| 11:33 am on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I lost all rankings on my most important site also.
Why ALL the rankings? Why would every single ranking be buried?
| 11:38 am on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
This is part of the excitement of what we do. A site of mine got hit yesterday. If the SERPs stay, it will cost me about $350/month. Meanwhile, I've got several other newer sites waiting to get spidered and listed. MSN and yahoo are bringing in traffic.
September 21 Referring Sites
September 22 Referring Sites
| 11:41 am on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Weird update and weird that there is no update thread.
For what its worth I see a previously "supressed" site back after being lost in a previous update.
I see another two gone.
All three sites are totally independant, unrelated and have unique content, all are over five years old.
The only thing they share is that they all have been SEO'd by me in the same ways (amaturish but effective up until now).
Can see no logic so far, so prefer to think that the update has a long way to go or Google are having problems (again).
| 11:50 am on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Why is it that nobody knows what is going on?
I thought some people on this board were well in with Google. Could it be a TOTAL screw up.
This is an update in my area
| 12:03 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Definitely an important algo change or "update".
Somehow I feel its tied to scrapers copying your content. Google, why not using historical data (simple stupid : which one has been indexed 1st) in determining which domain is a "parent" and else are "scrapers".
| 12:07 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>> Why ALL the rankings? Why would every single ranking be buried?
your site has lost Google's "trust". No matter what you put there, it will not do good until you gain that back.
| 12:13 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I lose $500 every day because of this update. I'm already busy working on brand new sites. No time to sleep or eat.
When's the next update? Just in time for Xmas sales?
| 12:22 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I'm just a novice--can someone translate for me these terms: "Serps" "SEO" "Page Frame"?
| 12:24 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Why is Google not bothering to inform sites of penalties?. That's really mean and keeps us all in the dark. Ebay, when they remove you, they tell you why, Google doesn't even bother--this whole "Keeping us all in the dark business" seems very creepy, and I'm sure will be illegal one day. Already unethical and personally disgusting!
| 12:25 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Interesting theory about "TrustRank", but I don't think it explains this update.
I see many pages ahead of me in the SERPS from websites that were banned and recently released (after removing hidden links and text). The link command shows these sites have no links, but the pages are ranking like they used to. It's almost like old backlink data is being used.
| 12:30 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Search Engine Result Page
Search Engine Optimize
Don't know, possibly, a framed webpage (an html thing, google it)
| 12:34 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
| 12:40 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Certain people DO KNOW whats going on. Those are the ones keeping quiet, adding and saying nothing.
The rest of us will find out when it suits them for us to be fed titbits of information, some of it true, some of it blurred and some it downright misleading.
We are on the outside of the 'inner circle'. It is up to each of us to research and make our own conclusions and adjustments to our sites.
We cannot grumble on at what google is changing as we are not paying them anything for natural serps, we are making money by accepting free traffic from them.
IMO thats just the way it is and always will be.
| 1:03 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
what do you mean by this?
who are the inner circle?
| 1:18 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
inner circle = not subject to centrifugal forces to the same extent as those on the edge of the circle....
| 1:35 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
My website was top for "second hand vauxhall vectra" a british car.
The top site is now an engines and gearboxes website with the above keywords hidden in a 1 pixel <h1> style sheet using same colour text as the background.
We are now page 16, our page content is... second hand vauxhall vectra cars.
You couldn't make it up :-)
| 1:52 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
what i have noticed with recent changes is that concurrently the serps are better for the best sites and worse for the worst sites..extremes of both so to speak..and this for both at the same time..so where the top ten used to be pretty good sites and some average sites you now get some very strong sites with some awful spam garbage..is that prgress or not?.. the sites that have suffered are the pretty-good-but-not-the-totally-best for keyword sites....
| 2:39 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
..Maybe this is a test...seeing who optimizes when things change....then striking them dowm...
| 2:49 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I had a site disappear a short while back. Still site:www.domain.co.uk shows 'did not match any documents'.
Initially I thought I'd screwed up my Google sitemap (parsing error reported in the Google sitemap login area).
But now you guys are reporting issues, I have a couple of questions.
Those who have 'been wiped out':
Does site:domain.com show 'did not match any documents' or do you mean traffic / rank drops but same number of documents held on Google?
Do you use Google sitemap?
Thanks and best of luck to all those in the same boat as me!
| 2:56 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
For future references, there is a link right at the top of these forums glossary where you can find definitions of several terms.
I hope this helps.
| 3:03 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
come to think of it a move to trustrank could have exactly the effect of
|what i have noticed with recent changes is that concurrently the serps are better for the best sites and worse for the worst sites..extremes of both so to speak..and this for both at the same time..so where the top ten used to be pretty good sites and some average sites you now get some very strong sites with some awful spam garbage.. |
as larger corporation sites will tend to benefit from trustrank and smaller niche circles of sites will tend to be outside the drip down of trustrank...garbage spam sites will have their own ways around this...ethical sites will not have moved in that direction...
| 3:03 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
no no site maps - I'm thinking this is an update just on some specific terms, or probably some specific trait some sites exhibit, as there's not widespread "my site's dropped, I hate google" / "I'm #1, I love google" type posts across the forums.
