homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.197.215.146
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
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 97 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 97 ( 1 2 [3] 4 > >     
Dropped from Google - a checklist to find out why.
Let all the sites dropped fill this checklist so we can narrow it down.
HostingDirectory




msg:710783
 3:54 pm on May 29, 2005 (gmt 0)

We all know a lot of sites have been dropped from Google but we don't know why. Perhaps this update has a long way to go, perhaps it has not. If it is finished we need to find out why we got dropped from the index.
I have assembled a check list that i feel covers all the angles. If sites dropped could fill in the checklist we might see a pattern occur. Then we can work out what we might need to change to get back in.
My checklist is below, some of the points are explained why it might be a factor.

1) Site size
It is reasonable to believe that a homepage that size is too large, will have too many people click away so may loose relevancy to show in the top results.
2) Outbound links
How many do you have on your homepage?
3) Inbound links
How many does your site have?
4) Adsense
Since it may connect innocent sites with scraper sites.. do you use it?
5) Content updated regular?
Some sites do not have content updated too much because they offer tools over info, but Google may consider sites with rare content updates to be poor quality and drop positions for them.
6) Adwords
Do you use paid advertising like adwords, maybe loosing some places will make you pay more or perhaps Google protects their paying clients?
7) Age of site?
How old is your site, perhaps older sites are likely to be better because they survived... so Google keeps them listed high?
8) Use of no follow tags on forums?
If you offer forums or blogs, do you use the no follow tag? Maybe we need to stop bad sites linking inside our sites?
9) Location of host sever
Maybe our host location plays a part in how high we rank to certain users?
10) Dedicated or shared hosts?
Are we being punished for what other sites do in a shared hosting enviroment?
11) Redirects?
Do you use any kind of redirects that Google may be having trouble with?
12) Scrapper sites linking to you / content theft?
Do you have lots of scrapper sites suddently linking to you or using parts of your content.
13) Are you listed in dmoz?
Perhaps Google pays more respect to dmoz listed sites?
14) Listed in Yahoo directory?
Perhaps Google doesnt want Yahoo directory pages to be listed high or maybe it does prefer them linking high?
15) RSS feeds on site?
Using rss feeds might be causing some kind of duplicate content penalty?
16) Pagerank ( before it dissapeared )
What was your pagerank.. maybe a high pagerank gets immune to any penalisations?
17) Extra domains pointing to main domain?
Do you have other domains pointing to your main domain that might be causing problems in Googles eyes?
18) Search engine friendly archives producing same content on different urls inside site?
Some forums like vbulletin have a search engine archive that produces the same content with a static html url.. maybe this might be picked up as duplicate content?
19) Did you bother taking LSI into consideration with onpage content?
Basically it seems Goolge is now using Latent Semantic Indexing in search results - so a search for zoo trips may look at page content and realise that zoo , wildlife and trips are related. So search results could give you wildlife trips for the term zoo trips.

It's a long list but if we all fill it in, we could then put the results in excel and compare them.. maybe see a pattern that all sites dropped might have. Then we can test that pattern aganst sites will did not get dropped.

Might be useful.

 

zeus




msg:710843
 8:16 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

I think the most who has lost rankings now to 12 month ago, have troubles with

11) Redirects?
Do you use any kind of redirects that Google may be having trouble with?
12) Scrapper sites linking to you / content theft?
Do you have lots of scrapper sites suddently linking to you or using parts of your content.

and the googlebug 302 redirecting links.

For safty, look at inurl:yourdomain.com look for other domains with your title and description.

HostingDirectory




msg:710844
 11:12 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

I think i may have found what might be causing the drop in serps for some sites and the connection with scraper sites causing the problem!

Atleast it i something that has not been put forward yet by anyone else...

The problem may actually be related to dreamweaver / scraper sites / slight turning up of duplication filter in Googles Algo.

Confused?

