homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 23.20.220.61
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
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 1014 message thread spans 34 pages: < < 1014 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ... 34 > >     
My site has been First Now vanished from Google
My site has been the first of its kind, I drop off Google
sabine7777




msg:760006
 6:35 am on Sep 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

For the past year I have experienced periodically being completely dropped off Google. My site has been the FIRST of its kind and is in all the natural search results on the first spot. I'm just a small business, but since spet of 2004 I have been vanishing off of Google every 6 weeks or so--recently it has been more often and for longer periods. Does Google discriminate against Older sites? Are they doing it so that we will advertise with them? Any help, advice, comment from a desperate single mother of 4!

 

shri




msg:760246
 4:25 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

>> Are other people who are experiencing the filter=0 issues also on a shared IP?

Doubt this is the case. (No, I'm not on a shared IP - never have been)

rickagain




msg:760247
 5:11 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Hi Reseller

Yes - I've read about 'thin affiliates' and would not call these sites 'thin' - plenty of unique content.

One site's been well ranked for about 5 years (it dropped from 4 to 14), the other's been up for about 2 years (it dropped from 2 to 9).

Neither site has ever been affected by a G 'update' before - I've had the same level of affiliate content for the past 3 years.

Don't have adsense on aff pages.

I was thinking the dupe affiliate content since it was updated... assuming there are more affiliates using this system than there were when I last updated the content - there would be more of the same content around.

Now - I'm also worried that adsens has affected me too.

diddlydazz




msg:760248
 5:17 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

What decent software is there to scrape and also copy entire web sites?

unbelievable!

anttiv




msg:760249
 5:23 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

A drop from position 4 to 14 doesn't sound bad. Most sites that took a big hit have dropped from PAGE 1 to page 5 or 10 or worse. It doesn't make sense because the dropped sites cannot even be found for their unique site names.

What causes this filter? It's not duplicate or near duplicate content, it's not affiliate links or Adsense, it's not backlinks, it's not spammy content. I can say this based on what I have on my four sites that dropped from top to nowhere.

It is very frustrating to know I have to start all over again and it will take months before I can even hope of the same traffic levels.

ltedesco




msg:760250
 5:50 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Are other people who are experiencing the filter=0 issues also on a shared IP

yes, I am!

SEOPTI




msg:760251
 6:09 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Time to get a real job (McDonalds or Burger King :)
and not rely on SEO and a single SE.

reseller




msg:760252
 6:17 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

rickagain

>>Don't have adsense on aff pages. <<

And I assume that you donīt have both affiliate links and AdSense on the front pages of the two affected sites?

steveb




msg:760253
 6:44 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

If stolen content is marked supplemental, going after the crooks will have no effect at all. Even if the page is deleted, even if the page is removed using the URL removal tool, Google will still remember the stolen content, and even six months later when the URL removal tool expires, the Supplemental listing for the stolen page will return (having just been "hidden" for six months, not deleted from their index).

Aside from cleaning up any problems with your own sites, contacting crooks to remove content that is NOT marked supplemental, and contacting Google to get their act together, there appareently isn't anything a webmaster can do.

Junior Optimizer, you are saying you have a correct site: page count showing, not an inflated one? Are more than one or two of your own pages marked Supplemental then? So far I've only seen this occur with the mega-inflated page numbers, or a site with many supplementals.

(This thing has zero to do with affiliate links or Adsense, or any hand manipulation.)

nsqlg




msg:760254
 7:03 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

What decent software is there to scrape and also copy entire web sites?

G apply hardly filters look good now to avoid things like this... keep away from ours site/work. Someone have a gun? :-/

outland88




msg:760255
 7:20 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Steveb, based upon experience your comments seem to accurate with regard to stolen content in Google. The only drawback is if you don't deal with the thieves you encourage more. Monkey see, monkey do. Since I rarely deal with Google support are the stolen pages removed if the DMCA complaint is filed directly with Google?

It also seems to me the duplicate content must be affecting rankings but Google refuses to answer. A site is penalized for duplicate pages but a web site duplicating pages not being penalized doesn't make much sense.

To me Google admitting that the duplicity hurts rankings would cast a lot of dispersions on their money maker Adsense. In other words we're letting sites hurt you to increase our Adsense revenue. Or perhaps supplemental results are an acknowledgement of the problems they may or may not be dealing with. Peronally I think Google is saying the theft is not our problem even if it relates to Adsense.

robzilla




msg:760256
 7:44 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

How many webmasters have n't ripped off printed copy or other web sites copy by changing the odd word here or there? Everyone has done it!

I honestly haven't.

reseller




msg:760257
 7:48 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

steveb

>>(This thing has zero to do with affiliate links or Adsense, or any hand manipulation.) <<

How could you be so sure?

andrea99




msg:760258
 7:51 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Everyone has done it!

