| 4:57 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Danny - the obvious search for you "yourname book reviews yoursite.com", ONLY shows you when you click "repeat the search with the omitted results included" at the very end of the list. With that filter removed you show up as you should at number one.
We have the same situation - the filters omit our site from the listings even for obvious searches.
Did you make any major link changes in the last 5 months? Do you have an email stating you are NOT penalized? We have several stating "no penalty" but I think Google makes a distinction between "filtered out" and "penalized". You and we are filtered out for mysterious reasons, but I think they are related to *other sites* copying or referencing the material and then getting ranked higher for the searches.
You have a superb site - esp. frustrating to users is that some of the most original book review material on the web can't be found!
| 5:24 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Did you make any major link changes in the last 5 months? |
Nope. My internal link structure has been pretty static for ten years, and it was a year and a half ago that I added Amazon links, which was the only really big spike in outgoing links.
|Do you have an email stating you are NOT penalized? |
I got some of those before (when things were bad but not this bad), but that just means there's no penalty that anyone at Google can see. There's clearly some kind of threshhold effect (given the huge ups and downs in rankings), even if it's the output of a neural network whose internal workings no one really understands.
| 5:50 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Dealing with the consequences of Bourbon update
Which changes has Bourbon brought about & How to deal with them?
As we are reaching the end of the latest Google update Bourbon, its rather important to do some damage assessments, study the changes brought about by Bourbon and suggest ways to deal with them.
We need to keep focused on the followings:
- Changes on your own site ranking on the serps (lost & gained positions or disappearance of the site).
- Changes you have noticed on the new serps (both google.com and your local google site) especially in regards to the nature of the top 10 or 20 ranking sites.
- Stability of the serps. I.e do you get the same serps when you run the same query within the same day or 2-3 successive days (both google.com and your local google site).
There is no doubt now that Google with those killer continuous "updates" is waging a war against all whitehat publishers and SEOs and you have to join the battle to survive. Google hasnīt been playing nice at all.
I wish to say it loud and clear to those friends who lost ranking, referrals and great proportions or all revenues generated by their sites:
Its about time to start discussing and exploring effective measures to deal with the above mentioned changes.
Loosing Bourbon battle doesnīt mean that we should lose the war!
| 6:27 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
helleborine after the whole demontration you made in that forum you are back at #5 for your keyword (i guess someone at the plex put a manual recovery like they did to some other guys in here).Good for you.
| 6:29 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
the update is not finished yet have you check all data centers?
| 6:37 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
the update is not finished yet have you check all data centers?<
I didnīmention that the update is finished. But I donīt expect miracles to happen either from now on. And wishful thinking and kissing asses arenīt always the right thing to do when decent hard working whitehat publishers are under a vicious attack by the plex ;-)
| 8:39 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
reseller - we probably know whats up with your site - give it time ;)
Starting to see a bit of positive movement for a couple of my sites. Does not seem to be any rhyme or reason to which pages seem to come back in the site.
Hope it carries through. I think we may still be in for an intresting couple of days/weeks/months/years?
One thing I am still a bit confused by is that GG was saying that the 0.5 was not done because the dcs were still showing different results for people - well I still see different results accross the dcs - but I assume the 0.5 has been done on all dcs? - (& I dont think the 1.0 would have moved to so many dcs by now - the way GG was talking)
| 9:30 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Its not settled yet. I reran the 50 worst searches yesterday and today and the results were different (some better some not), so I'll leave it for a month to see how they progress.
If you run this search again:
Google Googol mathematical followed zeros coined Milton Sirotta
In February, Google were nowhere but should have been near the top, even if you argue for topicality over authority, (topicality <> age of page!).
In March update it appeared at 50 below foreign language blogs and stuff.
I checked yesterday and a Google page was at 11, then later at 18, now currently in the 20-30 range.
The current results are (subjectively) better. There are only 1 Wikipedia clone instead of the 5 I counted yesterday and Wikipedia itself is finally appearing. Now if only they could figure out why a Google page come way below a '*oodle predictor' of the Google page.
I wonder how they handle Wikipedia clones? I would do a mechanical search to identify them, flag them as sites with a Wikipedia section and in result sets that have Wikipedia result, remove the clones in preference to the definitive site.
Perhaps even generalise it, to cover DMOZ, and other pure feed clones of definitive result sets.
| 9:35 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
That Google page you referred to is a supplemental cached March 2004 - bit strange.
G having problems crawling its own site?
Mind you it is a PR0 too - does not look linked up anymore.