Let me exaplain, Dreamweaver (and maybe other web editors) sometimes creates a temporary file that is the exact same file as the one worked on at some point - they normally go like this - tmp23444555656.htm .
I am not sure why it does that but i think it is for catching purposes when viewing previews of webpages as you work on them offline.

I did seem deep digging into my domian name with various searches and discovered that some of these files have found their way into scrapper sites ( mysite.com/tmp3454543545.htm for example )!

Two things are now clear

1) At some point some of these temp files were uploaded to my webserver by accident
2) Scraper sites have a way of finding all the files on your server

Another few things are now clear

1) The temp files are the exact same as other pages on my site but have a different url, this is duplicate content!
2) Since they find there way into scrapper sites.. googlebot could easily find these links.. when doing a major update

Now it is resonable to think that Google will penalise sites for duplicate content with the above scenerio and penalise our serps!

This also explains why only some sites have been effected by scrapers... only the ones which the temp files had found their way onto their servers and which some of the scraper sites had found and indexed these temp files.

Imagine a couple hundred scraper sites listing these temp files... Google and other engines could clearly penalise the sites for duplicate content!

Is this it?

Can all sites who lost their positions check to see if any tmp files exist on your servers.. check all folders.

If we all have this.. i think we have the answer.

helleborine




msg:710845
 11:29 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Not a single tmp file here...

HostingDirectory




msg:710846
 11:32 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Ok well... some sites may have just dropped due to the algo change... what i am asking is if any sites that have dropped way off the index for all their pages... have tmp files on the server.

Make sure to check all folders and sub folders on your server, they could be slightly out of view.

helleborine




msg:710847
 11:37 pm on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

One thing is certain, and that's the last 6 weeks, my internal pages have been picked up by scrapers like crazy.

This is an almost real example.

I have a spinning widget plan featuring a kiwi fruit.

I come up on kiwi fruit scrapers! Kiwi fruit scrapers... they really ought to get a life.

Also, if I do allinanchor: helleborine spinning widget plans, scrapers come up! Some people are exploiting my company name as anchor text somewhere.

And I'm a 2-bit webmaster. Imagine if spinning widget plans were big business...

Natashka




msg:710848
 2:05 am on Jun 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

I am almost sure it was because of scrapers sites and content theifs in my case. My site was 100% white and fluffy. To be honset, I have other sites that I *may* find smth if I search too hard ;)

But not this one. This one was cristal clear, like a tear. I never even interlinked it with my other sites, it was absolutely stand-alone pure site, without a single "stray" page. And this one was EXACTLY the one that got penalized, while others even improved!

My site didn't just drop in serps, it was penalized. For example, I have a *widget tutorial* that I've wrote myself, it's a copyrighted stuff, it took me a year to accomplish it, especially hard since English is not my native language.

Now, when I search for my own original tutorial name, it doesn't even show up in serps, while all scraper stuff with a copied paragraph or two from it and it's name in URL (like "name-of-my-tiutorial.htm") DO show up.

The same with each and every page of my site, featuring my ORIGINAL COPYRIGHTED designs. They don't show up, but scrapers do. I cannot say there are lot of scrappers, like thousands, but apparently enough to nuke my site.

And there is nothing I can do, just sit and watch how 5 years of my hard work got stolen and went to drain...

Janiss




msg:710849
 4:54 am on Jun 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

This thread has different questions from the other I posted to, so I might as well answer here too:

1) Site size
827 pages, according to the site search I use. Google says 828. I'm actually not sure how big the homepage is, since I use SSI to call in a lot of it. That said, I don't think it's all that large - it's mostly text and a couple small images.

2) Outbound links
To other sites, not to my own internal pages, right? 13 links that go outside my site.

3) Inbound links
Incoming from other sites? Alexa says 46 but I know there are lots more. And Google says that there are 6,140 "English pages that contain the term mysite.com"

4) Adsense
Yes. I used to get good money by using Adsense when I had good traffic.

5) Content updated regular[ly - ed.]?
Weekly, sometimes more often.

