homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.166.66.204
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 44 message thread spans 2 pages: 44 ( [1] 2 > >     
Disappearance of many Q sits from G serps - Possible reason.
I think i just found what is causing it.
max_mm




msg:757980
 10:04 am on May 24, 2005 (gmt 0)

Scrapper sites using Y feeds!

Those with affected rank (and major decline in G traffic), check the amount of incoming links to your site (on G) and you’ll notice an exponential increase in the number of incoming links.

If your site enjoy top position on Y, chances are your link will end up on thousand upon thousand of scrappers and doorway pages (as a result of those web sites using the Y feeds).

Google sees an abnormal growth in incoming links to your site (over a very short period of time), this triggers a filter and your site is penalised because it is now a major spam suspect (your site is now a “link buying”. “link farming” suspect ).

Many of those scrappers are from very bad neighbourhoods (“vi6ra”, “bad credit loans”, “casinos” etc.) and you’re site is probably being ladled as the same and being nuked off the serps.

Think about it, yahoo launched their free feeds approx 3-4 months ago which is about the time these wiled G rank and position fluctuation started to affect so many web sites (around Feb).

Furthermore,, most affected webmasters reported great position on yahoo (which probably made their link appearing on thousands of scrappers as a result).

Question asked. What can we do about it now?

And what happened to googles mantra “there is almost anything a competitor can do to influence your rank”.

 

HostingDirectory




msg:757981
 10:35 pm on May 24, 2005 (gmt 0)

You have a good point, i have listed high for several hundred keywords in the hosting sector for the last few years... now i am completely gone.

My backlinks seem ok but when i search for my domain in google - i get almost 30,000 scraper sites using parts of my content and linking to me.

Ironically many of them have placed my content and other sites content around google adsense banners!

HostingDirectory




msg:757982
 10:44 pm on May 24, 2005 (gmt 0)

Max... i am listed fairly high in Yahoo also and still am. Are you saying that yahoo allows rss feeds from their search results?

Is this how so many sites got my links?

Also how would they take part of my content? Could they get this from the feeds also?

I have noticed that most of them have small extracts of my content thrown in with other content stolen from other websites.

How can we fix this? Surely Google and Yahoo has a moral right to do something about it.

We are being unjustly punished for creating valuable content that both engines use to run their businesses.

bnhall




msg:757983
 10:57 pm on May 24, 2005 (gmt 0)

Very interesting. Allegra and Bourbon both hit me, taking me from top 3 to nowhere and:

1) I rank very high in Y for all my key terms
2) searching on myuniquedomainname gives zillions of bogus scaper sites yet myuniquedomainname.com is not there
3) Feb 3-4 was the start of my problems

eyezshine




msg:757984
 12:28 am on May 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

This has been going on for over a year at least for sites I manage and is just now becoming a bigger problem sinse google doubled their database and more sites are being affected.

Again, there is nothing you can do except wait until google allows your site to rank where you belong. I see my sites slowly coming out of it and ranking better every update so hopefully the mass scraper link penalty will wear off eventually?

But this could be what is causing new sites to be "SandBoxed" in google.

Because they rank quickly in Yahoo or MSN which causes your link to be added to thousands of scraper sites instantly and causes your site to get a penalty in google for gaining too many links too fast.

This makes alot more sense to me than the sandbox theory. It also explains why some sites don't get "sandboxed" which could be from not ranking well in yahoo which would cause your site to not get too many links too fast and your new site will not get the penalty in google.

It sounds to me like google needs to lighten up on the mass link algo alot. I know it seemed like a good idea at first but apparently they didn't think it out enough before they tested it.

max_mm




msg:757985
 9:54 am on May 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Max... i am listed fairly high in Yahoo also and still am. Are you saying that yahoo allows rss feeds from their search results?

Yes, they offer free feeds to every joe and thier dog.
Unfortunately, in most cases, those feeds are being used to create content for adsense scrappers and doorway pages.


Is this how so many sites got my links?

Yes, and there is nothing you can do about it except for maybe ditch your site, buy a new domain name and start from scratch hoping or blocking yahoo from finding your site. Because you can't trust google to accommodate for this issue, their engineers are fast becoming clueless and incompetent. Yahoo are beating them at their own game "relevant search result$". Google’s algo can’t find it’s way around the scrappers problem and it is affecting G serps big time. I can almost see the big smile on the faces of Y engineers as we speak.


