homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 107.20.25.215
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Visit PubCon.com
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 612 message thread spans 21 pages: < < 612 ( 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 21 > >     
Google Update Bourbon - Part 1
Has the sandbox been busted?
Dayo_UK




msg:767441
 8:35 am on May 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

continued from: [webmasterworld.com...]


Seeing something happening on 64.233.163.104 and 64.233.167.104 - might be worth keeping an eye on.

 

Powdork




msg:767891
 6:52 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

Jon_King I hope you are wrong because I don't exist on any of those DC's. Howver I am ranking ok (better than ever, but still just ok) on 64.233.163.104. I'm not too worried about some of the dc's you have listed because I am seeing in many cases

www.domain.com/article12345.htm

  • www.domain.com/article12344.htm (indented)
    admin.domian.com/yadayada

    all on page 1.

  • cpnmm




    msg:767892
     6:55 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    EFV - sorry to hear about your drop. You've always been a great source of advice on these forums.

    I did a search for site:www.yoursite.com just now and whenever I click on a result (listed as www.yoursite.com) I get referred to yoursite.com.

    I suspect that this is the cause of your drop - i.e. your pagerank was for the www version but now they are all being redirected.

    A while ago I 301ed one of my sites to another one and all the traffic disappeared - I didn't seem to get any extra traffic or PR from that site.

    Perhaps it's a matter of time before it resolves but it seems to me that Google may not like 301s as much as it says it does.

    Mauricio




    msg:767893
     6:56 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    It seems someone in the Googleplex decided that:

    If your site:
    - is more than 1 year old
    - has PR5 or better
    - contains more than 5.000 pages
    - receives more than 1.000 inbound links

    And:
    - some dozens of scrapers have collected content from your site
    - some dozens of scrapers are redirecting outgoing links to your site
    - you have no enough money to be a recoognized brand

    ...you will be in nowhere.

    Great.

    Andy_r




    msg:767894
     6:57 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    So is this for sure a major index update? If so, when did it start and how long do they usually last (until results stablize)?

    I have a few sites and Google traffic is way down. I saw a dip in total index pages from 160,000 to 122,000 at some point about a month ago. Traffic was still very high. Now it seems the faucet has been turned to a trickle.

    Are there any tools to "watch the dance" on different servers from once query? I recall a tool that did this with frames a while back.

    Thanks for your feedback in advance.

    wiseapple




    msg:767895
     7:01 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    I am seeing pretty much a common theme:

    - A site has ranked well for years has now fallen...

    This is the same with out site. Our traffic was lost after Feb. 2nd. It Has not yet come back. During this update (Bourbon), we lost even more visitors from Google.

    Both Yahoo and MSN love our site. This is the only saving grace. Yahoo and MSN have been updating more frequently and delivering more and more traffic. Terms we rank in the top 10 of Yahoo and MSN - we are in 800 range in Google.

    We offer relevant straight ahead informative articles. We do not use any black hat techniques or any SEO for that matter... Just straight HTML with incoming links from people who decide to link to us.

    It is amazing, we almost had as many visitor from Altavista as we did from Google. If it stays this way, Altavista will over take Google this week.

    Our was major fall, we had around 10,000 referrals from Google a day before Feb. 2nd. On Feb. 2nd, almost all serps dropped. It is now down to about 200 per day.

    Just my thoughts...

    PS: We went back and forth with Google Help - basic response: "There is no penalty on your site."

    Will Spencer




    msg:767896
     7:16 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)


    It seems someone in the Googleplex decided that:
    If your site:
    - is more than 1 year old
    - has PR5 or better
    - contains more than 5.000 pages
    - receives more than 1.000 inbound links

    And:
    - some dozens of scrapers have collected content from your site
    - some dozens of scrapers are redirecting outgoing links to your site
    - you have no enough money to be a recoognized brand

    ...you will be in nowhere.

    Great.

    I am seeing the first part of what you are seeing.

    My site which was dropped from the SERPS was over a year old, was PR6, had hundreds of pages and thousands of inbound links.

    The sites being dropped from the SERP results in this "update" seem to be mainly large successful information-only sites.

    Oddly, it seems like the group most negatively affected by this horribly flawed update were AdSense publishers.

    ckc1227




    msg:767897
     7:24 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    You guys still worry about Google? Its sooo easy to rank well in Yahoo, who cares about google and its drug mixing (get it- allegra and bourbon :)) updates? Not me.

    Having said that, my scraper sites are doing fine, some dropped and some rose, as always.

    caveman




    msg:767898
     7:25 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    Jon: I see substantial variation across those DC's FWIW. In fact, across a number of our categories, a random sample makes them look almost like a cross section of what's going on at all the DC's.