While I do use quotes, exerpts and a site's own meta description to describe it, these are clearly marked as quotes or excerpts.

No I haven't done it in the manner you suggest.

caveman




msg:760259
 8:00 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Regarding the dup part of this whole mess...

It seemed to me that some dup filters (and related algo elements?) got scrambled really badly in December '04. They seemed to have it sorted in Feb '05, but then it all wigged out again in April, and got worse still in June.

The result of all this is that since June, a lot of nice authority sites have lost ranking - especially for subpages - for some but not all of their pages on those pages' most relevent search terms. IMO this has really hurt the SERP's. A lot of 'goto' pages are now being filtered.

Usually, when G goes too far, from my perspective, they tend to come back a bit. (I don't believe that they want to throw the babies out with the bathwater.) So I've been waiting to see when they might have this sorted again.

But instead of restoring more quality pages to the SERP's, a lot more quality pages are dropping out. It may be the worst collateral damage I've seen from them ever.

I don't doubt how difficult it is to sort out the issues created by dup content these days. But for now it seems that the problem is spiraling out of control. :/

steveb




msg:760260
 8:02 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I'm not saying that you shouldn't hunt down content theiving scum and rip their throats out... I'm just saying doing so won't help you in getting rid of Supplemental results.

Personally I think finding, reporting, prosecuting, etc, content thieves should be at the top of anybody's list these days.

("How could you be so sure?" Because some or many or most effected sites don't have this stuff. All you have to do is look.)

WebFusion




msg:760261
 8:35 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

How many webmasters have n't ripped off printed copy or other web sites copy by changing the odd word here or there? Everyone has done it!

Just because you don't blatantly copy doesn't matter.

I wrote a whole web site from a book's contents and it is making a nice amount from affiliates.

It always amazes me how the dishonest assume everyone must be dishonest as well.

Congratulations on your lack of ethics.

reseller




msg:760262
 9:17 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

outland88

>>A site is penalized for duplicate pages but a web site duplicating pages not being penalized doesn't make much sense.<<

Agreed. And therfore I believe that there must be other factors involved. I.e the duplicate issue (stolen contents) alone may not be the reason.

>>Peronally I think Google is saying the theft is not our problem .....<<

Thats what GoogleGuy indicated too in his posts which I mentioned in my previous posts on this thread..

giga




msg:760263
 9:39 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Ok our site finally vanished (like all our other ones) from Google a few days ago. This was our bread and butter site that we've been working on for years. We recently bought out another website and put links to our current website on all 1,000+ pages back to us. As usual this caused us to drop like a rock in the serps. Sooo... although its all speculative obviously google has a threshold of how many links can point to a site in a given period of time, and if you go over that limit they penalize you(ban?). Based on this, isnt this a flawed way to go about things? Couldn't we now simply link thousands of pages with different anchor text to our competitor and watch his ship(s) sink just as fast as well? I mean seriously whats to stop this from happening? This is the most ridiculous penalty ever, furthermore we just removed all of the links and I assume it wont make a lick of difference as we are now on Google's possibly permanent bad boy list....

outland88




msg:760264
 9:45 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Reseller I did read your post. I would agree with GG then but not now. He needs to retract that since Adsense is at the root of so much copyright infringement. Google can't control the damage done to web sites in other search engines by Adsense. My point isn't to denigrate legitimate Adsense publishers but that program has almost become entirely synonymous with copyright infringement and duplicate content.

But Iím still wondering since I rarely deal with Google support are the stolen pages removed if the DMCA complaint is filed directly with Google?

soapystar




msg:760265
 9:45 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

giga

except they probably have identified you as linking within a network...

stevexyz




msg:760266
 9:50 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

RE - bobster2
It has always concerned me - the main reason I dont post that often - that the spammers and thieves of content hide themselves like pedofiles do on the chat rooms of kids.

To those of you who think its OK to steal content - I would rate a drug up'ed junky who robs a bank more ethical than a webmaster who steals content. The junky has a uncontrollable need because of his problem - with a webmaster its just simple greed, theft, dishonesty etc etc - and yes life turns on people like this - they die misrable because eventually the dishonest behavior catches up with them.

giga




msg:760267
 9:55 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

"except they probably have identified you as linking within a network... "

Gotta be impossible, people give Google too much credit as if they are omnipotent. We have seperate servers, seperate everything actually. Part of the buyout agreement was that we would keep all the files hosted on his server peremnetly so that google wouldnt make that conclusion (networked sites). Even tried to leave the whois info as intact as possible. The only changes we made was to add our link to all pages of the site back to our parent site, which as usual killed the parent site...

reseller




msg:760268
 10:08 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

outland88

>>But Iím still wondering since I rarely deal with Google support are the stolen pages removed if the DMCA complaint is filed directly with Google? <<

Some say yes.. other say no ;-)

[webmasterworld.com...]

