Ellio

msg:3015577 | 9:10 am on Jul 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
>>>>Google.co.uk is not showing cache links or similar pages links next to their search results today. <<<<< It is from where I am sitting.... (London) [edited by: Ellio at 9:11 am (utc) on July 20, 2006]
|
colin_h

msg:3015635 | 11:02 am on Jul 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Hi Ellio, Yep, all back again now. Must have been a short glitch ealier in the morning.
|
zeus

msg:3015636 | 11:04 am on Jul 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
if we are serious not much has happen the last 18 month in this issue, most how write in this thread are webmasters hows site has been in troubles, with ether non www, 302 redirecting from other sitres, supplemental just because a description looks the same, omitted results, 301 redirecting and most of the sites that was hurt was a good stables sites. Now today I see that also my index page is missing well thats a new one, that site has gone through HELL for 18 month and google are not happy when a webmaster has sites in same category, but that is a must when google owns the internet and they have such troubles with there index, they dont even have hardware enogh for all the sites they are indexing and that is maybe there biggest problem.
|
Dayo_UK

msg:3015703 | 12:07 pm on Jul 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Zeus As you know I have suffered from this problem too for a long time - I have seen more and more sites get effected with very few getting fixed. Personally I have totally given up on a fix for the issue.
|
Alex70

msg:3015734 | 12:45 pm on Jul 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Does any of you know how a penalty expires. I mean I have a site that has been 250 position for months, lately is jumping from 400 to 40, and this is going on for about 3/4 weeks, is my penalty expiring?
|
zeus

msg:3015788 | 1:47 pm on Jul 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Dayo : its realy hard times, still waiting for relief when VISTA comes next year then google will maybe just have less then 50% of all search, that will be good times. Dont get me wrong I liked google until they added all those "sites" where they reached 8bill thats when everything went wrong. Alex70 : why do you think you have a penalty, we are not talking Yahoo here, google has a filter to fix stuff, have you ever ranked with the site?
|
Alex70

msg:3015810 | 2:03 pm on Jul 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Zeus, I have 13 travel related websites, almost all of them reached the first 30 positions at once. Few of them are still in the 1st page ( 58 millions pages ..today )
|
zeus

msg:3015821 | 2:09 pm on Jul 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
ohh if they realy gor first in no time, it can be that you are now in the sandbox because its a VERY competiv area.
|
Alex70

msg:3015837 | 2:22 pm on Jul 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
IMHO the sandbox is the period for a site to recover from a penalty, or?
|
g1smd

msg:3016267 | 6:04 pm on Jul 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Maybe Google doesn't want 13 sites all from the same company in the top 30. Maybe they see that as an attempt to spam their index, and acted accordingly?
|
Ellio

msg:3016557 | 10:32 pm on Jul 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
13 sites from one company in one sector is spam as far as Google is concerned. Does not help the searcher much either....
|
Ellio

msg:3016558 | 10:34 pm on Jul 20, 2006 (gmt 0) |
I ask again: <<<As Google is updating its index "constantly" as and when new pages, new links, spam etc are found what exactly is meant by the term "Data Refresh" these days? <<<
|
reseller

msg:3016872 | 6:39 am on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Ellio "what exactly is meant by the term "Data Refresh" these days? <<< It seems at present that the term "Data Refresh" could cover various changes in the index, including possible changes in algos. Its therefore we don't hear about official announced updates anymore, IMO.
|
Ellio

msg:3016892 | 7:35 am on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
>>>Ellio "what exactly is meant by the term "Data Refresh" these days? <<< It seems at present that the term "Data Refresh" could cover various changes in the index, including possible changes in algos. Its therefore we don't hear about official announced updates anymore, IMO. <<<< Thanks Reseller but it would be good to get a definitive answers as Matt seems to refer to Data Refresh quite often and its an odd term for an algo change.
|
camchoice

msg:3016894 | 7:40 am on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
"13 sites from one company in one sector is spam as far as Google is concerned" Does google actually look into the registry data of an url?
|
soapystar

msg:3016896 | 7:50 am on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
someone needs to explain how 'data refreshes' can hit overnight while conventional updates and data shifts can take weeks to propogate...
|
Alex70