    Sometimes too much reilance on a given keyphrase cause what you describe.

    The keyphrase Chopin hardly gives me much traffic. I was just using this as an example. I get (got) most of my traffic from 6000 or more keyphrase combinations per month.

    chopin2256: You'd need to go back and read the Florida Update and Austin Update threads to appreciate this. Once a kw or kw phrase had been identified by the filters, other longer phrases containing the kw(phrase) are also taken out. Result: only obscure multi word phrases that were never optimized for return pages from the offending site. So, if 'red widgets' gets ID'd as problematic, 'large red widgets' is toast too. You may still show up for 'blue and pink widget information' however.

    skunker




    msg:767899
     7:25 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    If enough people start making noise about this and join up together and start using Yahoo/MSN, then maybe, just maybe, Google will do something about it.

    steveb




    msg:767900
     7:26 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    "Say, what percentage of the internet might that lop off in one fell swoop?"

    Not the interesting question. The interesting thing is the percenatge of people complaining about odd/unjust/unlikely changes who don't have the www/non-www issue consistent, or have inconsistent linking like relative links or some links to "/" while others go to index.html or default.asp?

    That percentage is close to 100%, if not literally 100%.

    penfold25




    msg:767901
     7:30 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    2 cents over here. My site is not going fantastic, but it is neither going badly either. The results are not too awful at all by google, most good sites i know are still their so maybe in the highly $$$ areas is where all the fuss is, non commercial looks fine to me.

    301 for me has not be a problem at all for many sites that i see. I think eventually google will pick it up if you have 301d correctly.

    Many informational sites i have noticed have not dropped at all.

    Thirdly, the update is not over, i think theirs alot more to come as per recommended by all the mods here.

    zeus




    msg:767902
     7:35 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    Mauricio - that happen to my site 3 nov. because of hijacking and the great googlebug 302, that site had what you described.

    hdpt00




    msg:767903
     7:46 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    These datacenters I show #3 or #4 for my main keyword and everything else I am about 700+:

    64.233.167.99
    64.233.167.104

    Hope these go all over. No change in traffic from google since these aren't shwoing on google.com

    Trax




    msg:767904
     7:48 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    that update sucks bad for me... I don't like what I'm seeing

    bether2




    msg:767905
     7:50 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    so maybe in the highly $$$ areas is where all the fuss is, non commercial looks fine to me.

    Nope, not from where I sit.

    wattsnew




    msg:767906
     7:53 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    steveb,

    <<The interesting thing is the percenatge of people complaining about odd/unjust/unlikely changes who don't have the www/non-www issue consistent, or have inconsistent linking like relative links or some links to "/" while others go to index.html or default.asp?>>

    Do you know of an authorative / non technical guide or thread for checking and resolving this issue. It's been chewed on here many times before. Aside from a couple of GoogleGuy thoughts, I don't recall anyone producing a consistent "guide".

    Thanks for anything you can point to....

    Dayo_UK




    msg:767907
     7:54 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    Steveb

    Bit drunk - so bit confused by your post.

    Do you agree that there is a problem with google and the way it handles non-www and www domains?

    I know you watch Google closely - so would be interested in your opionion.

    Dayo

    See Gooogle what u make me do on a day off - post when I am drunk ;)

    reseller




    msg:767908
     7:59 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    Will Spencer

    >Oddly, it seems like the group most negatively affected by this horribly flawed update were AdSense publishers.<

    Not exactly. As an AdSense publisher I have been mostly affected by allegra than this Alcohol Free Bourbon :-)

    However I do hope that this update will bring back at least some of the traffic which allegra took away.

    bobothecat




    msg:767909
     8:05 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    The interesting thing is the percenatge of people complaining about odd/unjust/unlikely changes who don't have the www/non-www issue consistent, or have inconsistent linking like relative links or some links to "/"

    Agree... the 2 mentioned 'problems' above have nothing to do with my sites, and I've noticed no 'abnormal' change in the serps.

    Think Steveb is on to something.

    walkman




    msg:767910
     8:14 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    backlinks are old too right now...about 2-3 months old. Maybe we'll get a backlink update too.

    taps




    msg:767911
     8:17 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    Dayo,

    I think he says that there are lot of people complaining about Google while they have unsolved issues like linking to their homepage with or without / and like having a widget.com and a www.widget.com without a 301 redirect.

    Cheers

    wiseapple




    msg:767912
     8:20 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    Not to sound cynical... This all sounds like the messages that started to appear after Feb. 2nd.

    The following did not fix pronblems:

    - Making sure there was a 301 redirect for non-www domains.

    - Relative vs. non-relative links.

    - Getting sites to remove 302-redirects.

    After we made those fixes, our site just sank further.

