homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.166.105.24
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 819 message thread spans 28 pages: < < 819 ( 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26 27 28 > >     
Google Update Bourbon Part 4
GoogleGuy




msg:736898
 12:02 am on Jun 4, 2005 (gmt 0)

Continued from part 3 here: [webmasterworld.com...]


I did the rounds to check on the state of various data updates. I'd estimate that the "0.5" (not algorithmic changes, but rather responses to various spam/porn complaints + processing reinclusion requests) should go out this weekend sometime or possibly Monday. There should be a binary push this week to improve a corner-case of CJK-related search, and that new binary should have the hooks to turn on the third set of data. Regarding finishing up the second piece of data, there's still two data centers with older data. Those data centers will probably be switched over by Monday. By Monday, 2.5 of the 3.5 things will probably be on.

 

MikeNoLastName




msg:737588
 1:47 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

Bourbon results getting funkier every day!
Just found the following in the SERPs for an allinurl of our domain: [disguised our info, although that's the original Google IP from the results - and NO I didn't click on the cache button by accident to get it]

[216.239.57.104...]

If you click on it, it's a Google cache of our page from one of their IPs, coming up in the search results! So now Google is hijacking us too ;)? Have no clue how to get rid of it. Last week under the same inurl: there was a URL only result that looked like this:

www.someone-elses-domain.com,our-domain.com/

With a comma in the middle! Tried to URL console remove it, but it wouldn't take it because it said it was in the wrong format! E-mailed G support, and they claimed they couldn't find it, and wanted more info. E-mailed them back. It disappeared the next day, but today, it's back again.

Where is all this trash coming from?

theBear




msg:737589
 2:02 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

Haven't a clue.

That may be Googles new redirect,sorter.outer (all them IP protection symbols go here).

Have a good night folks.

kamikaze Optimizer




msg:737590
 2:19 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

Mike No Last Name:

This: www.someone-elses-domain.com,our-domain.com/

Comes from: www.someone-elses-domain.com

linking to you that way in a script. I know it is odd, but I have found it myself for my sites, just last night.

joeduck




msg:737591
 4:19 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

kamikaze - is there any way to tell the address of the linking script? We have www,oursite,com showing up prominently and I'd like to know who is mislinking us.

reseller




msg:737592
 5:52 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

Good morning Folks

Nobody talk about Bourbon Update anymore?

Do you see any changes on the DCs or are they settled for now and Caveman´s Fat Lady has sung ;-)

storm_rider




msg:737593
 6:53 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

anybody else noticing pagerank greyed out again, is this yet another part of the bourbon update (hopefully rollback)

andy_boyd




msg:737594
 7:37 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

I've been seeing results from 64.233.183.99 and 64.233.183.104 being used on .com and .co.uk from yesterday. I'm in the UK ... anyone else seeing this?

MyWifeSays




msg:737595
 7:57 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

My guess on why some sites are being punished is that Google has tried to introduce a new filter which attempts to address the scraper site problem.

I think that in some cases it is penalising the innocent sites that are being scraped.

I have no evidence for this. I'm basing my guess on:

1) people have commented that they're seeing serps with fewer scraper sites.
2) such a filter would be very hard to implement without taking out innocent sites too.

I'm wondering whether having adsense is a factor in this. It might be time to start thinking about how much content on a page is unique.

ramachandra




msg:737596
 8:04 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

Till yesterday my site pages count got down and was showing the site pages links with no description including my homepage, now it has cached most of the internal pages and displaying description except homepage. Is anyone facing similar problem?

andy_boyd




msg:737597
 8:09 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

Something simailar here Ramachandra.

Google has pretty much every page on my site, and each one ranks well for it's intended phrase. However, the homepage does not exist ...

A search for my domain.com returns "Sorry, no information is available for the URL mydomain.com". Now ... why would the site index go MIA but every other page is fine and maintaining their rankings?