If your site's not showing anything when you search for the URL in google that's something different to your rank changing.
If anyone else has an old established site, on a reasonably competitive subject, that's seem a bit of a change over the past couple of days, I'd love to hear here or via sticky mail to see if we can guess at what's been tweaked at the 'plex :)
| 3:06 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
theres also a big swing in difference between english language google serps and serps from local domain non-english langauge googles for english language searched serps...
if you follow...
so... .co.uk and .com are very different to say .de and .fr for the same search...
| 3:17 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Site up since '02
No GG sitemap
Pages are there, just dropped hundreds of slots
| 3:18 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Just like any other previous update, its gonna be very tough as the update proceed. Google updates aren´t something for the weak souls. During Allegra and Bourbon some of our fellow members couldn´t take it any more and did a very wise thing. They took a break ;-)
And few words about our fellow member GoogleGuy. We might disagree with him on an issue or sevral issues, but we can´t just forget how helpful he has been.
GG is employed by Google and there are limits to what he can reveal in public on these forums. Please understand and appreciate GG´s situation.
As to GG´s contributions to this great community, here are few of GG´s 2827 posts:
GoogleGuy..thank you for being with us. Much appreciated.
| 3:32 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
(1) Site is still showing up when searching for site:www.widget.com
(2) I'm using a sitemap extensively and it was working very well
this time it really hurts hard. Even after allegra my site hasn't been wiped like this. I've lost all of my motivation to work on that site. Unfortunately I do not have any motivation to work at all today.
I think I should take a break until monday...
| 3:32 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"GG with us"
err.. where exactly?
| 3:47 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
GG is always with us, even if you can't see Him. You must have faith. ;-)
| 3:54 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
My site, which was decimated in May from Bourbon, came back in July, has now been decimated again as of September 21. Some I know who has researched these things extensively says it's because of my pages being framed by others and because of being hijacked - all this adds up to a glitch on Google's part that makes it refuse to acknowledge content sites like mine and leaves them low in the SERPs.
At this point, it seems like there is nothing I can do except pretty much drop my almost 1,000-page website, consisting of original, expert-written content and move on.
I seriously doubt Google's intention is to kill informative sites like mine, but that is exactly what this algo change is doing.
I am in the fitness industry, btw, and you will find NO quick-fix diet or exercise info there - it is all about sensible eating, exercising most days of the week and living healthy. Nothing cheesy about it.
| 4:01 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>>trustrank could have exactly the effect
I've haven't read anything about that but will try and find some articles.
The site I've noticed a drop in ranking is listed in DMOZ, linked from news.bbc.co.uk and a few edu / gov, and most of it's (former) peers at the top of the SERP's for it's topic so I'd have thought it'd have enough trusted links to hold it's position......I did check though all my outbounds and found a few that seem to have picked up bans so maybe it's just a an issue that'll get sorted after a few crawls....and thanks for the comforting words caveman :P
| 4:13 pm on Sep 23, 2005 (gmt 0)|
50% drop in G-serps in one day on my site also (1,650 average-per-day in Sept upto and including 21st, 824 on 22nd); Yahoo and MSN show no change.
I had asked G to slow their Mozilla-bot down [webmasterworld.com] back in June (they switched it off) and at first assumed that that was the reason. It is a relief to know that there is probably no connection (relief?).
|For the past year I have experienced periodically being completely dropped off Google |
A year ago my site had a million hits/month. In November--then again in Dec, Feb, etc etc) the G-serps were slashed by 50%, 90%, etc etc, and slowly rose again over the following weeks. On the 21st Sep the site was at about 50% of the previous year's hits. By Thursday that dropped to 35%. Many other webmasters are reporting broadly-similar behaviour from Google.
It seems that this must now be considered to be "normal" behaviour for the Google Search Engine.
As Webmasters, we either allow the G-bots on to our sites, or ban them; the latter option is a no-no for most of us, but not all [webmasterworld.com].
As regards to the frustration, fear and worry that G's actions cause, I honestly believe that it is, in the end, a waste of time (and I have had a fair bit of all 3 myself in the last 9 months). Google is, by their own declaration, an inhuman company (a bit like the Borg?). They rely on technological fixes, and are distrustful of human-mediated actions. They are blinded by the bright-lights of their achievements to date (those achievements are undeniable), and unlikely to respond to the nervous quiverings of any individual webmaster. If that is an accurate statement of reality, then it is best to face up to it, and get on with life.