Also how would they take part of my content? Could they get this from the feeds also?

I have noticed that most of them have small extracts of my content thrown in with other content stolen from other websites.

Yes, the Y feeds provide your URL, page description and title. The webmasters in question just embed this feed into their static html pages and G scoops it up like there is no tomorrow.


How can we fix this? Surely Google and Yahoo has a moral right to do something about it.

Those scrappers bring google a lot of adsense/adwords $$, why would they?

Webmasters who have lost rank on G serps will probably start looking into using paid PPC (eg ADWORD$$), again why would they fix it (G that is)?


We are being unjustly punished for creating valuable content that both engines use to run their businesses.

You bet!, it is all about the money now. Google is turning the entire web into a massive junk yard full of scrappers due to the reason i listed above.

I am actually on the lookout for a good scrapper software as we speak. Hell, if i can't beat them then i might as well join them. There are bills to pay.

ncgimaker




msg:757986
 11:26 am on May 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I have to say I doubt it, there have been these disappearances for years. It didn't suddenly begin with yahoo releasing their search results.

It started when Google downplayed PR in favour of onpage and offpage linkage way back in Florida update.

When I search "k1 k2 k3 k4" with quotes on Yahoo we come top, scraper search sites come below us. When I search without quotes, we come top, other sites related to in a more diffuse way appear below us. Scrapers are nowhere.

When I do the same with Google we are nowhere without quotes, there are no k1 k2 k3 k4 sites above us, all are tangentially connected to those words.
With quotes we rank below two resource directories, these are scraped text simply stripping tags from our pages. not 302'ing to us. (one doesn't even link to us at all).

So to me, its not a 302 problem or a yahoo search result based scaper site. Its just a Google problem. A poor algo that strips spam and ham in pretty much equal proportions leaving only snouts & offal to feed on:
Unconnected pages only tangentially related to the ham you were looking for.

max_mm




msg:757987
 12:54 pm on May 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I have to say I doubt it, there have been these disappearances for years.

Not on such scale!, what many of us are seeing nowadys is very new. Trust me, i'm in this business since 1997.

max_mm




msg:757988
 12:59 pm on May 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

So to me, its not a 302 problem or a yahoo search result based scaper site. Its just a Google problem. A poor algo that strips spam and ham in pretty much equal proportions leaving only snouts & offal to feed on:
Unconnected pages only tangentially related to the ham you were looking for.

Simple reason, the link evaluating algo google are using right now cannot handle the mess and double the junk the web has recently become.

Asking webmasters to include the "rel=nofolow" in href tags speaks a thousands words. The goolbot/algo can no longer tell good links from bad and simply penalize whenever it discovers a site has an un-proportional fast growth in the number of incoming links. It is as clear as daylight.

privacyman




msg:757989
 1:12 pm on May 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

For my own site I still have a decent position in A/V and in Yahoo I had never had too much there (part of its history for getting in) and in Google I had always had a comparable position that was similar to A/V.

Now it seems that my dot com site is totally gone from Google.

Couple years ago I had also gotten the net and org but never submitted either of them to any of the engines just wanted to cover my "back door" on my com domain so that someone else would not compete with my site. The site is not commercial but it has community "controversial issues" (alike "against redevelopment", alternative hiv views, some complainst against a few corporations for bad practices... facts are documented).... that's part of the reason why I got the other tld's so that a site opposing mine could not park at my back door and also to make it easy on someone just knowing the main domain they could use the com net or org and still get to my site.

Then all of a sudden the com domain became lost within Google. Searching for domain.com or www.domain.com yields nothing, the org and the net which I never submitted come up way the heck in the woods. Recently I put into my htaccess file a 301 for the net and org to go to the com domain.

My question is this:

Does Google or any of the other search engines ever submit to pressure by any corporations or anyone else to "drop a site" from their listings?

For any of the companies that I might have a documented complaint about, eg one nonprofit sold my address to other nonprofits yielded postal solicitations to me for a year; a major Tel Co release confidential subscriber info; another nonprofit showed discrimination; and a few others..... none of those that I have a complaint about has ever contacted me to say that it was libelous or slander or a false statement and none have ever had any lawyer contact me or taken any direct action.

