.
Tried resubmitting, maybe what you need to concentrate on is getting 'linked to' from some fresh 'good neighborhoods' googlebot will follow their links to you. The other thing is I would take a look at your site through a Lynx browser, may be surprised at what you find. Do a search for poodle predictor, check that out.
|
zeus
msg:756607 | 10:07 pm on Mar 19, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Reid - Yes it is a problem, I got rid of mine also, but still have 3 that are now redirecting to there homepage, but cache is still my site. To get googlebot back I tried, submitting/toolbar and links, nothing has changed. I did at one day get hit 120 time by googlebot, they did also get index, but slowly they also fall out of the index.
|
crobb305
msg:756608 | 10:48 pm on Mar 19, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Right now, Google likes having those stale caches in it's index. I have urls last cached Nov 2. Google is content with this new business model. And nothing is going to change. Hijacking urls are here to stay until they decide they want to provide the quality of search that they used to. BTW, a new redirect just showed up for my site in the form of a subdomain like mysite.jm8.net Using removal tool, it is now gone. But, for a while, it was ranking #1 for my company name and for snippets of text from my home page. As I have said before, absolutely pathetic.
|
crobb305
msg:756609 | 1:12 am on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
walkman, What is really funny (and still pathetic) is that Google is listing a bunch of bad urls in the form http/http://example.com/%20 And even though they don't exist, you can't submit them to Google for removal because the removal tool doesn't recognize the format. If the removal tool knows that the url is not correct, how does it get indexed in the first place? Why is Google loaded down with crap like this, fake urls, etc. Sad.
|
g1smd
msg:756610 | 1:16 am on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I tried the URL Removal Tool to try to remove pages that are on a site where the domain has expired and some others on a domain that is password protected. The action was refused because Google could not fetch the page to read the meta tags, nor could it fetch any robots.txt file either. How can I add a temporary robots.txt file to a domain that does not exist? Google hangs onto those old cached pages like glue.
|
theBear
msg:756611 | 1:57 am on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
crobb305, Databases get all kinds of trash in them if you don't use some real edits right up front. The devil is in the details, plenty of folks can dream up things. It takes someone very picky to write good edits. Unfortunely a lot of wetware malfunctions when doing this. You see examples of the failure all the time. That is why there are things like buffer offerflow exploits, executable code insertion exploits, etc ... etc ... Just look at IE, XP, Moz, Firefox, Linux, or you name it. There are failure modes because of not checking validity of data prior to acting on the data. These are seperate from doing the wrong thing with the data.
|
Reid
msg:756612 | 2:29 am on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I just removed one from my clients site. Tried robots.txt - didn't work, tried META tag, didn't work "the page appears to exist" tried renaming the homepage temporarily to get a 404, didn't work, the virtual host he is using substituted their placeholder. So I did a mod rewrite to redirect the whole domain to a bogus page - got a 404 when I tried to view the page, URL removal worked. (he only gets 20-30 uniques per day and the site was only down for a min, he was happy the link is gone)
|
Vec_One
msg:756613 | 2:31 am on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I don't understand why Googlebot stubbornly refuses to crawl all of these old pages that haven't been cached since September or November. I've tried submitting them and linking to them. It's almost as if Google is purposely refusing to solve this problem. Could there be a rational purpose for this that isn't obvious? Nah, probably not. Most likely, it's just screwed up and nobody cares. At this point Alta Vista is looking pretty sophisticated.
|
hdpt00
msg:756614 | 3:17 am on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Here is what one a** is doing to hijack me. They are link through initially to yahoo, then to their domain, then to a redirect. The link from inurl: shows their domain, the link on their site is actually the whole yahoo 302 mess. When I treid removal of the url in google (w/o the yahoo mess) it said page not found or something, when I copied the actual url link with yahoo stuff in it, it seemed to work. However, of the 4 hijackers, this page still shows up while the others are gone. Dang I thoguht I might finally get these penalties off of me. Also, one site that is now a 404 did a 302 hijack to me and no site exists so google now gives me a no URL found error but still shows as a supplemental result. I love you google.
|
thnkfst
msg:756615 | 3:41 am on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I've certainly had enough. The only remove page I can get is a Google Japan site and I'm not exactly inclined to read anything but French or English. Anyone get this when they click on the automatic URL removal system? Is there a page that is in English? or is it just Google punishing MAC users?
|
Emmett
msg:756616 | 3:55 am on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I don't understand why Googlebot stubbornly refuses to crawl all of these old pages that haven't been cached since September or November. I've tried submitting them and linking to them. It's almost as if Google is purposely refusing to solve this problem. Could there be a rational purpose for this that isn't obvious? Nah, probably not. Most likely, it's just screwed up and nobody cares. At this point Alta Vista is looking pretty sophisticated.
|
|
Vec_One, I have a theory. When I submitted some split site urls to google, no matter what it would never update the cache of the pages, then it dawned on me. Everytime googlebot visits my server was returning a "not modified" code so google wouldn't see a need to re-fetch the pages and update the index. I went through and did a global search and replace on those pages to re-save them with a new date. Now I've noticed double entries in my logs where the files get hit, then 301'd to the proper location. Now I'm thinking thats why google isn't updating those php redirects that used to go to my site but are now directed to their homepage. Anybody know if a php script like that would return "not modified"?
|
walkman
msg:756617 | 4:23 am on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
"What is really funny (and still pathetic) is that Google is listing a bunch of bad urls in the form http/http://example.com/%20" they need 8 billion pages :)
I doubt they matter though...unless Google can index, them I don't think that they cause problems. I hope so anyway
|
nakulgoyal
msg:756618 | 6:08 am on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
In my case, emailing the webmaster worked. But the information above is useful. Thanks everybody.
|
walkman
msg:756619 | 6:33 am on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
"In my case, emailing the webmaster worked" it worked for my 4 first ones. One guy couldn't care less. Sent him 3 emails. Maybe I should return the favor and link him ;)
|
Reid
msg:756620 | 7:52 am on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
As long as that link is still active to your page you should be able to remove it.