    In fact, there are tons of amateur sites that rank above us for keywords that would not know the difference between 301 - 302 - relative links - or any of the things discussed here... They load up MS Front Page and put a page with no validation on shared IP address at the cheapest hosting they can find.

    Therefore, I have come to the conclusion - there is nothing you can actually do. You have to wait until Google decides to somehow release you back into the wild.

    Someone mentioned here that you are still ranked for you keywords on some server out there in googe land... However, that server only will see the light of day for 20 minutes out of twenty four hour period. That is the trickle of traffic you will get.

    Just my thoughts after a frustrating few months of trying to figure it out.

    arran




    msg:767913
     8:23 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    These datacenters I show #3 or #4 for my main keyword and everything else I am about 700+:

    64.233.167.99
    64.233.167.104

    I'm seeing exactly the same, however, I don't expect these results to get to google.com - my site is only 3 months old and still in the sandbox. Could these DCs be showing the SERPs without the sandbox filter?

    wiseapple




    msg:767914
     8:24 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    Just another fyi -

    If you are in the top ten on every other search engine in the world for a key term and you are ranked 800 on Google - there is nothing wrong with your site. Basically, there is something wrong with google.

    BillyS




    msg:767915
     8:45 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    Has the sandbox been busted?

    Are the mods trying to stir the pot on this one. Is everyone getting out of the sandbox with these results except me? I can't even rank for a line of unqiue content on my site unless it is in quotes...

    bunltd




    msg:767916
     8:53 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    Jon: I see substantial variation across those DC's FWIW.

    For me, I see 7 varying sets of results from that list.

    sunflower12




    msg:767917
     8:54 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    "Many informational sites i have noticed have not dropped at all."

    Yep exactly, that's what I am seeing.

    europeforvisitors




    msg:767918
     8:54 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    I suspect that this is the cause of your drop - i.e. your pagerank was for the www version but now they are all being redirected.

    Maybe, but I've got more inbound links for non-www than for www. And in any case, when my main site doesn't come up in the first 10 pages of search results for my own uniquely weird two-word name (which is at the top of every page), there's got to be more than www-to-non-www redirects involved.

    In another thread a while back (I think it was in the Supporters Forum), there was an interesting discussion of how Google may be using data mining in lieu of traditional human-written algorithms these days. As I understood the discussion, Google engineers feed parameters into a "black box" (as in "Here's a list of pages that should rank high" or "Here's a list of pages that are spam") and the data-mining software concocts whatever recipe it needs to produce the desired results. If this is what Google is doing these days, the law of unintended consequences may be contributing to the strangeness and inconsistency of the current SERPs. (And if that doesn't make sense, I'm sure Brett would be pleased to have you join the Supporters Forum and contribute a rebuttal to that thread!)

    prairie




    msg:767919
     9:14 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    Google engineers feed parameters into a "black box" (as in "Here's a list of pages that should rank high" or "Here's a list of pages that are spam") and the data-mining software concocts whatever recipe it needs to produce the desired results

    That could be one of the main reasons for Google's spam report page.

    If we're being realistic, Google is more ruthless than Yahoo when it comes to suppressing parts of the web, and far less transparent.

    The description for this thread changed somewhere along the line... do people feel that this update is heralding in a period where Google will genuinley be able to rank sites in a timely manner?

    Iguana




    msg:767920
     9:25 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    So even Danny and EFV are being hit by this update. Two great sites that are exactly what the Internet should be about.

    The only good thing is that we now have examples of sites that should be authorities that have been hit. I also believe that I have a couple of sites that are worth people looking at but even my unsigned music reviews site again ranks at #40+ for it's own name. EFV has always been very helpful but very much on the 'content is king' line - the problems some of us have faced over the past 8 months were not about content but we couldn't convince anyone.

    It feels to me that the 'punishment' is spreading wider - sites with PR6+ are now being hit (us poor PR5s have been getting blasted in each of the recent updates).

    Congratulations on anyone who is doing well out of this update. Don't plan on retiring on your sites income though. Personally, I'm designing a 'find me in Yahoo' advert that I plan to put on all of my pages.

    steveb




    msg:767921
     9:27 pm on May 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

    There are over 100 threads on these issues, and I personally don't have one bookmarked. Someone more techno-geeky than me might want to contribute one at some point.

    "Do you agree that there is a problem with google and the way it handles non-www and www domains?"

    Sure. GoogleGuy has talked about this a lot. they try to find the canonical URL, and they sem to succeed the big majority of the time, but sometimes they fail, and they fail more often in cases where webmasters choose to be aggressively confusing (like linking to "/index.php" or whatever instead of "/").

    This 612 message thread spans 21 pages: < < 612 ( 1 ... 6 7 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