THUS -- I am very curious if anyone in the forum knows for sure, or if any S/E reps who might read this if anyone can say if any engines submit to pressure or requests to remove a site from the index and I am particularly interested if Google may have done so.

Otherwise I can not find any other reason why my com site is totally gone and one or two pages of the org and net are there but way lost in the ranks. Totally unexplainable to me when the com is still decent in A/V and a few other engines.

irock




msg:757990
 1:18 pm on May 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Hi max_mm,

I'm still kinda lost.

1. I have good rankings on Yahoo.
2. I don't see links from scrapper sites by typing "link:www.mydomain.com" (w/o quotes) and only a few by typing "mydomain.com" (w/ quotes).
3. My incoming links increased from 1300 (Jan) to 1540 (March) to 1700 (May). I'm not sure if 200 link increase will trigger this penalty.

I don't know... Is there any better way to confirm if my site is hit by scrappers?

Thanks.

Pico_Train




msg:757991
 1:24 pm on May 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I believe I have the same problem, too many unwanted links too quickly.

Waiting over the busiest part of the year is a real slap in the face.

flicker




msg:757992
 12:03 am on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

I really think this has got to be a coincidence. I maintain a website for an organization I volunteer with and it's acquired hundreds if not thousands or stupid scraper links over the past couple of months (there are so many of them that I can no longer check the site's backlinks effectively). It still shows up #1 for both the site's name and for the anchor text used by all the scraper sites.

The scraper explosion may have happened in the same timeframe as Google's indexing problem, but that doesn't mean it caused it. If Google was penalizing sites that suddenly acquired a large number of identical and highly unnatural scraper links, this site would have been toast; but it isn't.

2create




msg:757993
 12:33 am on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

That makes so much sense. I am #1 in Yahoo for several of my targeted search terms and I've done nothing to try to "trick" the engines for the 3 years my site has been around. I took a small hit with Allegra but got penalized heavily with the Bourbon update.

So much for building a content rich site that abides by the "rules."

max_mm




msg:757994
 1:17 am on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

The scraper explosion may have happened in the same timeframe as Google's indexing problem, but that doesn't mean it caused it. If Google was penalizing sites that suddenly acquired a large number of identical and highly unnatural scraper links, this site would have been toast; but it isn't.

Flicker,

Give it more time. It catches up with everyone, eventually. As i said earlier, G's algo has some serious problem with evaluating incoming links recently.

You may have not acquired the right number of scrapper links yet to trigger the nuking.

Check your site's link popularity on marketleap.....in my case one of the sites affected went from 150 (q links) to 20000 scrapper links within one month. The site was enjoying top positions for many keywords on yahoo and then BANG. G's positions melted with this update.

If you enjoy top positions on yahoo for competitive terms, be worried be very worried. That’s all i can say.

flicker




msg:757995
 2:17 am on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

Could be. My feeling is that it's likelier that the exclusion of the quality sites that have gone MIA is a mistake and will be fixed eventually, not that it's Google's plan and all the rest of the quality sites on the web will soon join them in oblivion. I'm a big Occam's Razor devotee. But I'll let you know if anything happens to this site or to any of the other authority sites in the field (they all have a gazillion scraper links by now, so they ought to make good test cases).

Mauricio




msg:757996
 6:46 am on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

Just a quick note: it's not just a question about scraper sites but "ADSENSE SCRAPER SITES".

The Google's branch Adsense (and his low quality politics) is a big part of the problem.

giga




msg:757997
 8:39 am on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

So if this theory were to be true couldnt you simply remove all controlable links to yourself in an effort to cut down link growth? Thus maintaining the scraper sites links (which would show a average growth rate) and remove your own links, thereby bringing your site back down to an acceptable level. This in theory would lift the growth rate penalty...

Rosalind




msg:757998
 9:00 am on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

So if this theory were to be true couldnt you simply remove all controlable links to yourself in an effort to cut down link growth?

That would backfire if the scraper site links are numerous and very low PR, and if the links under your control are actually valuable and older. You wouldn't be doing anything about the sudden growth of new links. That's assuming that Google is taking the age of the links into account, which their patent application suggested.

giga




msg:757999
 9:12 am on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

I believe they ARE taking the age of the backlinks definatly into effect. So you are suggesting that the older backlinks are irrelevant for the overall count of a site's recent link growth rate (makes sense if so).

helleborine




msg:758000
 10:04 am on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

I'm curious about something.

