| 9:05 am on Aug 12, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>> Napoleon, that's strange. I've not yet come across well linked sites, listed in ODP, that didn't make it into Fast sooner or later.
Any idea what might hinder Fast from indexing your sites? <<
I have no idea at all, Heini.
The site in question is of the form:
Sub1 and sub3 are indexed, but not sub2, which was there before sub3. All subs have hundreds of pages of unique information, not even any real SEO or anything on them. Similar page structures as sub1 and of course linked form www.url.com
No reason therefore why it should not be included (and in my opinion, ranked well). It just seems to get continually overlooked.
| 6:24 pm on Aug 12, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Abrexa/GoogleGuy - Despite claims by FAST or mention of frequent updates, I don't see them updating content even after months. I have some pages which were very old. This kind of thing does not happen with Google!. An update is an update with Google!. I can never understand FAST updates at all!
| 4:53 pm on Aug 13, 2002 (gmt 0)|
My established site that has a large number of links, including several from DMOZ and a couple of Yahoo, gets updated very frequently in Fast. New pages seem to get added within weeks, if not sooner.
I have a new site that went online a 2.5 months ago. That one isn't showing up in Fast at all, though it's been in the Google index for two months now, ranking well for its keywords. It is getting 12,000 pageviews a month in traffic based largely on Google and Google partner listings.
The new site has about 40 links, some from high PR sites, including a DMOZ PR 7 page. Twenty of the links are showing up in Fast, including links from a number of DMOZ clones, but the DMOZ link itself isn't showing up. (I don't pay for speedy inclusion of either site.) The DMOZ link has shown up in Google since the last update.
Fast may update their index with *some* web pages more frequently than Google, but I suspect if anybody did a calculation on the *total* number of web pages updated in the index per month, Google would have them easily beat.
| 11:00 am on Aug 21, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Still no update for us. Same old 100+ dead pages listed :(
| 11:11 pm on Aug 21, 2002 (gmt 0)|
No update? How about having your PPI pages listed one week and then having every single paid page disappear the next... No where for none of our keywords are we listed and I have been listed for weeks! Stranger yet, MSN, Google, Alta Vista and more place it in the top five positions for the same keywords and usually in top spot...have yet to figure out optomizing for Fast or why I am completey wiped out in one day...pages are all in order, by the rules, and have PR6 in Google...what's up? Why is Fast SOooo incredibly different? Not being sarcastic...an honest question..
| 11:19 pm on Aug 21, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Linda, are the pages wiped out, not indexed at all - or just ranked badly? And is this a temporary thing or have the pages been missing for more than a day or so?
Any chance your server was down when the crawler came around?
| 4:24 am on Aug 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Heini...thank you for your quick response.
I just re-checked on both lycos and alltheweb, and none of my paid site pages are coming up, and this is rather new as they have been ranked in the top 10 on alltheweb in the past and now nowhere.
There are some free pages showing, but curiously, not the paid for review sites, which according to the lycos in site information, they were crawled okay today.
I am at a huge loss as to what goes on with the different results I see (almost weekly) and was actually coming up in rank last week and pleased. I have 36 incoming links according to alltheweb link:url and as I mentioned, very high placement in the other major engines, #1 in Google, Yahoo and MSN for our keywords. Noticed the same results in both lycos and alltheweb...and don't really know what to make of it.
If server was down, would'nt that be documented in lycos update information?
Have been seeing news about positiontech coming on board...would that be a better option for PPI?
| 7:46 am on Aug 28, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I think there have been an update i see some major changes right now, but maybe iam wrong i have not checked for awile.
| 7:49 am on Aug 28, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I agree with you Ove, I see the same thing for many of our sites.
| 8:04 am on Aug 28, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Agree, but a new site that I have submitted many months ago is still not indexed! The site has many backward links, including dmoz listing.... Are there other people having the same problem getting sites listed for free? What about you Abrexa?
| 10:10 am on Aug 28, 2002 (gmt 0)|
No luck yet. Same old dead pages listed still. I have almost given up on Alltheweb. Our problem is not one of getting listed, but of being listed wrongly.