Dayo_UK




msg:737598
 8:11 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

Yep - same here on some dcs for the home page - other dcs show url only.

serafino




msg:737599
 8:56 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

"I've been seeing results from 64.233.183.99 and 64.233.183.104 being used on .com and .co.uk from yesterday. I'm in the UK ... anyone else seeing this? "
Yes i noticed that too,depending what are your KW's are ,though G.uk has the same but in deferend ranking + - at the #1-#10

Dayo_UK




msg:737600
 9:07 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

If the UK is hitting those DCs - that explains why I am getting little traffic today.

EFV likes talking about Yahoo to Google ratio (although normally G to Y ratio)

I would say its about 15:1 - 25:1 in favour of Yahoo for my site at the moment.

MSN to G ratio 6:1 - 7:1

Jeeves to G ratio 3:1 - 5:1

suidas




msg:737601
 9:07 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

Is the time yet ripe for someone to sumarize what may or may not have gone on? Apart from some strange dips--now over--my positions have shown little change. A little up, which is nice.

Dayo_UK




msg:737602
 11:00 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

Looks like people have given up on this update.

sailorjwd




msg:737603
 11:06 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

This is pretty much the final status for me:

All pages had adsense on them.

Pages with ~> 400 words have come back to be fully indexed although heavily penalized.

Pages with ~< 400 words are mostly totally gone, some are url-only.

I had a lot of pages that were blowups of screen-shot thumbnails. These pages had a paragraph or two describing the screen. I believe not one of these remain indexed in any manner. These pages would be very similar to product pages.

My solution is to go back to how the site was 2 years ago where these small programming example pages were all on a single page with a table of contents (within page links). I have one page remaining like that and it is in the index.

I'm just going to delete the small pages since 95% of them don't exist in G and, while they rank well in Yahoo, no programmers use Yahoo for search.

Time to visit the wayback machine.

Any comments are welcome.

thebug151




msg:737604
 11:11 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

I have given up, no real movement for my site in about 2 weeks.
I may have it all figured out: Google has changed PR! PR0 is the new PR10, less is better. This means my PR6 site is burried just past the half way point...just out of sight :)

ska_demon




msg:737605
 11:11 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

Looks like people have given up on this update.

Yup! it has most certainly been a strange one. I have a new site that initially appeared to dodge the sandbox. It got a bit of pr and I was getting a little bit of traffic from G. A week down the line and G is listing all pages from the site but I can't find them in any useful positions. I still have the pr but almost zero google traffic. Funny thing is my Yahoo traffic has gone up quite dramatically and is driving far more relevant customers to my site and is converting far better than google did. I think its time to ban googlebot and remove my URL from google ;oP

I think G could be a 'bad neighbourhood' heh heh

Anyway, for me, at the moment Yahoo rocks and Google sucks so whatever they do this update has no effect on me except in influencing my new opinion of google.

Ska

Dayo_UK




msg:737606
 11:22 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

The most annoying thing about this update is that there has always been hope just around the corner.

Now it appears all hope has gone.....

Tomseys




msg:737607
 11:25 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

I have found that some of my sites can rank very well in one update and then poorly in the next. I usually never alter them. I think there is very little rhyme or reason with G beyond the influence of certain continuing problems they have.

fearlessrick




msg:737608
 11:40 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

I haven't given up, though I'm wondering how the changes will eventually affect everybody, especially sites with adsense and sites that have been scraped.

On Wednesday night, I stumbled across a firm called Step Forth (sorry, no URLs, why?), but you can find them pretty easily - they're a .com.

