| 5:50 pm on Mar 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
As the supplemental issue was a Big Daddy issue I guess I can ask this question here ;)
Any news on ETA on the Big Daddy roll out - looks like about 4/5s of the DCs are now Big Daddy.
Structurally it looks good for me - but the ranking & crawling has not come back to the sites effected by 301/2s and Canonical issues - Would this be a good idea to report somewhere soon, would you like feedback? - or perhaps as a supplemental prob (as they dont get crawled ranked it has supplemental pages) - but it is seperate from the main supplemental issue that hit a week or so ago.
| 8:37 pm on Mar 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I'm sorry in advance for the rookie question.
How do I know what IP address my local google is (here in Toronto)?
I think it might be 188.8.131.52
but how do i check for certain
| 8:48 pm on Mar 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Just run your mouse over the "cache" area of a link on the search results page and you will see it. I am in BC and I get 2 or 3 different ones alternating each refresh.
| 10:06 pm on Mar 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I'm not recovered yet either. I'm really excited to see that some of you guys have come back, but it's even more excruciating now that I know some are coming back and my site still hasn't...
Googlebot has stopped hitting the site too.
|All my pages are back now with caches all current. Back as of 3-12 AM. |
Today my pages are starting to crawl back into the the pre supplemental disaster serp position. Not all, but at least some and my traffic is increasing.
I was definately in the dumper before yesterday.
Hang in there all, hopefully more good news is on the way.
I'm hanging on... were you checking the BD DC's, or any/all DC's?
| 10:30 pm on Mar 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
We are still supplemental, except the index page. All of the cache's are showing dates from over a year ago (2/05).
| 11:03 pm on Mar 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Our one site that was effected is 100% supp still less the homepage which is still in.
| 11:27 pm on Mar 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
All pages still stuck in supplemental here.
Website has been online and fine for 5 years till March 8th 2006.
My website is recommend on Microsoft.com and Google feels I don't even deserve a place in its index!
I just don't get it. Google lists so many junk sites (Products copied from Amazon, Exact copy of Dmoz and stuff like that) - and they don't want to list a original content rich site which is recommend by the maker of the OS Windows!
Sent an email to GoogleGuy ( Subject: stillsupplemental - My website is recommend by Microsoft )
I really hope he reads my email and fixes the big bug in Google.
Never really though this would ever happen. I used to think SEO was only for paid product sites where competition is very high and stuff like that, never thought a quality content site would get stuck. This is the first time I'm reading a Webmaster / SEO forum!
| 12:10 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I'm just re iterating that the result quality is appalling in our industry sector. Just about all the top ten results are for non related items - mean badly non related, now that the supp results have come in.
There's no way a user will tolerate this - they either have to bash away at refining their search or simply switch to Yahoo or MSN. In the case of Yahoo users will be re introduced to a much better product than the one they left 4 - 5 years ago.
There's only so much you can do this before people out there start to talk - the biggest reason for switching is you don't find what you want - relevence is fast becoming the issue here.
Any guys/girls - sure our results are still not showing - we're "supped out"
| 12:20 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yes can confirm too the problem is still there. I know google are working hard on this and was wondering if google sitemaps could be a way to identify the true owner of content and prevent any 302 issues?
Does anyone here use google sitemaps and are you experiencing the same difficulties?
| 12:22 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
If Google had an Authority Websites list, it would be much easier for them not to screw up during updates. Let the spammers and easy dollar guys take the heat, not the honest folks.
| 12:45 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Same problem in my industry too.
In many sections my website is the only one which has the information, and after all the pages in my site joined supplemental club, Google is now showing information which is NOT AT ALL related to the topic for 100's of keywords!
Sent Google 3 examples ( #495270580 ). All I got was "feedback will be forwarded to search quality team".
Been trying to get in touch with Google since 8th March, I only get a template based response.
A #1 software company (Microsoft), selling #1 operating system, recommending a website on their products page since launch of their product in 2002. Google puts all the pages of the site in the supplemental club. I really don't know what better "authority website" would Google team like to see.