Things are deffo still moving though -& supplementals are still ranking high(ish)
| 9:45 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"Mind you it is a PR0 too - does not look linked up anymore."
Thats the weird thing, the Google page I'm referring to is their Corporate information page, which appears in many forms on their various domains.
The one that Google pulls is an old press page I think.
| 9:50 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
as i mention to another thread there are some fellow webmasters that there sites are back in preburbon update rankings ,due ,who knows to much crying or what ever,I just show that the member heleborine had her site back as well with europe for visitors page ,as far as i can see from previous postings ,do we have to keep posting here as long someone gets bord and bring our site back to preburbon rankings or what? I am not goin to cry for help here ,I will only wait a few months or weeks and who knows maybe my site will be back ,not due certain relationships or begging ,but due content and AUTHORITY ONE WAY LINKS.-
| 9:55 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Not sure - if you do the following search:-
You will see they are all duplicates - dont know why the supplemental from intl/ia/press hold the highest rank on the search you mentioned. Maybe its the oldest? (Not by cache date by creation date) - but the order on the site search seems more like it should be.
(Oops - should say on the DC I am accessing - I am also getting Google.in/press etc etc ranking instead of intl/ia/press on some dcs)
| 10:07 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
<apologies>I'm very sorry to everyone, I attempted to be funny in a previous post, but I now realize it might have been interpreted the wrong way...
With every webmaster obsessing over their website, and myself being WAY more guilty of this than anyone else, I thought it was the most hilarious and unlikely thing ever, that someone else than me should discover my re-inclusion in the SERPs before I did. What were the chances of that?
If anyone has a screw loose obsessing over a website, it's me, not novice - that why I thought it was so funny that novice should be the first to find out.</apologies>
| 10:10 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Yours is an intresting case study - I have checked to see where your results are a few times too - as clearly Google should not apply a penalty to sites of that nature. I expect others like Novice have been too :)
Glad your back - started getting hits from G?
| 10:24 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I no more believe in conspiracy theories than divine intervention.
And if divine intervention was possible, I was more concerned that my whining here would result in my site being kept in the sewer forever, so that no one would get the idea that divine intervention was possible! <insert humorous emoticon>
What is more important now, is to examine any other sites that come back from the Purgatory, and find their common element.
| 10:36 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"than divine intervention."
LOL ,i rather say, manual intervention, because your site does not target money keywords like many other thousands that sunk.Was an atempt to GG or Google WebmasterWorld 007 agents to show mercy i recon.
| 11:09 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|your site does not target money keywords like many other thousands that sunk. |
Don't get the impression that I'm the only complainer here not targetting money keywords, whose site disappeared. There isn't much point discussing manual intervention, I have no proof either way. Even if I did benefit from such mercy, I find little cause for cheering, with danny's site still drowned in the river.
I do believe I know what happened to many the websites of webmasters that continue to suffer the injustice and the shame of being sandwiched between 2 scrapers in the SERP's red-light district.
Theories are just theories, and when they're not tested they are mere words. So I promise I wont bore you with theories. I'd rather give you some verifiable facts that you'll be able to use to draw your own conclusions.
I still need a few more hours, the normal delays when a group collaborates on a project... long days, short nights and computer-chair sores!
| 11:23 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"Theories are just theories"
ye..hmm.. they show mercy to your nomoney targeting site trying to proof there theory "Google is not evil" (or EVAL?).And Google gives mercy if you kiss .....
| 11:30 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
My standard search for my quoted company name brings a big change in the results this morning.
The top 10 had always been solid companies that link to me, mostly recipricol link partners.
Today 1st result is a spam supplmental page. And, 4 of top 10 are spam sites now. My position is still about 40th.
9 additional pages with full description came back last night but still site-wide penalty.
| 11:45 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I'm also getting back pages that have not existed for some time and pages coming back with Oct 31 04 cache dates.
Don't know what this means... but as I say - anything different is good.
| 11:49 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Yes - I am seeing this too.
Not on all dcs though....
Are you getting referrals to these pages?
| 11:58 am on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I'm using the default DC.
I can't find my site for any searches (looking in top 100) and looking at my logs I don't think I am getting ANY free G referrals.
When searching for a copied 10-word sentence I will come up towards the end if at all. If it is a quoted sentence I'll come up after any scrappy scraper site that has copied it.
| 12:27 pm on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
This morning, for the same search I have been doing since May 21 - very relevant, in title, tags and body copy on more than one page on my site - I have gone from 76 to 83 to 96 to 113 yesterday to 196 today. And I so wanted to drop below 200 ;-)
I still rank #1 and 2 or 3 on MSN, Yahoo and elsewhere.
