| 6:10 pm on Jul 26, 2005 (gmt 0)|
In my opinion, the website will never rank high in Google. First, yes, you are in the sandbox, 2nd, if you ever get out of the sandbox, you will be dropped like a rock because of scraping someone else's content (especially a top competitors content).
Do something honest with your site, write your own content, get rid of the hidden text, and you may have a chance... once you get out of the sandbox.
| 7:11 pm on Jul 26, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"I was penalized by google because i use display:none or duplicated content?"
If you are trying to make a site that is guaranteed to fail in google, you're doing all the right things. Duplicated content pages will basically be ignored, since the pages you copied the stuff from will already be considered the source page, so those will probably never rank. Even if you get away with hidden text for now, with the amount you're putting on the pages you won't get away with it for long. And the chances are good that some time in the future your site will also drop out of yahoo and msn.
If you're going to use hidden text, use a more sophisticated method than display none, that's the easiest one to spot, though I don't think google looks to much at css libary files currently, though that could change at any time.
| 9:18 pm on Jul 26, 2005 (gmt 0)|
sgsurvey, you mentioned that you're using hidden text, and that you're scraping content from other people and using it yourself. Either one of those could be contributing to your problems. From listening to feedback that the search engineers heard at the the last WebmasterWorld pubconference, I have a strong hunch that we're going to be taking a closer look at sites that are just scraper sites, or throwing up a copy of the ODP with no value added. So I wouldn't be surprised to see (for example) sites that are just scraping Google (or possibly other sites) not doing as well over time.
| 10:32 pm on Jul 26, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Googleguy, sorry, you can suggest something to me?
We had a authority site (yes, added to ROOT dmoz category of your language, like Word: My Language: My Category, #1 in your keyword, that equivalent site in english is alexa top 2000, and some other good things).
Your main domain, rank well in google, of course, had tons of backlinks, dont had any type of SEO yet too. But we had another domain, sub-session of your site, with few backlinks but some content, that got penalized in Bourbon.
Will be a good ideia move the content to your main domain or sub-domain, using 301 redirect the pages? My fear is your main domain got penalized too "301 moving penalization".
Sorry for my english, tks
| 10:52 pm on Jul 26, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Hi, I seem to have a problem similar to the sgsurvey who posted this topic. However, my site is no different to many others in the sense we use shared content from the NET and give full credits (i.e. back links). We also have our unique games. It is a big gaming website that gets close to 1 million uniques a month. However it seems google will for one reason or another not index the site although we have 1000+ back links and some unique content. Yahoo are not indexing us either. I purchased the site from someone and they insist that it is not banned (but Google) will apparently not explain why it is not being indexed. It is very annoying as we believe we are missing out on 1000s of hits a day from Google alone from people typing in our brand name, and the .net version of the site (which is ripping us off) is getting all the traffic. Help please someone, also willing to pay if someone can get us into google/yahoo, any advice would be much appreciated.
Sticky me if you want to check out the site, alexa ranking is in the top 20000.
| 4:08 am on Jul 27, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"I have a strong hunch that we're going to be taking a closer look at sites that are just scraper sites."
I think I'm seeing some changes in my niche.
I honestly hope this time Google gives a full knock-out to all those scrapers.
Like we say in Costa Rica, pura vida Google!
| 4:52 am on Jul 27, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|I honestly hope this time Google gives a full knock-out to all those scrapers. |
Yes, I hate see dozens of useless pages in SERPS, G need fight agaist this, web for quality. Worst than see spam in SERPS, is spam sites above you using your domain as keyword. But G will do better I hope.
| 5:08 am on Jul 27, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I've been waiting paciently for what GoogleGuy mentioned a few weeks ago at [webmasterworld.com...] in message number 10.
It's good to know the Plex has been working hard on their infrastructure to improve the quality of results.
Just let us know when the new equipment is in place and working. We'll tell you if the new infrastructure is good enough ...
| 6:22 am on Jul 27, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Thank you all for your suggestions, well googleguy you are from google right? don't punish me, i am going to rewrite the content and remove the hidden text right away.
I added in hidden text not long ago, just because i wanna test whether i am still in sandbox or my on-page factor is not enough ....
but how long have to wait to get out the sandbox?
| 9:53 am on Jul 27, 2005 (gmt 0)|
sgsurvey message 1 ...
|well, i admit i use some hidden text by applying css disply:none, in order to get more keyword density |
sgsurvey message 10 ...
|I added in hidden text not long ago, just because i wanna test whether i am still in sandbox or my on-page factor is not enough |
... nuff said.
| 10:27 am on Jul 27, 2005 (gmt 0)|
If you use other people content without their consent and hidden keywords, you deserve a humongous penalty, if not downright banning. Thank you and dont complain next update.
| 10:42 am on Jul 27, 2005 (gmt 0)|
That googleguy says they will do something about those scrapers, is realy good news.
