homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.161.175.231
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 930 message thread spans 31 pages: < < 930 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 31 > >     
Update Jagger, Google Update Oct 18th, 2005
When can we expect a new PR update?
jretzer




msg:815226
 5:33 pm on Oct 18, 2005 (gmt 0)

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



Anyone have any guesses as to when we can expect a new systemwide PR update?

 

texasville




msg:815436
 2:27 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I posted this over in the searchengine world thread yesterday. Wanted to say it again.
The most astounding thing I have sen in this update is a site I reported to google as being spam was banned about 2 months ago. I thought "hurrah". Google finally acted on a complete blackhat site I reported. Never seen them do it before. The site uses about 100 phony pages with keyword url's. It is an old site recently redone by a seo firm that uses nothing but blackhat. All the pages are non existent. All use a js redirect to the main page. Well they were banned and pr stripped and backlinks gone.
Yesterday, they were back. enjoying top listings for 2 word phrases. Their phony sitemaps are #1 in all their keyword combinations. Their pr and backlinks are still gone and they have not changed anything.
My point is-is google using a wayback machine to produce results? Seems like the same results as 3 months ago.
How can a site be reincluded without cleaning up? This is a real mystery. Is it inside influence in google?

Mountdoom




msg:815437
 2:40 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

It won't be inside influence - just a dodgy algo. It can be soul destroying looking at the minuti of what's happening across the dc's and trying to second guess Google. IMO wait a couple of weeks. Think of jagger as a 3 course meal. We've had the starter (mine came with a stomach pump) - I'm hoping the chef will redeem himself with a first rate main course and desert!

texasville




msg:815438
 2:50 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

It just seems real strange an algo can bring back a banned site.

Patrick Taylor




msg:815439
 2:51 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

It's easy enough to imagine that flushing the system (or whatever Google is apparently doing - some sort of top-to-bottom reconfiguration of data, seen in layperson terms) might produce results that are topsy-turvy until it's done. Why, though, does this take three weeks? Is it simply the computing power required?

Ankhenaton




msg:815440
 3:04 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I think we might be well operating on a temporary results tree with only the PR display being updated. There is a system split somewhere or the systems are differently distributed. The Geotargeting doen't work for me as usual. Usually .com leads me .co.uk. Now I end up at .com with alink to .co.uk. No automatic redirect. They seem to want to either spare resources in Europe or have changed this because of complaints.

The name FLUX given to the final phase sounds a bit dodgy tbh. I can personally only bank on that it would be useless to upgrade me PR wise and then drop me. :\

[edited by: Ankhenaton at 3:06 pm (utc) on Oct. 25, 2005]

reseller




msg:815441
 3:06 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

normasp

Welcome!

>>I've wrote a reinclusion request to Google, like GoogleGuy recommends in his blog, and this is the thing more stupid that I've done in my life because I knew that a robot will answer me, and I did it..<<

I assume that the folks at Googel are paying more attention to the reinclusions request recently, otherwise Matt Cutts wouldn´t post a detailed procedure to file a reinclusion request on his blog. So who knows, maybe something good will show up.

And I guess we want to report that thief spammer who have stolen your contents to Google ;-)

Matt Cutts wrote:

Reporting spam in Google’s index
I especially want to hear about webspam that you see in Google. The best place to do that is to go to [google.com...] . In the “Additional details:” section, I would use the keyword “jagger1″ (that’s “jagger” and the number one with no spaces in between).

Good luck.

WebPixie




msg:815442
 3:07 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

As far as why it takes three weeks for the updates, I have no idea. But I have no ideas about a lot of things involved in an algo that large.

It was suggested earlier that google is stretching out the update to give webmasters that are having issues a chance to clean up problem areas. I don't support or oppose this theroy, but it is at least one idea of why it's taking so long.

shri




msg:815443
 3:36 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Umm. Saw a good bump in traffic yesterday on a site that dropped out. Looks like phase two might have started. OR a sitewide link (logo on another site) which was removed might have contributed.

walkman




msg:815444
 3:47 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

reseller is the official keeper of the records, and our own, certified GoogleGuyologist

helenp




msg:815445
 4:00 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

This I ever seen before,
Was comparing the results in google.co.uk and google.com which are very diferents, and suddenly in google.com using 2 words (mycity + apartments) 5 results apeared and below tip from google, See results for: mycity apartments state, below another 3 results, then an blue line and another 2 results.