6) Adwords
I have an Adwords account, but I'm not spending a lot of money there. Am thinking that maybe I'll have better luck with Overture, where I also have an account, although I've yet to use it.

7) Age of site?
I mentioned this elsewhere, but it's 3 1/2 years old.

8) Use of no follow tags on forums?
No. No forums, as a matter of fact.

9) Location of host sever
Pennsylvania

10) Dedicated or shared hosts?
Shared.

11) Redirects?
I don't think there's anything troublesome. Mysite.net redirects into mysite.com, but that's pretty common.

12) Scraper sites linking to you / content theft?
I'm sure there are lots. I don't know how "sudden" it is. Yes, I have sites using parts of my content in hidden text. I am glad that someone posted the link to reporting spam to Google - it is getting used liberally by me now that I know it exists.

13) Are you listed in dmoz?
My homepage isn't listed, but a couple of internal pages are.

14) Listed in Yahoo directory?
Yes, twice - once for my homepage, and once for an internal directory page.

15) RSS feeds on site?
Yes.

16) Pagerank ( before it dissapeared )
PR6

17) Extra domains pointing to main domain?
Mysite.net, like I said before. Oh, and I have a separate domain pointing to my store. I don't remember if I set it up to stay outside of the SE's, but it should be. It's only meant for print advertising purposes (I wanted a shorter domain than using mysite.com/store.html for print ads). I actually don't want that domain in the SE's.

18) Search engine friendly archives producing same content on different urls inside site?
No.

19) Did you bother taking LSI into consideration with onpage content?
No. I think I said this before, but I write for the reader with only secondary consideration to the SEs.

20) Do you use any of the following words on your homepage - under construction, updating, re-design, upgrading, etc.
Ugh. Never. If it's "under construction" it ain't live.

21) Do you use more than 1 way to link back to your homepage from every other page in your site?
There are 3 links to my homepage... one image and one text at the top, and one text link in the footer.

Frankly, after looking at all these threads I am beginning to wonder if any of this matters - everyone's site seems to have different issues going on. Or maybe I'm getting so bug-eyed that it's all starting to blur, keeping me from seeing any common thread.

WhoopsAccident




msg:710850
 11:43 am on Jun 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Thoroughly confused or should that be bemused.

I have quietly got on with my own thing for the last five years, beavering away creating content for my web site. The content and pages were created with three things in mind - making them visually appealing, easy to follow and interesting to read. At no point was I creating pages to get ranking on Google . . . but then four years ago (give or take a few months) I found that my pages were getting high ranking on Google. I have never looked into search engine optimisation or even worried about it.

Around 11th May I decided that I needed to start making my living from the internet and based on my site's positioning for so many different search terms I launched a new business site.

On the night of 20th May I checked the search term for a new page I had created on 16th and there it was at number 1. On 21st May it had, along with all my other high ranking pages, disappeared.

Having read through this thread and various other ones I have become very confused as to what is going on and what if anything I should do about it.

The facts that I know are:

1. Something happened with Google on 21st May
2. Google (so I am told) started implementing something called Bourbon on 21st May

Logic says that it is Bourbon which has caused my problems. There is a large amount of conflicting advice going around. The first advice was to do nothing as the site should spring back . . . well it has now been over two weeks and it is not happening. This advice was then modified in that I should wait for Bourbon to be fully implemented, plus be tweaked, before taking any action.

So has Bourbon been completed and tweaked?

If I have to deliberately tweak my site in order to achieve search engine rankings then this seems wrong to me. As far as I am concerned content should be God - this is the information highway and information is what people search for. (Isn't it?)

There are various things I have found very strange about this whole thing. Take for instance one search term I have looked at. It is a person's name (which would not be that popular a search term). This name ranked number one worldwide prior to 21st May but then disappeared altogether. After a week it was back to number one. None of my other pages / search terms have come back like that. The name of my site is fairly unique (not that many would search for it) and was ranked number 1, now it can manage no better than number 14 and those above are not truly listed as having that name - only part of it being in their page title.