Another thing I dont think hidden text will get you baned, because I have seen a site with hidden text in the serps for years and they also have google adsense, but I would NEVER use those tricks, so if you are serious about your site, then make your own content/website and drop this scraper/dublication/hiddentext.
| 1:36 pm on Jul 27, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I was trying to use hidden text to raise the keywords density to see whether can help on the ranking or not, it's common trial and error for beginner like me:
if i do see the change on ranking, that means i am already out of sandbox and need to do some other thing to improve;
if no change on ranking, then i am still in sandbox...
| 1:50 pm on Jul 27, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Hey guys - I use other peoples content but give full credits and we also have our unique content. How do I get google to review my site again. It's possible that the previous owner did not give credits and therefore was removed from Google/Yahoo.
| 6:32 am on Jul 28, 2005 (gmt 0)|
zafile, I believe some scraper sites went out today. It's something that we're going to look more at over time, too.
| 6:48 am on Jul 28, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Cīmon go to bed. It must be early morning hours where you are ;-)
| 6:52 am on Jul 28, 2005 (gmt 0)|
What about a very clean site that ranked in the top 10 for 5 years had a page rank of 5 and had over 150 backlinks; Today it is nowhere to be found, has a pagerank of zero and shows no backlinks?
| 9:14 am on Jul 28, 2005 (gmt 0)|
What about a PR6 site in top 10 for its main keywords with a lot of unique content pages that went nowhere, being there for years, having rightful dmoz listing that was completely dropped from the index today?
| 9:15 am on Jul 28, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Hello GoogleGuy, please remember your thread at [webmasterworld.com...] hasn't been updated in the past few weeks.
I'm sure many WebmasterWorld members will be happy to have some fresh news.
| 10:00 am on Jul 28, 2005 (gmt 0)|
As far as I understand our site was kicked as a "scraper" site today?
Here's the site structure:
Product Info Pages, such as demo, features, contact etc. and DIRECTORY.
Since the site is a classic sample of ordinary internet site, i assume that our DIRECTORY is to be blamed for making us a "scraper" in Google eyes. One thing though... WE ARE NOT SCRAPING ANYTHING. We have human edited directory, with niche links, all added by webmasters, and with unique descriptions, written by our administrators. We do not use anybody's search results, not copying, scraping or stealing anything. I insist that we have 100% same (yet smaller) directory as , say Yahoo, or DMOZ, but its UNIQUE. Now I am sure that Google should consider this and accept that they could make a mistake. Please tell me what should I do to have the problem fixed fast. How may I let Google know fast about this particular problem. Would Google even assume that they could make a mistake?
| 10:08 am on Jul 28, 2005 (gmt 0)|
My site got booted today too, and its not a scraper site at all. We do have a DMOZ directory script, but only as it is useful for our site (and is just for the computing category).
| 10:12 am on Jul 28, 2005 (gmt 0)|
GoogleGuy, is there a chance that Google sees that the new filter shoots down legitimate sites? I submitted reinclusion request, wrote about the site, etc...
I'm sure that a lot other webmasters will be here reporting drops once the daylight comes.
| 10:39 am on Jul 28, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I dont see why directories and other search engine results have to do on a google search, so I think its ok that they start something and that will maybe also lift some sites who had got hit by a dublicated filter.
If some uses a directory for there uses they can link to Yahoo directory/DMOZ or google, the ponit it most site only have dir. because of the added content.
These days I working on a site where I delete alot of text, because its hit by dublicated content, because some of the info tells the user what to do and that is repeated on most pages, with the google filter that high I have to remove the text and the user have guess what to do.
| 11:08 am on Jul 28, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I dont see why directories and other search engine results have to do on a google search
And what if it's only a part of the site, and of minor importance, and maybe removed, if requested? Why would our sites be banned whereas Yahoo Dir or Dmoz Dir are still in? I say it's oduble standarts then.
| 12:01 pm on Jul 28, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"What about a PR6 site in top 10 for its main keywords with a lot of unique content pages that went nowhere, being there for years, having rightful dmoz listing that was completely dropped from the index today?"
Mine had been in DMOZ for years. And it is not a directory site. It's a site about a specific topic with articles written everyday!
| 12:15 pm on Jul 28, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Back to square one...
::: sigh ::: This is the day I've been dreading, years of work down the drain.
| 12:27 pm on Jul 28, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"Back to square one...
::: sigh ::: This is the day I've been dreading, years of work down the drain."
Yes, I know how you feel. Honest hard work for up to 8 hours a day!
| 12:30 pm on Jul 28, 2005 (gmt 0)|
As far as I can see, my directories didn't lose any Google traffic. They're not DMOZ duplicates though, so maybe that's it?
| 12:34 pm on Jul 28, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I think every dublicate directory, should not be indexed anywhere on google, also not yahoo or dmoz, it will just lead us to other search results, when I search google I want RESULTS, not another search option.
| This 67 message thread spans 3 pages: 67 (  2 3 ) > > |