msg:3016914 | 8:20 am on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Elio << 13 sites from one company in one sector is spam as far as Google is concerned. >> In my sector some one on a single site sells "widget" around Europe, some other sell "widget" on a sigle website for every European city. Don't think this is spam.
|
soapystar

msg:3016932 | 8:43 am on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
i think this last data refreshed was inferred as being an iteration...so the result of updating an algo point...in the way page rank is calculated after many run throughs of the index...each run resulting in an update to the former run....page rank is said to need at least 30 runs.... so while some things like keyword density are fixed..other parts of the algo are totally relative such as page rank..but who knows what else... although keyword density and filters in gernal can be relative to...either relative to how many bad marks you acheieve elsewhere..or even to other sites being returned in the serps...so they may set a sweet point for something at say 80% of the average for that...and as you have no control over the other sites..whther you hit or miss that mark is out of your hands..great for reducing manipulation...the counter for this is up the threshold this kicks in relative to your authority score..thus we see big brands can basically do wotever they want without penalty why mom and pop gets kicked for having two pages with the same title... [edited by: soapystar at 8:48 am (utc) on July 21, 2006]
|
Ellio

msg:3016933 | 8:46 am on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Multiple websites on the same IP may be seen as spam by Google especially if they interlink. [edited by: Ellio at 8:51 am (utc) on July 21, 2006]
|
Alex70

msg:3016937 | 8:53 am on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
I have a maximum of 3 websites on a single ip.. [edited by: Alex70 at 8:53 am (utc) on July 21, 2006]
|
Ellio

msg:3016943 | 9:01 am on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
May be OK if they are in completely different markets.....
|
steveb

msg:3016957 | 9:14 am on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
"13 sites from one company in one sector is spam as far as Google is concerned." Nonsense. Who owns a website is completely irrelevant to how useful it is in answering a searcher's query. Duplicate sites, sure, that's a problem, but making multiple unique sites on a topic certainly isn't spam, or anything close to it.
|
Alex70

msg:3016988 | 9:35 am on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
One of my websites is jumping from 40 to 400 position and back. The only reason that could couse such behaviour IMO is the average of web pages uploaded/changed on a period of time. I think that google likes more one page added every day than 30 pages per month. Does this make sence?
|
soapystar

msg:3017045 | 10:44 am on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
not really. Not that simplistically anyway.
|
Alex70

msg:3017081 | 11:21 am on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Lets think for a sec that google may have infrastructures problems after bigdaddy or just an implemented way of spidering ( see goglebot strange behaviour lately, cahce out dated etc) Lets now think tha I have to add 30 pages per month on a website. Ok, what I think is that google want me to add a single page daily instead of 30 pages monthly, and this explain my up and down...
|
soapystar

msg:3017149 | 12:43 pm on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
well, do you think the bods at google believe all information and articles are one page articles and projects? Do you think it hasnt occured to thm that new information on websites might have to include sub pages? related pages? so uploading one a day isnt possible..theres a bunch of pages linking to each other.. of course uploading 30 pages might be seen differently to uploading 1000 pages..or it might be relative to the size of your site and past chnages to your website..in other words patterns...
|
Alex70

msg:3017162 | 12:52 pm on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Lets say you have a 1000 pages website and you have 10 articles ( total 100 pages )ready to go online, would you add the 10 articles on your website all at once or would you spread it in a longher period of time?
|
JoeSinkwitz

msg:3017317 | 3:13 pm on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
Are you guys showing gfe-ro and gfe-ro2 missing data? On certain searches, the # of results is a lot less [I wouldn't have noticed if one of my sites hadn't had the index page disappear from its #1 position held for a few years and move out past 1000].
|
Hissingsid

msg:3017472 | 4:24 pm on Jul 21, 2006 (gmt 0) |
| Ok, what I think is that google want me to add a single page daily instead of 30 pages monthly, and this explain my up and down... |
| But only if you are eating mature Camembert and drinking a good red wine at the same time LOL. Where the heck did you get that theory from. There is something very broken with Google and the reason that you are jumping from 40 to 400 is because you are seeing results at different times from data centres. FWIW unless your site is in an unusual subject area IMHO you might as well be at #400 as #40. Sid < continued here: [webmasterworld.com...] > [edited by: tedster at 7:48 pm (utc) on July 21, 2006]
|
| This 179 message thread spans 6 pages: < < 179 ( 1 2 3 4 5 [6] ) |
|
|