Another unreasonable result I have seen happen concerns a site I was responsible for building and writing. The company that owned it went out of business in October 2003 since when the site has not been added to or updated. It had all but disappeared from the first few search results pages (for certain phrases) but since 21st May it has come back into the top ten or twenty results and my pages (completely different) for the same search phrases (formerly in top 10) have dropped beyond position number 100.

What with what I have seen myself, what I have read in this post and similar posts leaves me totally confused. The advice "don't worry" does nothing to help. Other sites have not lost position so is there anything to suggest my site will come back at the end of all this. I don't think so. It has been dropped for some weird reason which has not been clarified as far as I can see. Everything is still speculation at this stage.

If I was responsible for a search engine my main energies would be devoted to preventing anyone manipulating the search results (like SEOs). It is the single most important criteria for a search engine - to return genuine results - otherwise its credibility will be lost. In any war there are casualties . . . am I just one of those casualties.

What is fact and what is speculation? If Bourbon is not completed then surely no conclusions can be reached?

JuniorOptimizer




msg:710851
 1:45 pm on Jun 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

WhoopsAccident,

Based on what you've said their really is nothing for you to do. You have sat around cobbling internet content like a good little content-cobbler for a half decade, and so far it's worked out great.

Google, a third party unrelated to yourself, has made a shift in its search paradigm. There is no guidance forthcoming from Google, nor will there ever be, due to the necessity of secrecy as it concerns their ranking algorhythm.

In essence, you have two major options:

1) Realize your complete lack of power in this situation and determine to avoid this sense of helplessness in the future by diversifying your income streams
2) Do nothing. Have "faith" that the universe of the web will return to the state it existed in mid-May and that your former efforts, which used to bring you such great results will prevail again. In that case, get back to cobbling internet and worry no more about updates.

I realize this post is not comforting, but almost all webmasters are at a cross-roads now, as it concerns Google. Everyone has no seen just how ephemeral their earnings really are and must make decisions as to their futures. The Golden Age of Google has passed.

PatrickDeese




msg:710852
 2:49 pm on Jun 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

> So has Bourbon been completed and tweaked?

No - Googleguy said [webmasterworld.com] (msg 41), as of a few days ago, that Bourbon was only "halfway through".

Unfortunately during every update a small percentage of good sites are thrown out with the naughty ones.

Right now, I'd honestly just keep doing what you've been doing til the update stabilizes, then look at what sites survived and try to figure out why, and see if you can reproduce those results.

As it stands, from what I've seen, most of sites that got hit were punished for links from off-theme sites and dodgy recip link partners.

If your site doesn't fall into this category, I'd recommend gritting your teeth and riding it out for a couple more weeks.

JulianDay




msg:710853
 3:09 pm on Jun 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

For my main site I haven't seen any change at all.

In fact, until I heard about Update:

"We're such a cool insider-bunch at WebmasterWorld that we're going to name it after a strong drink near where we're going on our hols! - but if just one of us geeks had a couple of shots of it we'd be lying flat on the pavement outside parsing our own contents"

Bourbon,

then I wouldn't have noticed it happening.

It can't be due to scraper sites: these sites use Yahoo and DMOZ don't they?

Established sites, like my own, have already been scraped to bits due to being in these directories for so long.

(BTW, ever cryptic GG said that they had experimented with snippets from DMOZ - so the DMOZ relationship is not dead then!)

If you're lost in the serps, just give it time: maybe the sites above you are better? If not, I'm sure Google will figure it (they generally do, in a financially motivated sort of way.)

And don't get too obsessed with redirects, 301s etc. or with server-side re-directs. No-one understands the latter, except the folks who have successfully done one - and they are willing to explain it in all its technological glory (without actually explaining how to do it :-)- so forget it.)

Forget about robots.txt - if you're not sure how to write one, just delete it!