And Heck, Microsoft employees review my website every other day, because they wouldn't recommend a junk site!
| 1:08 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I think the intention of google here is to stuff a percentage of sites in the hope of increasing adwords income.
Im not seeing a great rush to correct the issue and i do wonder if its some sort of extra filter applied that went wrong or right for them depending on your view point and took out a good number of authority sites in one hit.
For one of our sites the traffic has fallen off the side of a cliff as a result of this supplemental issue.
The site has heavy spider action on a regular basis and still is, yet it just went supplemental at the flick of a switch on March 8th. Tuesday it was ranking fine, Wednesday gone!
For us the most frustrating thing is seeing junk sites
ranking where we should be and even worse some sites that ripped off some of our content sections and pages are now ranking for them whilst we dont feature!
Talk about stuff an authority and reward a scraper!.
Im glad some are seeing some improvement but we see no signs of improvement yet in the UK yet thats for sure!
| 1:14 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
What I think is amazing is that quite clearly there is a huge problem with the new Big Daddy index.
(1) Sites going supplemental - obviously due to canonical homepage problems that this infrastructure is meant to cure - i.e. re-evaluate the root of the website incorrectly and the rest of the site becomes supplemental because all the internal pages no longer are linked from the home page. One correction that they are trying is clearly to load older data to re-instate homepages and therefore be able to re-crawl sub-pages and therefore make them un-supplemental!
(2) Huge decrease in pages indexed. Possibly linked to the above problem, but could also be linked to the difference in crawl data from the 2 google/mozilla bots and how that data is merged. If you are trying to create a new index from a new bot (Mozilla) but not properly incorporating the old data from (Googlebot) then you have problems - huge problems in terms of incorrect pagerank and cache versions and link maps. If Mozilla does not mirror Googlebot at the minimum then you have big data problems.
(3) Do it live. First rule of incorporating a totally new infrastructure is to not do it live - because you can't ever get back properly - unless you rollback data (which they are doing).
As a guide to how serious the problem is, why has Googleguy appeared from exile and asked for examples - and then said that based on the feedback "things should be back to normal within a week" - and then further posted that "stillsupplemental" should be sent in if you are still seeing problems. Unbelievable - what the heck is that all about? We are in deep trouble. I am sorry but people slate Microsoft for releasing an OS with bugs in - well the last time I looked it didn't affect to this scale the earnings of thousands if not tens of thousands of people wondering why their site has disappeared. In my book paying to upgrade my OS in the UK only costs £65. All I can say is get another site launched pretty quick if you don't recover very shortly if Googleguy thinks it is almost sorted.
Why has this massive issue not made the news - well it won't take too long because do a like for like search on Google vs (anyone) just now (I don't care if they sort it in 2 months) then they are the AltaVista of our generation. In fact they already are - Google Mail, News, Page Creator, Portal wannabe rubbish etc.
Anyway, I run many sites and some have been affected by the problems mentioned in this thread - if we multiply this out (expect 90% of small site owners not to even know why or what) then this is a big thing.
Not a big fan!
| 1:18 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Or maybe just be a big site like BMW so we can have a direct connection to the big G:
"You spammed us so we removed you"
Client (I mean website)
"Sorry about that - all cleaned up"
"No problem, back to where you were - just a few days later, what great customer services"
All other webmasters:
"What the f..."
| 1:24 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I've a friend who's webmaster for a local news site, extremelly well reknowned in its native language and that also has been hit by something related to 301s URL changes (not supps).
Its quite ridiculous.
| 1:32 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Rich TC - How is relevance holding in the results for your subject or industry? Can you give some specific %'s on those pages producing spam results?
| 1:47 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
MasterG00gler, good point - I know many people hit by 301 or 302 redirects still with bizarre listings and therefore total removal from the index.
Does it really take 2 years to understand which is the real home page in relation to redirects - and then have to release a new infrastructure (full of new bugs) to have a go in cracking it!
| 2:01 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
RichTC, exact same predicament for a few of my sites (only 10-20 pages per site).
