| 10:39 am on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Good Morning Folks.
There seems to be a certain amount of flux, OR removal of pages, as the total number of search results on any given keyword has changed since yesterday on .9.104.
Also, in my case, a keyword I check, moved from position 62 to 27 overnight, and another moved from 27 to 28. In relative terms they are minor changes, but shows at least there is some movement.
| 10:53 am on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I see an increase in results but the SERPs are stable.
| 10:54 am on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
no real movement on the results I monitor either
| 10:59 am on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Do you still do OK in image search results?
For one of my sites I get about 10:1 ratio of Image to Normal search results. Different industry - but is not a lot of your traffic image serp driven?
It just seems crazy, and not much logic to some of the goings on.
| 11:02 am on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
My main site is being deep crawled right now, so it'll be interesting to see the results in a day or two.
To confrim the results are moving, I was checking the word 'versace' and up until last night, the first pages had a lot of Chinese results in them. This morning [UK time] they have all been removed. So,there must be filtering of the results, if nothing else.
| 11:10 am on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>Do you still do OK in image search results?
I'm about 40% down on image search comparing Fridays traffic and pre drop, why you got some cunning plan.
BTW cheers for making me look at my old figures - now depressed again
Oh another note still no movement on the spam report I put into GG - mind you he did say to watch it over the weekend so I'll keep you updated if anything happens
| 11:15 am on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>>>BTW cheers for making me look at my old figures - now depressed again
I was just intrested in your experience with Image results.
If my site has been given a penalty for a reason I dont know about - the penalty in my case does not apply to the image results.
As Google dont look like they are fixing Canonical issues then I would still consider doing a 301 from non-www to www if I was you.
Although G does not show your non-www as an entry in the index - the non-www does have different PR and BLs.
| 2:31 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Like Dayo, Lee and tigger I'm also hoping for further beneficial flux. I'm also making changes on a few sample pages to try and improve things i.e. making title unique (no strap line), cutting back on keyword usage, introducing more content. I doubt we have been actively penalised because for some keywords we still rank top 5. I just think our shop window doesn't quite fit the new algo. Hopefully with googlebot busy at the moment, the effect of any changes will quickly become apparent.
| 2:43 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"making title unique (no strap line), "
| 2:52 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Just a hunch originally proposed by Miop with evidence from my own site i.e. those pages with duplicate titles (all had same keyword + strap line) dropped in rankings compared to those without the strap line. Like everything else I'm trying, it's mostly conjecture and grasping at straws, but that's the place I'm in right now :-(
| 2:53 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
What is a strap line? Do you mean a dash?
| 2:57 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
No. Strap line as in advertising blurb - your stock phrase e.g. "keyword - the best widgets in town". I had appended the strap line "the best widgets in town" to all my titles.
edit - actually, not all, and the ones without the strap line are performing better - coincidence? Probably!
[edited by: Mountdoom at 3:04 pm (utc) on Nov. 12, 2005]
| 3:03 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>Just a hunch originally proposed by Miop with evidence from my own site i.e. those pages with duplicate titles (all had same keyword + strap line)
just looked at that and one of my sites that is still holding a bit and that has same title/heading and is number one, although one thing I have noticed is that term has very little anchor text both off/on site pointing to it - maybe anchors are starting to go against the webmaster
| 3:11 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Has anyone seen .9 spreading yet?
| 3:17 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>>>>Has anyone seen .9 spreading yet?
It is coming and going on:-
| 3:19 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>>Like Dayo, Lee and tigger I'm also hoping for further beneficial flux.<<
I don't know whether this could be considered "beneficial flux" or not. But I see a general flux through out ALL the DCs within the sector I'm watching; marketing and advertising.
Please fasten your seat belt, Flux Turbulence Ahead :-)
GoogleGuy is a man of his word. He said there will be flux to come after Jagger3!
| 3:26 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Back to watching
| 3:26 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>>>GoogleGuy is a man of his word. He said there will be flux to come after Jagger3!
Yes, he did - Reseller how long did he say? - I think he even said weeks.
But as I mentioned earlier - from his point of view the update is probably finished - eg the new code/algo etc is out there and spreading accross dcs.
| 3:30 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
">>>GoogleGuy is a man of his word. He said there will be flux to come after Jagger3!
Yes, he did - Reseller how long did he say? - I think he even said weeks."
I recall asking him twice. In both cases he said there will be a flux. I don't recall him mentioning a specific flux period.
But my feeling is around two weeks, as in Bourbon. I have posted that for few days ago, but some of the folks were sad to hear it, so I kept quite ;-)
| 3:34 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Reseller, you're right. For the first time since jagger started we are again number 1 on 220.127.116.11 for the title of our home page. No movement elsewhere, but I'm hoping for knock on effects.
| 3:35 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
>>> but some of the folk were sad to hear it, so I kept quite ;-)
Probably sick and tired of this update :(
Just noticed something about a site that I 301'd the non-www to www ages ago - the 301 was picked up by Google about July time.
However, the non-www is showing different PR and BL to the WWW again. :(
Sooooo - even though it appears that Google picks up and recognizes the 301 - it still seems to be able to come back and split them again :(
It seems to be a very deep rooted problem - however, MC did say that new 301 stuff is coming in soon (Hmmmz - cant remember now - might be after Xmas even) - maybe that will help.
I have given my business until Xmas - if no improvements Dayo is going back to P/T Webmaster I guess.
| 3:43 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
There is all indications that the folks at the plex are still busy in tweaking and who knows with what else.
The "cache" case, the current flux are some of these indications.
Its my FEELING, no more no less.. that the folks at the plex still working to improve the final results of Jagger3. Don't expect GG or Matt to talk about it... Fair enough!
| 3:52 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
No its a FLUX.
And you better go "Back to watching" the Flux :-)
| 3:53 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Found the bit on MC blog regarding the 301s.
|I have heard some reports of people having issues with doing a 301 from olddomain.com to newdomain.com. Iím happy to hear those reports in the comments and I can pass them on to the crawl/indexing team, but we may be due to replace the code that handles that in the next couple months or so. |
I wonder if a 301 from non-www to www actually counts as two different domains - hmmmz
Intresting comments in that thread also - eg about Google not recognizing 301s (esp supplementals) I suppose this is what has/is happen(ed)ing to some of my old non-www.
| 4:38 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
"Jagger3 was visible starting at 18.104.22.168 around 11/4/2005. Jagger3 is not widely visible yet (it might also be at 22.214.171.124), but I expect it migrate to other data centers over time." Matt Cutts - November 10.
I get different results (better) on 126.96.36.199 so J3 is just on 188.8.131.52. Do you see 9 migrate to other data centers?
| 4:40 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
still going down although all pages on all DC's main keyword still n#1 on all dc's ... detected fallback of new content from p1 -> p3 and later ... Dickipedia rules as usual ..
| 4:45 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Kangol, I also see better results at 184.108.40.206
| 4:49 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
lee_sufc i think that we may have the same problem.
I rank better on every DC except 9. I think that I had a www/non www problem.
| 4:53 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
yeah, dayo uk looked at my site the other day and said it looks like that too (I don't know too much when it comes to that so PM if you wanna take a look at my site)
| 5:00 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Dayo - were ANY of your site's problems resolved? Are you still confident it's only canonical confusion?
| 5:14 pm on Nov 12, 2005 (gmt 0)|
definitively better but site:example.com looks like an old result. :\