Don't worry about validation (what a red-herring that is - the obsessionals at WS3 will criticise virtually anything you can throw at them.)

GG recommends absolute URLs vs relative ones: so a spider doesn't know which page it has landed on? How come my computer understands relative URLs? Is your surfing ever interrupted by a relative URL? I can appreciate the tidiness of it - but surely it is just smoke and mirrors.

Ignore the BS, make a nice site. If you've been dishonest - you probably know it anyway ;-)

Above all, don't listen to too much technical 'noise' - it is mainly brown and sounds like a bell (Dung!)

MHes




msg:710854
 3:19 pm on Jun 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

>Ignore the BS, make a nice site. If you've been dishonest - you probably know it anyway ;-)

I agree with a lot you say. The words 'woods' and 'trees' come to mind when people get obsessed with stuff that probably doesn't matter.

Will Spencer




msg:710855
 5:22 pm on Jun 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Revenue matters.

All those nice words of "wisdom" mean so very little in the light of a $200/day dip in revenue.

I don't know what people are trying to accomplish with those posts, but unless it was "annoy the hell out of people who are already in a bad mood" it is not working.

Sorry, I know you probably mean well. :)

europeforvisitors




msg:710856
 6:05 pm on Jun 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

There's one problem with trying to identify the reasons why your site may have been dropped from or downranked in Google: You're aiming at a moving target. So, even if you can find common elements among all the sites that have been hurt or helped by Bourbon (something that's unlikely), there's no guarantee that the changes you make will be helpful--or that they won't prove harmful--when Google patches its holes or polishes its rough spots.

FWIW, my own "white hat" FORBES Best of the Web content site was stable through update after update until Allegra (February), when it got a 30% boost. Then, on March 23, it lost 70-75% of its Google referrals. Now, after Bourbon, Google referrals are back where they were at their peak, and traffic is at record or near-record levels. The only change I made during that time was a 301 redirect of www.example.com URLs to example.com URLs in .htaccess at the end of March (something that still hasn't fully taken effect, to judge from the fact that Google is continuing to list spurious www versions of my pages in its SERPs).

I know of another "white hat" FORBES Best of the Web content site that has had a similar experience, except that its ups and downs have been out of phase with mine. Until late last year, its Google referrals were stable in update after update; then it fell, climbed again, and fell again with Bourbon. Same pattern, different times.

As much as we'd all like to have control over our destinies (and our Google rankings), we need to recognize that what Google does is probably far more important to our rankings than any tweaks that we can make (assuming that we aren't using "black hat" techniques that invite trouble). Sometimes, we'll drop because Google screwed up; at other times, we may drop because Google made a change that favors one type of site or content over another (e.g., portal-style megasites or highly focused "authority" sites or whatever). And sometimes, we'll find ourselves on top again without knowing why or for how long, no matter how much we'd like to think that we can decipher the present or determine the future.

JulianDay




msg:710857
 7:17 pm on Jun 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

All those nice words of "wisdom" mean so very little in the light of a $200/day dip in revenue.

Yep - I fully understand. The way we individually approach and write about updates depends a great deal on our individual experience, and the immediate financial impact. It is indeed probably of little comfort for folks to say "it will eventially sort itself out."

All I can say is that I have ridden out past storms by simply holding firm and knowing that my site is legit., whilst other webmasters have been tempted to tweak their sites - or even make drastic structural changes.

I have responded in the past by adding content, relevant links and so on.

But don't forget the clear (and I think well documented by now :) possibility that Google has muffed it up.

These days I generally just leave the site alone - and leave it to Google to work out what *they* have done wrong!