Wednesday - gone.
A few of my friends who have online shops - Wednesday, gone.
I work with government organisations (Business Link, Enterprise Trusts etc) helping small businesses sell online - so much feedback is that they are hit, so many of them. I personally work on thousands of projects (not SEO ) and a substantial amount have had a drop on Wednesday.
Now that is crazy, what are you doing Google?
| 2:04 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
still all supp except homepage - wrote to the googleguy email addy
| 2:24 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I got about 40 pages back, still about 6000 sup, so atleast something it happening
| 3:13 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
also something interesting is one of my forums is gone completely sup, strangely 99% of the indexed pages are printthread versions and most of my caches are from 2004!
| 4:30 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
All our pages are (were) indexed in non bd centers, in bd centers 200 pages, and the rest supplemental. Now bd data is being spread to all data centers? What is google doing? Caches are from early to mid 2005, when non bd centers have current caches. What the h*ll is google doing? Even MSN is adding pages not losing them or reverting back to antiquity
| 7:25 am on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
My Home Page has always had two entries, the first being supplemental and the second being normal. This morning for the first time they have changed positions. And my cache is March 2nd when it has been back in FEbruary. Is BD over, I hope?
| 2:40 pm on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
My cache has been bumping all over the place.. Some days it will say the current day, then it bumps back to March 2 or sometime in Feb.
What if only some of our site went supplemental but has been recovered and still hasn't returned? Our number of pages indexed changes continually, cache can't make up its' mind... Just nothing looks settled yet regardless of the supplementals.
Who on earth do WE write to? I think it's great GG gave an email if you are still totally supplemental. Gives some hope that someone might look into it for you. But what about others that seem to be suffering a lot of these changes but slightly differently?
| 6:15 pm on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
My pages are coming back now. I've been in the tank for a week and as of the past 3 hours I see more and more DC's swithcing over.
| 6:55 pm on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Please can you help - is this a BD / supplemental issue?
Since 11th March I can't get any of my 1000s of pages (apart from homepage) to show up in the SERPs and have lost about 90% of my Google traffic to my site (UK based). All my site's pages are still in the Google index though.
I'm aware of the 'What to avoid doing to get bumped' issues with SEO and, to the best of my knowledge, nothing has been done to my site to cause this dramatic change.
What used to happen:
I used to type in the phrase "blue widget" and a sub page of my site was coming up top ranking.
What happens now:
Now, this ranking has disappeared and can only be found in the SERPs by using the query "blue widget mysitenamehere". But now, even that result doesn't show the sub page - it just shows my homepage along with this message:
[More results from www dot mysitenamehere]
Please can you help - do you think this is / could be connected to the Big Daddy update and could be rectified by Google's bug fix?
Thank you for any help or advice you can offer.
| 9:55 pm on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Well, I WAS having most of the DC's change over but in the last hour many of them have gone BACK to supplemental. This is just ridiculous at this point...
I don't even know when its getting better because it just goes back again. I've tried to be level headed about this but now I am getting pretty frustrated.
| 10:11 pm on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Up to now I don't have a supplemental problem but a huge drop of indexed pages. Only about 1/3 of the total pages is listed in the index. Additionally cache is way outdated.
Ranking for the remaining pages is still good and Googlebot (not the Mozilla Bot) is crawling like hell (although a little late today).
There exist some datacenter (checked via <edited>) which still have all pages AND actual cache data.
I have no idea what it happening with Google and I hope they fix this soon as this is very embarrasing :(
<Sorry, no Google tool sites.
See Forum Charter [webmasterworld.com]>
[edited by: tedster at 11:55 pm (utc) on Mar. 23, 2006]
| 10:45 pm on Mar 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Dawg, "going supplemental" might be a poor label. This all started with observations just like yours, that many pages were vanishing from the Google index very fast -- and soon for many sites that LEAVES only their urls in the supplemental index.
| This 265 message thread spans 9 pages: 265 (  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ) > > |