Check allinanchor: for your company name.

In my case, when I do this for "helleborine free widget plans" there are 4 scrapers and "buy-buy-buy" sites that come up.

Are people creating links with anchor text "helleborine free widget plans" leading to their own site to increase their traffic?

Could this have something to do with my site's disappearance?

ann




msg:758001
 11:02 am on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

I am beginning to believe that Google is really broken or someone has been tippling on the bourbon while tweaking.

Google no longer obeys the robots.txt file.

I disallowed all bots from my guestbook and my cgi bin...guess what? Some of the pages showed up in site:mysite.com. The cgi ones didn't open when clicked on but the guestbook and other disallowed pages did!

I personally think they need to hire a whole new crew!

Searching on links did not bring up even a third of them or even the high ranking sites that are linked to me....I went and checked just to be sure and they were still up...I had those links for years. My main site is 8 years old and my smaller site is 6 years old.

Ann

JuniorOptimizer




msg:758002
 11:51 am on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

Ditto on the robots.txt issue. I disallowed all dynamic crawling yet have received referals from these pages which are listed as "Url Only" in Google.

SEOPTI




msg:758003
 4:12 pm on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

Google lost the algo tweaking game, Yahoo! is the winner.

Undead Hunter




msg:758004
 6:22 pm on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

Max:

Maybe this would explain why certain sites have come back UP in the rankings over a month or more... Let's say you're in the top of the rankings in February. Scrapers "attack", you get 10,000 backlinks in a month, and so in May, Google drops you.

After that, the links get older and older, so they dissapate, and you move back up into top position.

If this is the case, then we're looking at a constant cycle of this happening.

europeforvisitors




msg:758005
 6:55 pm on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

If this is the case, then we're looking at a constant cycle of this happening.

Isn't it more likely that Google would say "Oops--that filter didn't work the way we thought it would" and try something else?

samwise




msg:758006
 7:00 pm on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

This happened to my site: [webmasterworld.com...]

I've found a number of German sites that have a link to my site on every page of their site(s). These sites are named like so: site1.info site2.info and on up to site22.info etc... They would then continue it using another group of site names: siteA1.info siteA2.info etc...

I thought that it only mattered if you linked back to them?

I'm in the index for a small number of keywords but nothing near what I was.

Undead Hunter




msg:758007
 7:33 pm on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

Hi EFV:

Well, I hope so. But didn't this start in February, and aren't we still seeing it happening? Do they know? How would we know if they did, one way or the other?

My fear is that they do know this, but sites like yours and mine are "acceptable losses" - maybe this works for a majority of search results. Or their bottom line.

You think they'd be able to shake our this kind of problem on test servers. Not have to run it for a few months live to realize the problem.

I guess the only upside is that if it IS the case, spammers will attack competitors with this method. That should cause a sufficient stink to have it changed.

Again, these are a hell of a lot of assumptions.

sailorjwd




msg:758008
 7:53 pm on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

Are any of you experiencing this scraper issue:

If found thousands of sites showing up as links to me with my Adwords ads. I didn't think these ads got cached like that?!

I'd be happy to send someone an example of this if you're interested.

fearlessrick




msg:758009
 9:12 pm on May 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

Well, I checked my allinachor and sure enough, scrapers all over the place. Maybe this whole link popularity scheme of Google's has seen better days?

I sure hope so because it's always been a pain in the behind and ain't worth a damn. Like when I want to link to an AP story in an article on my site, for instance: I go to google news, there are usually 20 or more websites running the same story, so any will do. If I choose the Kansas City Star just because that's where my cursor happened to land, does that mean the Star is better in any way then the Des Moise Register, the NY Times or the People's Daily. Probably not.

End the link madness, just take it right out of the algo and rank sites on relevance, quality and original content, period. Good riddance to this link crap.

And clean up the AdSense publishers. Kick the obvious scrapers and for the rest, lower the payout to .000000001 per click.

Google's making a mockery of the web and themselves. They need to fix this NOW!

This 44 message thread spans 2 pages: 44 ( [1] 2 > >
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