This only turns up using those 2 words.

thecityofgold2005




msg:815446
 4:07 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I think that yesterday we saw a partial roll-back of the serps (maybe in preparation for Jagger2).

That would explain the black-hat site reappearing and is consistent with the serps I monitor.

I fully expect everything to change again in the next couple of days.

frup




msg:815447
 4:43 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I think we're seeing stage 2 roll out now.

[edited by: frup at 4:44 pm (utc) on Oct. 25, 2005]

ssjxxx




msg:815448
 4:43 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I think that yesterday we saw a partial roll-back of the serps (maybe in preparation for Jagger2).

This is likely. I noticed that I got a lot more traffic yesterday than I did over the previous 10 days. But also, a new site that was created around Sept 24 (aka Black Saturday) began receiving referrals from Google. So it's definitely not a complete rollback, but a partial rollback is possible. Or it could be just a little tweak of the dials. :)

suggy




msg:815449
 4:54 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

There's definitely something up with the data, more than the algo this time.

Google seems to have 'forgotten' my site's subject. A 'related:' search turns up a "Your search - related:domain.co.uk - did not match any documents. " The site's 4 years old and I used to be able to do that for nearly every page.

For big keywords my site remained rock solid. For minor phrases fell victim to the supplemental (url) listngs wholesale.

Hoping this binary push (?) will fix it.

reseller




msg:815450
 5:05 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

walkman

>>reseller is the official keeper of the records, and our own, certified GoogleGuyologist<<

Thanks, walkman. I'm flattered.

Now my B.Sc. Chemistry 1968 is so old, I might go to college again to study GooglGuyology :-)

Yippee




msg:815451
 5:08 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

GooglGuyology sounds too close to Gynecology... Just an observation. At the risk of sounding "ignant", can one of our humble senior members give a brief explanation on what is a "Binary" push? Is it the same as the normal push or are there different characteristics to it?

theBear




msg:815452
 5:28 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Well until the drunken update I hadn't heard of binary and push used in that manner.

A normal person would say that they were updating the software on the system by placing a copy on the required computers.

However, what would I a critter know about such things?

I guess I sould see if I have any ACM publications that would explain binary pushing.

My favorite would be a binary pop and reload.

YMMV

reseller




msg:815453
 5:44 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Ooooops!

Some of WebmasterWorld pages gone supplementals (:(

I just tried to run a query:

binary push

and was surprised to see so many supplementals!

Link [google.com]

[edited by: lawman at 6:25 pm (utc) on Oct. 25, 2005]
[edit reason] Fix Sidescroll [/edit]

ssjxxx




msg:815454
 5:52 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

At the risk of sounding "ignant", can one of our humble senior members give a brief explanation on what is a "Binary" push? Is it the same as the normal push or are there different characteristics to it?

I'm not a senior member, but I can give this a shot. The term binary is most likely referring to the search software that runs on the servers. The term push refers to distributing said software to the servers. Since G has so many servers, the process is likely done in waves and can take a bit of time to complete.

I think the distinction between that and a "normal push" is a matter of what's being pushed. The "normal push" is typically a push of new data, such as PR & backlinks. The binary push is actually sending updated software to the G servers.

Yippee




msg:815455
 6:05 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Thanks ssj!

Binary Push = New Algo and/or Bug Fixes?

Just to report things on our end... We are seeing some of our lost pages come back to life. Marginal increase, but it's there. Needless to say SERPs are propagating painfully slow but SURELY :) AND dog nabit it feels good to know there is a faint pulse someplace out there. I don't believe G is just gonna flip things around overnight. I think they will re-introduce the SERPs slowly and carefully.

My guess now is the second phase will be to bring the pages back, and the third phase is to PR them accordingly.