A good inidcator is how non-commercial, academic, sites are doing. If you see really good ones crashing - then they've muffed it again :)

(Genuinely sorry if some of us have been insensitive)

Reid




msg:710858
 5:07 am on Jun 6, 2005 (gmt 0)

the Buboun update is still trickling through the net, so any assumptions are a guess at best.
If your site suffered since Burboun then just wait it out. Even if it means waiting for a final analysis of the update, which could take months - if ever.
I would sit tight until an initial report - to see if there is anything rock-solid against you in this update, if not, wait longer - even until the next update and just keep writing content - or focus on other sites for a while.
If I was responsible for a search engine my main energies would be devoted to preventing anyone manipulating the search results (like SEOs). It is the single most important criteria for a search engine - to return genuine results - otherwise its credibility will be lost. In any war there are casualties . . . am I just one of those casualties.


SEO has nothing to do with manipulating the search results and everything to do with 'helping' the search engine. Search engines LIKE good SEO.

Black hat - directly manipulating search results in violation of the TOS of the search engine and not getting caught.

Please don't confuse SEO (search engine optimization) with 'black hat'

larryhatch




msg:710859
 6:27 am on Jun 6, 2005 (gmt 0)

" Please don't confuse SEO (search engine optimization) with 'black hat' "

Reid: I have to agree. There are lots of good, useful and relatively innocent things we can do to
improve a site without going black-hat.

For example, validating pages; proper, moderate (non-stuffed) keywords placement; good meta-tags
(in case any engine looks at them); sensible internal and external links; seeking/building incoming links..
plus a whole bunch of little goodies and nuggets gleaned from these discussions on WW.

Just rewording your own (non-scraped) text a little differently can affect your SERPs placement.
Make your site SE friendly. That's good sensible SEO and its not necessarily black-hat at all. -Larry

Will Spencer




msg:710860
 7:54 am on Jun 6, 2005 (gmt 0)

But don't forget the clear (and I think well documented by now :) possibility that Google has muffed it up.

That's my working theory.

A good inidcator is how non-commercial, academic, sites are doing. If you see really good ones crashing - then they've muffed it again

My site which was dropped is a very dry technical FAQ, so I have hope. :)

(Genuinely sorry if some of us have been insensitive)

Thank you for the kind words.

I _know_ I'm a wee bit loony right now. Work, travel, and Google all at once... not so good for the sanity level. :)

g1smd




msg:710861
 7:56 pm on Jun 6, 2005 (gmt 0)

One SE friendly action to do is to delete session IDs from all URLs, but if you really have to use them, then make sure they are the LAST parameter in the URL. Google might try to truncate the URL just before the ID string and see what it gets...

Johan007




msg:710862
 10:12 pm on Jun 6, 2005 (gmt 0)

The more you study it, this update and penalty seems to absolute bull#*$! on the innocent sites. My initial concerns about my affiliate shop and duplicate content due to accessible versions and AdSense are all proving to be VERY WRONG! Because I have seen other site with the same variable factors do the same and rank just bloody fine.

I am very tired and never been this pissed off in a forum before!

GoogleGuy maybe correct to say we should not make any changes because I think it’s a big fat Google bug nothing more nothing less - It’s the only logical explanation! I will put all my removed pages back tomorrow...ffs.

:(

Will Spencer




msg:710863
 7:02 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

Monday passed... no noticeable changes.

max_mm




msg:710864
 8:21 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

Monday passed... no noticeable changes.

Don't expect any. The "Guy" is just full of crap trying to do damage control and raise PR for a lost company (the re-inclusion requests is another good joke). This update is over and done with. If your site is lost then start working on your resume or launch an adsense campaign (it is all part of the big plan BTW).

The rest is just pure speculations, rumours and heartburns. Stop wasting your time. This search engine is going down.

PatrickDeese




msg:710865
 1:52 pm on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

> full of crap

Well, I agree with the sentiment, but not the attribution.

Google is not "broken", Bourbon it is not a "bug".

The day you search for "new york hotels" and the top ten shows websites selling Armenian folk music on 8-track, its broken. Don't think that will ever happen? Try asking anyone who used Altavista back in 1995-97. I don't think that there was a single SERP that didn't have porn in the top 10.

