| 2:36 am on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
For a variety of reasons Google sometimes takes a snapshot of a page and then stores it in a separate supplemental index, forever.
Google continues to crawl the Internet normally, updating pages completely separate from the snapshot process above.
If your "normal" page is removed/lost/deleted from the regular index, the snapshot page will show in its place. You can't get rid of that snapshot page no matter what. Some folks have lost their normal results, so therefore the snapshot supplementals, that have been lurking in the background for years, now appear instead of the normal pages.
As has been explained above, if this has happened to you, you aren't trying to "get rid" of the supplementals, you can't, you are simply trying to get your normal pages listed again. This could occur in the usual way pages get crawled, or by a box getting kicked at the googleplex, or your "normal" pages could stay out because Google has (in most cases incorrectly) decided they were duplicates or whatever.
| 3:21 am on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
>so therefore the snapshot supplementals, that have been lurking in the background for years, now appear instead of the normal pages.
I saw this today (cache date january 2005) on the last few remaining pages still labeled as supplemental. So when these pages come back, if they ever go supplemental again, I will should expect to see the january, 2005 cache again, correct?
| 5:08 am on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|I saw this today (cache date january 2005) on the last few remaining pages still labeled as supplemental. |
Your site is coming out of supplemental hell?
Or is your situation different than most of us here?
Did you do something specific to get your site to start its emergence?
| 5:26 am on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I am one of the HP good, rest supplemental sites.
Have others done a specific "keyword phase site:www.mydomain.com" type of search to see if your "good" pages are listed as supplemental?
Mine are along with lots of malformed urls, 404 pages ect.. The only thing is the "good" pages in supplemental also have a cache date of June-Aug
| 5:49 am on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Mine was a dupe content issue. Once I fixed that and it was recrawled, the pages were reindexed and PR showed up again as well.
| 7:06 am on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I received a confirmation from Google that it is only a matter of time for pages that have gone supplemental to be crawled again, and that the priority of the crawling is based on factors like pagerank, and incoming links..
So if - like me - you had your stomach tied up in knots, and were about to do something desperate like modifying your site structure, playing with redirects only to solve supplemental issues.. Now is a bad time to do it, just sit back, relax, let the storm pass, and when things normalize again, you can tune up and fiddle all you want, it's probably best time to build content and work on getting better links, grow new sites, see friends and family .. Just don't obsess.
| 8:02 am on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
All I have to say is after all this, I just can't believe that it actually seems like most of the whitehat sites got hit with this....
Who would have ever thought....
| 11:13 am on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Might be that only the whitehat sites got hit, which are (too) heavy optimized. Sort of a new algo, which went a bit too far. People her at WebmasterWorld are probably all quite into SEO.
| 11:20 am on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
>>>>and that the priority of the crawling is based on factors like pagerank, and incoming links..
And with Big Daddy bound to have a seperate calculation of these figure I wonder if we will have to wait until Big Daddy roll out has been completed first.
| 12:14 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Well on one of the sites we work on all the major content pages have vanished.
Site:abc.com produces a list of pages with all the main prime pages gone - vanished, been swept away. These are PR6 and PR5 pages including the index page
Traffic has fallen off the side of a cliff - to say we are worried about this site is an understatement
Any views anyone on this?
| 12:19 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
All what you talking about is just Bvll sit
take a look at
[edited by: Brett_Tabke at 12:25 pm (utc) on Mar. 8, 2006]
[edit reason] no specifics please [/edit]
| 12:58 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yep just checked - all major pages suplemental not showing - thats about 85% of the sites content vanished and its an authority site
If i search for a missing page using the page url google shows the page and the cash of it taken 6th March but it doenst rank or show anywhere in the index.
So does this mean the sites F@cked?
| 1:01 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I think all we can do is wait....... and wait ...... Personally I think until after Big Daddy has rolled out and then a crawl with this new infastructure - but might be sooner based on GG comments.
Would be intrested in the URL if you are able to sticky to me.
| 1:27 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Of course we have to wait. But some of us have already been waiting for months for the canonical URL problem to be solved.