They're an SEO firm, and they seem to have a pretty objective understading of Google. Here's just one comment they are making:

The second major factor is that Google needs to discourage search-marketing consultants (SEO/SEM) from abusing the obvious exploits found in their core-method of sorting and ranking sites, PageRank. While parts of the PageRank formula have changed over the years, the base concept that a link equals a vote has remained the backbone of Google’s ranking algorithm since day one. The simple logic behind PageRank produced highly relevant search engine listings, which were fairly easy to manipulate. In order to prevent gross commercial manipulation, Google has had to add several weights and measures to the evaluation of incoming links, a process that is obviously easier said than done. It also has to tie as many of its features and services together in order to present the best search listings it possibly can.

danny




msg:737609
 11:56 am on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

I've pretty much given up hope. I've blocked my AdSense alternate ads using robots.txt, following a suggestion in this forum, but I can't think of anything else to try - it's not as if my site is very complicated.

I may or may not have a problem with scrapers or hijacking, but if I do it's distributed over so many other sites that I have little chance of doing anything about it.

Dayo_UK




msg:737610
 12:03 pm on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

Danny - A PR7 that gets no traffic from Google - that beats my PR5 sometimes PR6 that gets no traffic.

Any PR8, 9 or 10 now getting no traffic at all. (No traffic - well virtually no traffic I think I might have had 1 referral so far today)

WebInker




msg:737611
 12:06 pm on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

I hate to p*ss yet further on most peoples already rather soggy parade but my sites are performing rather well having all been released from the sandbox and reaching the top 10 for all my localised keywords, the googlebot is also crawling around 10 - 20% pages daily. These SERPs (for my keywords) I first saw about 3 weeks ago on 64.233.163.10 and 64.233.167.10 and have slowly propagated across all the DCs I am aware off which is the first time I have seen this consistency since the beginning of this update.

Dayo_UK




msg:737612
 12:15 pm on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

Pleased for you WebInker.

Those two dcs - back when I noticed the changes on those two dcs about 55 weeks ago (it seems) - the reason I noticed it was because I came up in 3rd position for my unique name - and I thought - at last things are improving.

But soon afterwards all was lost.

danny




msg:737613
 12:15 pm on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

A PR7 that gets no traffic from Google

Not quite no traffic. Thursday saw a few score visits from Google users prepared to venture to page 3 - or 20, or in one case page 84! - of the search results. (One of my pages seems to rank around 250th for the most popular three letter word of them all.)

Dayo_UK




msg:737614
 12:20 pm on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

danny

When did you put your 301 redirect from www to non-www - or has it always been there.

WebInker




msg:737615
 12:20 pm on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

Cheers Dayo, although am sorry your not doing so well :(, is interesting that the sites I speak of only have PR3 on the front page and PR2 throughout, and others in my SERPS have PR5 - 7 and are positioned below me. I am disappointed with the resulting traffic however which is nowhere near what I am recieving from MSN and Yahoo!

danny




msg:737616
 12:25 pm on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

When did you put your 301 redirect from www to non-www - or has it always been there.

I've had that there since I got the current domain, over five years ago. For some reason I've always been fanatical about having one canonical URL for web pages - possibly a result of my mathematics background.

Dayo_UK




msg:737617
 12:34 pm on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

>>>I've had that there since I got the current domain, over five years ago.

Really - bang goes another theory then.

I am now about 5% (down from 80% this time yesterday) sure I might have a canonical url problem.

Hopes fading fast :(

novice




msg:737618
 12:50 pm on Jun 10, 2005 (gmt 0)

I am now about 5% (down from 80% this time yesterday) sure I might have a canonical url problem.

I am so much more convinced that it has something to do with linking - 302's, redirects, domain forwardings, scraper links,...

Google has held links as their highest regard. Their whole algo has been based on - PR of link, anchor text, words surrounding link, if they are low quality links (like guestbooks)..

With the recent burst of Yahoo feeds and scraper sites, Google is trying to modify their ranking of links with little success.

If this is indeed the problem, they will figure it out eventually. Hopefully sooner than later.

<edit> typo

[edited by: novice at 12:53 pm (utc) on June 10, 2005]

This 819 message thread spans 28 pages: < < 819 ( 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26 27 28 > >
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