Freedom




msg:760269
 10:36 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Personally I think finding, reporting, prosecuting, etc, content thieves should be at the top of anybody's list these days.

True, but I got a bead on a hacker that can just rip out their site - and their entire livelyhood.

It's faster and comes with a bit of poetic justice.

Freedom




msg:760270
 10:49 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

There would be a good business that could earn a lot if monitored copyright infringement on the net with automated software and then handled the DMCA complain, C&D, spam reports, and initial legal action.

Sort of a protection service from content thieves that could handle it all for the busy webmaster.

nutsandbolts




msg:760271
 10:52 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

For me, it doesn't look like a duplicate content issue or WWW/non-WWW issue (301 re-direct already there) or even a linking issue - in fact, a website linked from that affected site actually came out of the sandbox a few days ago after over a year in search engine limbo.

I am flummoxed... The site knocked back is getting hit hard by Googlebot today...but the last cache for the index page says the 19th September... perhaps things will sort themselves out in the coming days or weeks...

Sure do miss those extra 1,000+ visitors a day!

rickagain




msg:760272
 11:22 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Hi Reseller

I don't have aff links and adsense appearing on the same pages.

The pages that ranked (each site had an indent) did not have any aff links or adsense on them.

True - our 'drop' was minimal (about 10 spots down + we lost our indents for our main keywords)... but it is the biggest downward movement ever for us.

For other phrases we've dissapeared - and these pages had adsense / NO affiliate for the subject.

As it only happened to the 2 sites we added adsense to and updated our affiliate content on - I can't help thinking one or both these things are part of why its happened.

Perhaps, adsense drew attention to these sites - but I'm leaning to the dupe content theory... adding that the effect of dupe content on one section of our sites has caused the other sections to lose ranking.

giga




msg:760273
 11:34 pm on Sep 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

So no one has address my statement/question, can we take our large directory sites and link everypage (with different anchor text) to a compedator's site and in effect kill him/her in the serps? If so isnt this alittle flawed on google's part? I think it is possible and plan to try it this evening as a test. If google allows/encourages it why not...

andrea99




msg:760274
 12:20 am on Sep 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

True, but I got a bead on a hacker that can just rip out their site - and their entire livelyhood.

This would be illegal and actionable, I would entirely expect a content theif to take you to court and win. How ironic.

aeiouy




msg:760275
 12:44 am on Sep 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

In other words if they can't do a decent job of making that choice why not just leave it all in there and have complete (and in most cases better) SERPs.

The reason why this would never happen is very simple. People with high ranking sites would just make duplicates of their own pages and have all their duplicate listings go on forever blocking out anyone else from the search results.

If you demote people who do that, then you are back to square one. You can't just have them present duplicate data as-is because it would be significantly abused.

Kimkia




msg:760276
 1:35 am on Sep 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

I've had a top ranked content based site since 2002, and I've never been hit badly in any previous update. In fact, I've always managed to be number one, on page one, for my top keyword phrase (out of 27,000,000), and either number one, two or three for my next most popular keywords - also very competitive - with page one ranking for dozens of many lesser terms.

I'm not an SEO or HTML expert; far from it, but I've taken what I learned at WebmasterWorld and applied it fairly consistently with excellent results -- until now.

Now, I've gone from over 7,000 visitors per day to just over 3,000 - and my affiliate revenue has gone down the toilet.

I've read this thread, trying to figure out this stuff about duplicate content penalties etc. And I've done the &filter=0 thing on my site - and, yep, it's showing me right at the top when I do that, and right out of sight on many, many pages without it.

Ironically, although lots of my original content pages have hit the dumper, one page that still ranks well is one of a small proportion that I copied with permission from a free reprint group.

One possibility occurred to me...a couple of months ago, I added a php based affiliate product catalog to my site. I placed this in its own directory, linking to it from my home page and relevant places within my site. This brought my page count up in Google from about 350 pages to about 1,800 pages - but, of course, the 1500 extra pages were exact reproductions of the affiliate site. I hadn't considered this impact when I installed it, nor did I promote it heavily - it was more a service to readers than anything else. Now I'm wondering...could it be this catalog that has tripped the update filter?

From Google's perspective, I guess, I'm now featuring predominantly copied pages, and I've had a huge increase in pages in a very short time period. Makes me look bad.

I thought this experience might help us all to sort out the scope of this filter or penalty. And my question is: can I recover my respectability by dumping this catalog post-haste?

This 1014 message thread spans 34 pages: < < 1014 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ... 34 > >
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