homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.161.214.221
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 205 message thread spans 7 pages: < < 205 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]     
Supplemental Club: Big Daddy - Part 2
larryhatch




msg:752742
 10:39 am on Mar 6, 2006 (gmt 0)

< continued from [webmasterworld.com...] >

One thing to watch for: HOURLY fluctuations.

After years long slow advances, my main page reached #13 in Google for the main single KW.
Suddenly it dropped to #16, then 4 hours later it was right back at #13.

Same thing with a 2-word key-phrase. From #2 or #3 I fell back to #6.
4 hours later, like the above, it was right back.

Some of this is data center switching I'm sure.
Then again maybe they use old data while they polish up the new.
All in all, Big Daddy has not hurt my site yet (knock on wood). -Larry

[edited by: tedster at 6:48 pm (utc) on Mar. 6, 2006]

 

fiu88




msg:752922
 5:16 am on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

Phish
Our e-comm site has dropped to page 17 for keyword (brand name)....but , when you search by brand name + part number, we're actually listed abovethe manufacturer themselves for most items...weird....
we have not had a high ranking for keyword BrandName since forum links were not givenmuch PR by G..maybe 3 years?
As for the checkout pages...I'm gonn adouible check, cause I have seen a huge number of first time visitors enter our site from an " empty" checkout page...it must be right up there for some keywords

ah well...ppc ppc it is....

seochristine




msg:752923
 5:32 am on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

Hope we are relieved to hear a word of assurance from GG. But its really important to know where the actual problem lies: URL cannonicalization and redirects or duplicate content issues or is it some internal problems that Google is facing.
Somehow or the other if things are going to get normal and back to where it was, it does imply there are or rather there were some severe faults in the G index.

ramachandra




msg:752924
 6:05 am on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

Welcome back GG and thank you, appreciate for updating us.

icedowl




msg:752925
 6:09 am on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

I'd like to think that I'm seeing an improvement at this point in time but I really can't be sure. I'm not even sure if I care anymore as the days/weeks of frustration have taken their toll. I guess it just depends on which DC the results are returned from and maybe even when you look - or maybe even the phase of the moon. Anyway, this is definitely not my idea of fun.

A few days ago, no matter where I looked, I had my HP plus only about half a dozen other pages return as normal with the remaining pages all supplemental. Actual site size is approximately 850 pages.

I just checked on 66.102.7.99 (I think this is my default DC) and I find that a good number of my pages do not have the supplemental status. I still have many pages showing as supplemental that shouldn't be that way. Page count returned is 1,550 - too many pages but these results are the best that I'm finding.

On 66.249.93.104 I am finding supplemental pages that really do not exist anymore except in my personal files on my PC. This amounts to about 400 pages that are no longer online as ".html" pages but have been recreated in Joomla using a MySQL database. Page count returned is 749 - too few pages for the current site size.

On 64.233.179.104 and 216.239.51.104 the results are similar to the results on 66.249.93.104 - except that the page count is again at 1,550. It seems to be a mix of the two at first glance but a deeper look reveals that these results show no improvement at all. There are only about a half dozen pages that aren't supplemental in this set. Again, current & live pages are "supplemental".

Prior to this mess Google was sending about 3 times the traffic that Yahoo sends. It has totally flip-flopped to the point where Yahoo is sending 8 times the traffic that Google is now sending. Sounds like shooting oneself in the foot to me.

sit2510




msg:752926
 6:23 am on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

VERY VERY BIG THANKS TO GOOGLEGUY for your update! It is a big relief. With all of our pages dropped off around 21 Feb 06, we have prepared three lists of employee's lay off of 10-12 each in 3 different phases if the problem would not resolved. I think we can put those lists in the drawer now or trash them :)

>>> But its really important to know where the actual problem lies: URL cannonicalization and redirects or duplicate content issues or is it some internal problems that Google is facing.

Sorry seochristine...I think GG has already been kind enough to address that the issue would be solved and I think that it is more than adequate. In this case it is not really important to know what the actual problem is, but what is more important is to have our pages return into the index and continue our living. You know some issues are not suitable to be explained to public and what is even more important is that we do not own Google.

Crush




msg:752927
 6:45 am on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

sit2510, how about adwords? I would not give up that easily.

sit2510




msg:752928
 7:07 am on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

>>> sit2510, how about adwords? I would not give up that easily.

Crush, just lay off to downsize but not out of business. Fortunately Yahoo and MSN are our cushions but we cannot maintain our current size without Google. Adwords is another option that we also use, but higher and higher rise of bids make our margins lower and lower progressively - we cannot survive if we were to rely on Adwords only. Some times we do spend more on Adwords, not because of good profit from advertising in Adwords, but by channeling the funds received from free serp.

joeduck




msg:752929
 7:09 am on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

Sit2510 has your site recovered already?

sit2510




msg:752930
 7:20 am on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

joeduck,

No, they have not been recovered in Big Daddy, but as GG said it could take few more days or after weekend. In non-BD datacenters, there are no problems - indexing and caching for us are ok with non-BD.

Grinler




msg:752931
 9:00 am on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

Future indexing should start picking up most affected people's pages again, though it may take a few more days for it to be visible.

Anyone else interpreting this as old indexed pages are not being restored, but rather only pages from recent crawls will be.

Guess that does not bode well for our previous pages rankings. :(

schalk




msg:752932
 9:03 am on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

>>No, they have not been recovered in Big Daddy, but as GG said it could take few more days or after weekend. In non-BD datacenters, there are no problems - indexing and caching for us are ok with non-BD.

I think I can also confirm this fact as of today.