While we are waiting, we are loosing trafic and income. A little more communication from Google on this issue would help us wait with a little more serinity.
| 1:56 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Agree, we have no idea how long this is going to take. I thought BD was going live this week?
Thing is what i dont understand is why some sites have been hit and others havent. With us the site was hit after midnight last night.
Looking in my sector a few have been hit hard like this one site but others have avoided it whats that all about.
Also, why has it picked on all the main pages? and left just a few loose pages or are they about to go suplemental also shortly?
This is suplemental hell all right and no one has a clue!
| 2:09 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Anyone see a rollback pre December 27th? I see a major shift in serps.
| 2:21 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I'm still inclined to think that the supplememtals are being applied to sites that underwent redesigns, alterations and page deletions post alegra & jagger updates last year.
Has anyone experienced supplementals that didn't change anything last year?
All the best
| 2:46 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yes! I had a redesign with new urls at October 2005.
| 2:49 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Are you checking the BD data centers? I don't see any change!?
>Anyone see a rollback pre December 27th? I see a major >shift in serps.
| 2:57 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yes, on bd data centers. Looks absolutlely different than the past 3 months. I have a feeling this is another "unrelated data refresh".
| 3:03 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
"I'm still inclined to think that the supplememtals are being applied to sites that underwent redesigns, alterations and page deletions post alegra & jagger updates last year.
Has anyone experienced supplementals that didn't change anything last year? "
Yes About 12 months ago I switched my forum's software from IPB to VB.
| 3:24 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Whats also irritating is everyday in my sector there is a bunch more ebay redirects popping up with the use of dead domains. My google alert shows me more being added every day.
Right now they are dominating the serps. Quality searching at its finest.
Maybe I should drop my site and list my products on ebay. Would get more traffic from G right now.
| 3:27 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Our site is affected and we also did redesign last year that changed all our pages (except our home page!). I've been thinking this was the reason for a while.
| 3:29 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Are you seeing a full recovery? I'm not seeing anything.
| 3:30 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Its early in the game, but 100% full recovery.
| 3:31 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Which DC are you looking at?
>Its early in the game, but 100% full recovery.
| 3:36 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
All of them. See some may recall that on December 27th all datacenters underwent a data refresh. Matt Cutts posted this on his blog and stated that it was unrelated to big daddy. With that being said, there was very little in the way of discussion about it because everyone has been focusing on big daddy. This morning at least for the keywords I track, everything on all data centers has changed.
I beleive that I told frakilk that I would share any updates regarding this as soon as it happened.
frakilk if this sticks, i would assume that you may be seeing it soon.
| 3:37 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
So back to the million dollar question
Sites in the supplemental hell are they likely to return? any clue as to how long?
In our case the supplementals dont rank anywhere bar a few loose pages, low keywords that are showing up. We havent lost all the pages yet just 99% of them so can we expect the last few to go also before/ if things improve?
On other sites in our sector that have been reduced to the index page only i notice they still have some positions in the serps but on old cashed dates so would you agree that once the serps index is updated they will lose those serps positions also.
The only thing that makes me think this isnt just a hit against our site is the number of other sites affected by this suplemental problem but i have to say its worrying to say the least
| 4:03 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Without question this is not a site-specific problem. Unfortunately, I am in your boat and waiting on Google to fix the problem. My hope is it is sooner rather than later.
| 4:07 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I noticed something interesting...I would say 90%+ of my pages in the supp index are ones that utilize 302 redirects in my forums. Anyone else?
| 4:14 pm on Mar 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
For what it's worth, as I don't quite know what's going on, on standard DC's I have 800 page results, none of which are supplemental, but on BD I have 67,500 results, the first 25 of which are non-supplemental, and the rest are[well those you can see!]
New site April last year, no major changes.
However, no effect on traffic, apart from natural increase due to time, added pages, etc.
| This 205 message thread spans 7 pages: < < 205 ( 1 2 3 4  6 7 ) > > |