[edited by: Yippee at 6:25 pm (utc) on Oct. 25, 2005]

Hollywood




msg:815456
 6:24 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Ok I should know the answer to this by now but never got it figured out. Maybe this will help tell me something about this update but maybe not.

When doing a search for anything on Google

SERPS show these two types of urls (In serps view of listings)

www.test.com/testing/test-test.html
www.test.com/ testing/testing.html

Why is there a space in the url sometimes and sometimes not?

lawman




msg:815457
 6:26 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Glad everyone's back and on their best behavior. :)

mzanzig




msg:815458
 6:28 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

As to why it takes three weeks - just some more speculation. :-)

Maybe the changes are huge, and G is fully aware of the fact that end-consumers and press *may* actually notice a change (read: drop) in SERP quality? Now, if you do a step-by-step approach, maybe even with different result sets during the day, you can soften this effect until people "get used to it". Or you check consumer reaction to initial changes, and this influences the further development of the algo?

Heck, as I said, pure speculation.

theBear




msg:815459
 6:38 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

Yippie,

Assuming facts not yet in evidence ;-).

A PTF or APAR for one thing can bust another thing.

<sorry for the very old tech speak>

chopin2256




msg:815460
 6:46 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

My site is still not back from when I was penalized in May. Wow, I rank well for my sites name though. But I can't rank well for my own unique paragraph in quotes. Very unfair.

futuresky




msg:815461
 6:56 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

helenp
regarding...
This I ever seen before,
Was comparing the results in google.co.uk and google.com which are very diferents, and suddenly in google.com using 2 words (mycity + apartments) 5 results apeared and below tip from google, See results for: mycity apartments state, below another 3 results, then an blue line and another 2 results.

This only turns up using those 2 words.


This is something different than the update - it's "google's query suggestion feature". Searching on those words will give you info about it.

[edited by: futuresky at 7:07 pm (utc) on Oct. 25, 2005]

2by4




msg:815462
 7:04 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

as noted, 'push' is a networking term, it means to push 'something' out into the network machines that are set to receive it.

However, since pretty much everything you push out in this way is in binary format, that's one of the more pointless adjectives that could have been attached, the only other option is an ascii push, simple text files that is.

You can't put any meaning into that, it's just matt using terms likely to create confusion, it could be a binary package of new configuration settings, it could be a new module, it could be a new algo, it would all be a binary push.

drall




msg:815463
 7:09 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

This update has been very good to our 4 mega authority sites and very bad to our 20 smaller more niche type sites.

Man am I glad we diversified 2 years ago because it is paying off like crazy now:)

sore66




msg:815464
 7:26 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

No improvement for me. One popular phrase to find my site is still #1 in Yahoo and invisible in Google. My PR is unchanged at 3.

After 8 months focused on just building one strong site, my intention going forward is to niche out my topics more and diversify into several sites, diversifying my loss risk.

Are the blog aggregators who reproduce my blog whole affecting me in terms of duplicate content penalty?

Those aggregators show up on page 1 of results while the actual blogsite is invisible.

wordy




msg:815465
 8:05 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I've always related binary pushes to going fishing!

You throw out a line with 8 billion hooks baited with the latest algo. You wait a week and pull it in expecting to catch the tastiest fish at the top.

try2




msg:815466
 8:20 pm on Oct 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

hmpf:
Coincidentally I just saw, that G means that the sites of my link partners are related to one of mine, even if they don't link to their sites! I have an other site, which is a very small link portal, from where I link to some of them (in different categories) - and to that site that is 'related' to the others, too.

These two sites haven't wether the same IP-adress, nor the same class-c.net. One of my link partners, who is an ODP editor, appears in this list as 'dmoz.org/profiles/hisnick.html'? These two sites are not listed in DMOZ anyway, so what?

Funny, the site from who I link to doesn't seem to be related...

What will this mean for future links exchange? If I link to a panlized site and G thinks it's related to mine?

Does anybody see something like this?

This 930 message thread spans 31 pages: < < 930 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 31 > >
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