I guess I will be happier, once this propages to BD.

znakedwrx




msg:752933
 10:10 am on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

Something happend today! One of my sites which had about 80% of "Supplemental Result" got re-indexed and i dont have anymore supplemental results!

I did not change anything - not even adding links modifying .htaccess 301 redirects or changing the IP address.

However the bad news: my ranking did not improve, did not get higher traffic...

I assume it would take some time?

GoogleGuy used to say: More then a day less then a week(s)?:)

Whitey




msg:752934
 11:23 am on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

sit2510

a few things could still be there next week after all this such as 301 probs ....don't confuse Big Daddy with other issues .... they are separate..... Big Daddy just distorts the problem and is confusing a lot of folks on the forums ....... see this report i received :

[webmasterworld.com...]

aldo




msg:752935
 11:36 am on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

I start design pages for MSN.
[news.bbc.co.uk...]
Google's days are numbered.
[news.yahoo.com...]

MrRoy




msg:752936
 12:08 pm on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

Finally we heard something from GoogleGuy. Although we dont know exactly what they are upto but according to his thoughts its clear that very soon everything is going to settle down. Whether it will be good or bad for us...only time will say.

Hope everybody will get back their lost positions after the weekend.

Probably GoogleGuy will come back with lots of good luck wishes during "St. Patricks's Day"

aldo




msg:752937
 12:23 pm on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

Mr Roy"lots of good luck wishes "
Good bye mate ,
"zoooom ...what was that"
"that was your life in google mate"
"do I get another lot"
"no mate that was your lot"

steveb




msg:752938
 1:08 pm on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

"In this case it is not really important to know what the actual problem is, but what is more important is to have our pages return into the index and continue our living."

If the world revolved around you. Sheesh.

Anyway, obviously understanding the problem is the far more important issue since we don't want to see this happen to a different batch of sites next week or the week after, and if there is a way to further protect sites, we all should know that.

Basically the expected status quo, with pages lost being replaced by newly crawled ones, with the supplementals going back into the background again. The question of whether ranking will be the same, or similiar, or dissimilar is a good one. Obviously the "fixed" indexing is only one aspect and reindexed but lamely ranking pages isn't going to please many folks.

schalk




msg:752939
 1:50 pm on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

My pages have seemingly gone back to supplemental again. Watching earlier and both google.com and google.co.uk was showing good, except for big daddy DC's.

I don't think I will get to be optimistic, until we see the big daddy DC's start to show full listings.

I would sure love to know what the hell is going on!

BillyS




msg:752940
 2:23 pm on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

>>understanding the problem is the far more important issue since we don't want to see this happen to a different batch of sites next week or the week after

I agree with steveb. The fact that the problem is getting fixed is a relief IF your site actually returns to prior ranking.

What's far more important is what triggered this problem in the first place.

A couple of folks sent me examples of their site. In each instance I was not able to find an actual page - with links pointing to the page - among the supplementals. In other words, the pages showing should be supplemental. The fact that they were showing may simply be the lack of "real" pages to show. Those supplementals were probably there in the first place, it's just you didn't know about them.

When mine first started showing, I took the opportunity to clean house and make sure Google knows what's going on with those outcast pages.

I don't think I'll ever get rid of those supplementals. But at least I can keep telling the SEs what to do (410, 301, robots.txt)if they try to find them. I've also taken steps to prevent more supplementals from being generated in the first place.

[edited by: tedster at 3:23 am (utc) on Mar. 10, 2006]

quarryshark




msg:752941
 2:56 pm on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

It would be nice to know what caused the problem to begin with, but I for one do not intend to drastically changes my good pages based on what GG calls a glitch. If this is truly a glitch and things come back to some thing close to what has been normal for the last 5 years, I have no desire to sacrifice my good rankings on Y or MSN for something that MIGHT happen again and also something that we obviously have no control over.

zeus




msg:752942
 3:02 pm on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

quarryshark - Never change your site regarding google, special not in these times where they have these bugs, also which is very important, when VISTA hit the road, with a desktop search direct to MSN, MSN will get a HUGE share of the search industry, this topic is very undervalued here in this forum im not sure why, but thats a whole nother topic.

RichTC




msg:752943
 3:04 pm on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

Its just a nightmare

We need all the supplemental pages that were recently trashed on our sites returned back to the index asap.

I can only hope this problem is fixed quickly and pages are returned, currently im seeing little change in both big daddy data centres and non big Daddy data centres for UK results currently.

As i say its a nightmare.

quarryshark




msg:752944
 3:08 pm on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

"quarryshark - Never change your site regarding google, special not in these times where they have these bugs, also which is very important, when VISTA hit the road, with a desktop search direct to MSN, MSN will get a HUGE share of the search industry, this topic is very undervalued here in this forum im not sure why, but thats a whole nother topic"

Actually, that was my point. You just put it better :)
From reading posts on forums such as this, I get the impression that some are doing exactly that.
I think major changes right now would be a mistake.

jrs_66




msg:752945
 3:12 pm on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

---- MSN will get a HUGE share of the search industry, this topic is very undervalued here in this forum im not sure why?

Because this is a GOOGLE forum!

RichTC




msg:752946
 3:14 pm on Mar 9, 2006 (gmt 0)

Whos to say this will get fixed quickly and all sites will return as before - as yet the jury is out on this - no change yet!

Looking in my own sector, our site is trashed and so are a number of others thanks to this error. As one poster said earlier its even more frustrating when you realize other sites somehow missed the problem and are now ranking higher than they deserve to be!

Google has let a good number of authority sites down here with this supplemental issue.

< continued here: [webmasterworld.com...] >

[edited by: tedster at 12:30 am (utc) on Mar. 10, 2006]

This 205 message thread spans 7 pages: < < 205 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7]
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