If your pet keywords no longer show your site, but shows on-topic sites for the top 10, 20 or 1000 - well, that means Google is working just fine. What it also means is that your site was doing something that Google could easily detect and filter.

1) Are you a thin affiliate?

2) Do you have reciprocal links? Are they with on-theme sites, or with any old site that will say yes?

3) Do the bulk of your links come from off-theme sites?

4) Do you use automated link trading tools that leave a footprint that Google could detect automatically?

5) Does the bulk of your content come from other online sources?

6) Do the bulk of your links come from a fraternal network?

7) Have you recently lost large numbers of links, or have sites that link to you been penalized recently?

--
thin affiliate: a site with pages that exist only to shuttle visitors from the landing page to the affiliate, with no value added to the search.

footprint: telltale words or code that are easily detected. Several years ago, sites using a trendy link trading tool got zapped because their link page was called themeindex.html

fraternal network: sites that are closely related to another site - for instance sites that are on the same IP, sites that use the exact same template, have the same whois info, same hosting company, similar inbounds, that link to one another in circular fashion, etc.
--

If none of these things apply to your site, and I mean that *honestly* don't apply - you'll just have to wait it out. If you were using any sort of edgy technique and now the site isn't ranking, just because you used to get away with it doesn't mean that you are getting away with it now.

Google loves automation. Think of what the easiest things would be for them to detect automatically and see if any of them apply to your site.

Getting caught sucks, but if you haven't gotten a site "algo'd" by a search engine, or even banned by a search engine you just haven't been trying hard enough. :)

danny




msg:710866
 2:05 pm on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

This is easy for me: no, a few but only ones directly relevant to my pages, no, no, no, no, no.

I can't see anything about my site that would trigger any kind of filter - but maybe some weird combination of things has upset some neural-net like spam detection system.

And I've never been "trying", so it's not a matter of being "caught out".

1) Are you a thin affiliate?

2) Do you have reciprocal links? Are they with on-theme sites, or with any old site that will say yes?

3) Do the bulk of your links come from off-theme sites?

4) Do you use automated link trading tools that leave a footprint that Google could detect automatically?

5) Does the bulk of your content come from other online sources?

6) Do the bulk of your links come from a fraternal network?

7) Have you recently lost large numbers of links, or have sites that link to you been penalized recently?


weela




msg:710867
 2:32 pm on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

I’ll answer this one honestly, and in doing so maybe ask more questions than are answered:

1) Are you a thin affiliate?

Less so than others who now out rank me. I had a handfull of affiliate links.

2) Do you have reciprocal links? Are they with on-theme sites, or with any old site that will say yes?

Zero reciprocals, all 1350+ links are organic.

3) Do the bulk of your links come from off-theme sites?

It's an across the board mix, but yeah likely falls on the off-theme or weakly themed side of things by a small margin.

4) Do you use automated link trading tools that leave a footprint that Google could detect automatically?

Geesh, If I did I wouldn’t even be wondering why my rankings dropped.

5) Does the bulk of your content come from other online sources?

Roughly 85% original with the other 15% quoted text form press releases etc.

6) Do the bulk of your links come from a fraternal network?

No.

7) Have you recently lost large numbers of links, or have sites that link to you

Nothing other than the usual flux, this has been outweighed by new links.

So like I said, at the end of that I see nothing “concrete” of definitive learned by the whole exercise, still somewhat confused, but hopeful all is not lost.

g1smd




msg:710868
 7:40 pm on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

>> Monday passed... no noticeable changes.

At #3 since forever (several years), boosted to #2 on Monday, dropped to #8 on Tuesday (in 120 million results).

Will Spencer




msg:710869
 12:23 am on Jun 9, 2005 (gmt 0)

You guys with one SERP that you are competing for crack me up. :-)

Bourbon sent me to page 20+ for the hundreds of extremely non-competitive keywords which I target.

My pages have largely been replaced with irrelevant pages.