Just rename the page or whatever you need to do to make that link return a 404 page not found.
Then submit the hijackers link to be removed. Once you get a 'successful' then your done. the problem is removing inactive links or if someone has a copy of your page on another server. I suspect that these guys like having these dead links layin around, maybe because the cache is never updated they still count somehow, I don't know. I have one in my site: that was removed from the directory that hosted it but Googles URL tool won't remove it because the php file is still there but does not recognize the id# for that link, returns an empty header. They won't talk to me either, got banned for poking around investigating my link (and others). Joke is on them though because they banned my home IP (not my site).
|
Emmett
msg:756621 | 8:06 pm on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Has anyone figured out a solid way to get rid of a 302 redirect thats been updated to point to their home page but still cached in Google as the old redirect? I've tried submitting the link to Google's addurl and put the link on my home page but it hasn't updated yet.
|
Vec_One
msg:756622 | 8:25 pm on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Emmett, although other people have tried submitting and linking to such a page, I haven't heard any success stories. AFAIK, the only solution is to convince the webmaster to completely remove the link, and then submit it to the Google URL removal tool. I am currently trying to have two of these links removed. If anyone knows a better way, *please* let me know!
|
walkman
msg:756623 | 8:29 pm on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
success story...in removing the links via this method. I can only hope the serps will reflect that. Not holding my breath though "Emmett, although other people have tried submitting and linking to such a page, I haven't heard any success stories. AFAIK, the only solution is to convince the webmaster to completely remove the link, and then submit it to the Google URL removal tool."
|
Emmett
msg:756624 | 9:02 pm on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
Only problem with removing the link is their go.php script will return to their home page for any invalid id #. I doubt I could get them to change the programming of their script. Would filing a DMCA on the google cache work in this case?
|
trimmer80
msg:756625 | 9:09 pm on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I have the same problem Emmett
, i am requesting the webmaster add a line to their .htaccess file that will force a 302 redirect for that exact url and thus i can remove it. :D
|
zeus
msg:756626 | 9:55 pm on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
We all know that the only one that can solve 100.000s of websites problem is google, its there problem, so still the only solution is to go public with this 302 googlejacking to the press/internet sites, if you hit them so they can feel it in the stock price you will get a solution within a month. Since there has been NO comments on this topic in the press or forums from google, they are not interested.
|
Lorel
msg:756627 | 10:22 pm on Mar 20, 2005 (gmt 0) |
| "What is really funny (and still pathetic) is that Google is listing a bunch of bad urls in the form http/http://example.com/%20" they need 8 billion pages :)
I doubt they matter though...unless Google can index, them I don't think that they cause problems. I hope so anyway
|
|
I agree. This whole mess is because if google fixes it then they loose a lot of pages indexed-and the amount they loose will tell us how many pages were affected too. re the example.com%20 I've seen it under the site command. So Google is indexing them
|
g1smd
msg:756628 | 12:38 am on Mar 21, 2005 (gmt 0) |
I recently read an article about the very small number of websites using the domain of a small island nation in the South Atlantic, one which Britain fought a war over about 20 years ago. To see for myself I did a site: search on the Top Level country domain. Even in a couple of thousand results I was amazed at the amount of malformed rubbish that has got into Google's database. Those sort of URLs shouldn't be in their database at all, never mind actually turning up in search results.
|
Reid
msg:756629 | 8:35 am on Mar 21, 2005 (gmt 0) |
| Only problem with removing the link is their go.php script will return to their home page for any invalid id #. I doubt I could get them to change the programming of their script. |
|
How about do a DOS attack to bring their server down - that way you'll get a 404 so you can remove your link. Just a thought...
|
Dayo_UK
msg:756630 | 10:23 am on Mar 21, 2005 (gmt 0) |
This is getting ridiculous. Cant Google just ask Yahoo if they can use Yahoo results until this is fixed - or perhaps ask - Ask Jeeves to use Teoma results (might be a little less embarrasing and they have a contract re Adwords.) Well Google have certainly confused SEOs and Webmasters if that was the plan - confused us by asking why so many problems are not getting fixed.
|
entropicus
msg:756631 | 11:04 am on Mar 21, 2005 (gmt 0) |
this problem, assuming people are using it to gain PR or SEP, could also be done with 301s possibly. What if i have a PR 6 site, then created a blank directory with a htaccess 301 redirect to the most popular file/page on a site with a PR 2?
eg:
redirect /mydir/mysite.html h**p://somesite.com/somefile.html The googlebot would also see this as duplicate content, and also think that the content it directs to belongs to my site.
|
claus
msg:756632 | 1:29 pm on Mar 21, 2005 (gmt 0) |
entropicus, no 301 would not work. 301's and 302's work in opposite directions - see my answer to your post in the other thread :-)
|
vfilip
msg:756633 | 3:39 pm on Mar 21, 2005 (gmt 0) |
this is a google bug and google just doesn't care to resolve it . It indexes both my site and another site ( maybe scrapper site ) , but what about if i have paid an advertisement and they have linked me in that way ( 302 redirect)? Have i paid to kill my self? I mean this the usual way of an advertiser to link to sites! 302 redirect is a common practice in the web . what can we do?
|
Emmett
msg:756634 | 12:12 am on Mar 22, 2005 (gmt 0) |
OMG! I'm back in 2 datacenters! 64.233.167.99 and
64.233.167.104 The 302 link is still there but I don't seem to be getting a penalty for it. Ranked #2 for my company name :D
|
|