Old adage: Fool me once (took pages from a subscription-based, password-protected site into public view based on potential AdSense income), shame on you. Fool me twice (income was improving steadily over 4-5 months until this update - lost 70% of revenue), shame on me.
Conclusion: I have nobody to blame but myself for trusting Google to operate in a fair, understandable, reasonably stable manner. They don't, so my basic business premise was faulty, and I really hate being wrong.
Apparently, this update is not over, but it is moving in the wrong direction for me. Google is forcing me to choose sides and I'll choose to support the SEs and business models that benefit me most.
| 1:26 pm on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|your site does not target money keywords |
I'm sure there are some "money keywords" I used to rank on inadvertently, but the searches I care about are ones like
"Audrey Kahin Regional Dynamics of the Indonesian Revolution", where my 500 word book review now ranks nowhere. And similarly for hundreds or thousands of similar searches.
| 1:28 pm on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|(By the way, if you're correct in your assertion that my site's recovery was the result of manual intervention by Google, I can only say that they did a sloppy job, since some of my most important pages are still missing in action.) |
EFV, so what exactly do you mean by "Manual intervention", how exactly did you accomplish that?
| 1:40 pm on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Clint - EFV was responding to fearlessrick's comments below. (Sorry for answering for you EFV, but I remember reading it...) Not sure he is claiming anyone did anything for him.
|Your site being returned to high rankings in the SERPs was most likely human intervention, because I recall that you were complaining earlier in this tread (Part 1). |
I also seem to remember that GoogleGuy suggested that we not react to the SERPs until after the update is over. I know traffic is important, but remember what he is telling us...
|Apparently, this update is not over, but it is moving in the wrong direction for me. Google is forcing me to choose sides and I'll choose to support the SEs and business models that benefit me most. |
The update is only about half over. I suspect he will not be actively back until it is over. He also promised to give us an email to supply feedback. My advice - do your best controlling what you can control, try not to get too worried about what you cannot control. If you can't handle Google's power (or any other search engine's), then maybe you're in the wrong business.
| 2:16 pm on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
So, Helleborine, am I to understand you got back your G SERP's? If so, can you please tell us exactly how, or do you know? What all did you do to your site after you were removed?
I thought I mentioned it yesterday, maybe I didn't. Those of you "complaining" (and I certainly CAN understand why) about being knocked back a few or several pages are the lucky ones. I found a website that checks your site's G position for any keywords. I checked dozens of several words/phrases where I WAS 1st on the 1st page, and get a load of this cr@p: "Not found in Search Results for Keyword in Google". Phenomenal. In some cases I was "really lucky" and showed in the "fantastic spot" of ~700th position! So at least those of you only back a few pages to maybe the 5th or 6th page can still at least be found.
| 2:19 pm on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Got ya beat.. I have seen mine at 808 sometimes!
| 3:06 pm on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>reseller - we probably know whats up with your site - give it time ;)<
Honestly when I wrote my post this morning, it wasnīt my site, which hasnīt been affected by Bourbon, I had in mind. My site actually is gradually recovering, you know ;-)
But what make me sad is to see decent fellow members penalized by Google for reasons we might assume and guess what they are.
At the same time several fellow members have posted and reported that spam sites and scrapers having their golden days on Google.
And it seems that Google by one way or the other inviting us to "Ass Kissing" party, if we are interested to see our sites recover. What the he_l they think we are?
| 4:14 pm on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>>>My site actually is gradually recovering, you know ;-)
Thats good. Gradual being the important word.
I think mine is but painfully slowly.
Seem to be taking two ant steps forward and then one ant step back.
| 4:32 pm on Jun 8, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>as i mention to another thread there are
>some fellow webmasters that there sites
>are back in preburbon update rankings ,due ,
>who knows to much crying or what ever,I
>just show that the member heleborine had
>her site back as well with europe for visitors
>page ,as far as i can see from previous
>postings ,do we have to keep posting here as
>long someone gets bord and bring our site back
>to preburbon rankings or what?
I really doubt it had anything to do with the quantity of crying and moaning. :-) Either it was something they fixed on their own sites (Helleborine getting rid of the hijacking link to her site seems a likely candidate), or else they just naturally resumed leading positions as Google folded more data in/fixed bugs in their algorithm (seems very likely for EFV since a few of his pages are still AWOL but others are ranking better than ever; so it's hard to believe that's a penalty or a manual intervention).