If I had a page about "X Y Z" that used to rank #1 for "X Y Z", it now ranks so far down for "X" that I can't find it. Many of the top ten SERPS for "X Y Z" are now pages that barely mention "X Y Z", or even pages which only mention "X" or "Y".

It's broked.

Interestingly, my SERPS for single-word searches didn't get whacked...

annej




msg:710870
 1:21 am on Jun 9, 2005 (gmt 0)

On the night of 20th May I checked the search term for a new page I had created on 16th and there it was at number 1. On 21st May it had, along with all my other high ranking pages, disappeared.

Sound like my experience. Any new web page was on serps page one with appropriate search terms within 3 days. I sometimes have articles written by top people in my field and it was nice to be able to have them check Google and see that their writing would be seen by anyone interested in the topic. I'm not going to publish any articles by experts in the field until this gets straightened out; Google is certainly not helping improve the quality of the web this way.

Interestingly, my SERPS for single-word searches didn't get whacked...

My experience exactly. I started a thread on this at [webmasterworld.com...]
But I find that 2-3 word searches still do just fine on my site that is still doing well. But on the smaller site that Bourbon has hurt 2-3 word searches never bring up the page they used to. If I put quotes I do find the pages so the site is still there but greatly penalized.

On the thin affiliate etc list my site doesn't fit any

thecityofgold2005




msg:710871
 6:55 am on Jun 9, 2005 (gmt 0)

lol, lol, and lol.

My one and only big revenue generating site (by selling actual things, not some geek reseller stuff) went down from 6 to 15 on my main keyword. I was pissed off until I thought about it. The fraternal network thing may have been a problem so I have now sorted it and will wait for Google to re-rank.

It's been weeks now, GET OVER IT!

Oh yeah, and my Yahoo rank is on the way up and my ask rank is at number 2. Yee haa!

Will Spencer




msg:710872
 7:10 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

I believe that I have found out why my site got whacked in the Bourbon update.

I sent the following note to Google:

Dear Google:

Over a year ago, I registered the domain http://www.example.com and created a 301 Redirect from my existing web site http://www.example.org to the new domain.

Shortly thereafter, Google corrently connected http://www.example.org and http://www.example.com. The new site gained the page count, backlinks, and page rank of the old site. Life was very good for about a year.

Then, suddenly a few weeks ago, this understanding "broke".

The two sites now show different backlinks and page counts.

http://www.example.org shows 122 backlinks and 6 pages.

http://www.example.com shows 152 backlinks and 867 pages.

Please "reconnect" these sites in your database the way they were before.

Thank you,

Will

Natashka




msg:710873
 7:48 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

My one and only big revenue generating site (by selling actual things, not some geek reseller stuff) went down from 6 to 15 on my main keyword.

you know, me too, one of my sites went from 4 to 17. Inner pages went even lower, some below 100. And just like you, I am also selling my own actual stuff. I am still #2 in Yahoo.

But there was one interesting thing I noticed - though traffic dropped, but my sales remained almost the same! This confirms my suspicions that Google's traffic is actually "empty". It's crucial for those who make their living from traffic itself (like sponsor ads, AdSense, etc.. I have such sites too, and those didn't drop thank God), but not for those who are actually selling their own stuff. Ppl probably just use Google to look around, shop around, and those who are into freebies ;)

Lets say they want something they have no idea about (yet!). They go to Google, enter "widget". You are #1. Ok, they go there. But since they've just started their research, they don't buy it from you, coz they don't know prices yet, or maybe they can even get the same for free? So they go further, and further... and when they actually make their mind to buy, they buy it from somebody else, somebody who may not even be in Google, through affiliate link, banner, whatever.

I gotta confess that I do the same thing when I shop for something. I've also noticed that from better conversions in Overture over AdWords. maybe, Google knows that too, that's why they came up with Froogle, or whatever it is?

This 97 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 97 ( 1 2 [3] 4 > >
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