I was hoping that they are saving up a massive update to coincide with some big news, like the Yahoo contract, but that seems increasingly unlikely.
| 11:26 am on Aug 28, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Looks like a major update to me. We have the home pages of two sites in the index now. ATW "knew" about these pages for at least six weeks (they were shown in the SERPS with the domain name as title and the anchor text of the link from DMOZ as description).
One of our customers has about 400 pages in the index. They are all optimized for specific keywords and had good rankings. Now, the home page of that site shows up in the SERPS instead (well ranked), even if the search terms appear on the home page only once in the link to the optimized pages. One of my collegues' private site links to one of the optimized pages. And even his site ranks high for the terms in the anchor text of the link, although the terms appear nowhere else on the page.
My first impression is that there have been major changes in the algo and on-page optimization became far less important.
| 8:10 am on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I am disappointment on Fast. I think it is very slow. My website hasn't been crawled for six months. I think Fast is slow. I submit my website to Fast almost every month. But the crawler of Fast does not visit my website. I think Fast updating cycle is too long.
| 10:41 am on Sep 5, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Well, I have been watching our presence in Alltheweb every day. Over the past couple of weeks, I have seen Fast dropping a page here and there so that we now are down to 108 pages (down from 132 I think). These are mostly the same old dead pages from January, which were removed around 6 months ago.
No sign of an update yet.
| 4:12 pm on Sep 6, 2002 (gmt 0)|
abreca, i have 100's of dead pages that are now 404's listed on fast. they've been dead for months and months..
| 9:11 pm on Sep 13, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Thanks to Hotbot, I can now check the last time our pages were updated. Remember of course that Alltheweb claims that "AlltheWeb provides the freshest information because we update our index every 7 to 11 days".
Looking at the dates for our pages, the majority have the recorded date as "2002/02/19", with some even older than that.
In fact only the front page has been visited since February according to Hotbot (DATE: 2002/04/18)
7 months to update seems a little excessive, especially given that the site has been completely crawled since then.
Mr_Dredd2, when were your pages last updated by Fast? It is good to see that we have company in the Fast zombie zone (we're there but everything is dead ;))
| 12:25 am on Sep 14, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I have two pages that were accepted into DMOZ, one from a PR6 category and one from a PR7 category that are not showing up in Fast yet. The link from the PR6 page was from about last May and the PR7 link from July.
| 4:00 am on Sep 14, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I just now noticed that my dead pages are gone from Fast. Came here to report it, actually. I hope the rest of you get updated, too.
| 9:15 am on Sep 14, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Prior to this update, my site was in the top 5 listings for all KW, now it's on page 5! No idea why the major drop in ranking. My site continues to advance in Google and Yahoo, and linkage has been climbing steadily.
| 10:37 am on Sep 14, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I see lots of pages showing up crawled around 1 September.
| 11:35 am on Sep 14, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Heini, any thoughts on why Fast would leave 100 dead pages from our site that were crawled in February, while it has ignored at least one complete crawl of our directory since then (around 15000 pages)?
If we have triggered a spam flag, then why are any of the pages still in there? If not, then why isn't it updating at all?
And shouldn't there be some kind of check for pages older than a couple of months? I would think that pages older than 3 months should be automatically removed, rather than risk sending people to dead pages.
I have contacted Fast about this and will let you know if I get an answer.
| 11:38 am on Sep 14, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Abrexa, yes I have some thoughts about your problem with Fast.
But going the route of taking this out with Fast themselfes is what I'd recommend and think is the right way.
| 4:24 pm on Sep 14, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I see major changes in Fast for my sites. For one site, the number of inbound links went from 33 => 46.
| 5:28 pm on Sep 14, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Heini would you mind sticky mailing your thoughts on this to me please? If we have been flagged for spamming then the sooner I can do something about it the better. Thanks.
It appears that Abrexa UK now has 91 incoming links recorded by Fast, so I can't see that it is a lack of link popularity.
| 8:25 pm on Sep 14, 2002 (gmt 0)|
There is a lot of pages that showing 12-9 now, i got some new sites in and i did a changes to some site in this week and they are showing.
So something is going on
| This 55 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 55 ( 1  ) |