| 5:35 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
HOW TO INTERPRET THE RESULTS
First, as predicted, i doubt we will see "major updates" anymore.
Remember, the whole BD thang fixed the whole reason for major "updates" in the first place - lack of storage (or computing power or whatever)
So what people are seeing now is the current "updates/data refreshes" which started off refreshing every 3 weeks.
then every week.
now as mattg3 has said, every day or so.
This is why certain sectors see no movement and others see great movement.
You just have to let go of the old mentality of "major algo updates"...
They(updates) were a fluke due to the above reasons.
It's also why MC (or Google engineers) can say with a straight face,
"then's been no major update"
They simply "tweaked" something.
For sites with scoring factors that fall under that "tweak", you see alot of movement.
For sites that don't, you see nothing.
For some of my sites, I see dramatic upward movement...akin to updates of old.
Other sites, nothing.
(Remember, this also happened when they WERE updates...just on a larger scale)
Now that Google has the storage/computing/whatever to do these changes on a weekly basis rather than every 6-9 months, it's simply not going to effect nearly every site/sector as in the past.
But something was surely "tweaked"...
| 5:44 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I tend to agree, but I am suspicious that this has proven to be a bad data push and is being reversed. I'm seeing movement back to where our rankings were 2 days ago. Not complete yet, but within the last hour or so a number of pages have started to rank again. The big difference has been with the site:search, where ealier today I had supplemental listings first, then bizarre pages before the bulk of the site. This has now gone back to normal.
| 5:45 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
MHes are you seeing that on all DCs?
| 6:01 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I'm seeing movement too, a few garbage sites dropped and a couple of good links (competitors) back in...let's hope this is the start of GXER...Google Xmas Eve Rectification:-)
| 6:11 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I'm seeing healthy site:search on 22.214.171.124 with a 'UK only' search. 'The Web' searches are still showing all the supplementals on a site:search. However, across all the dc's, on 'UK only' or 'web' I keep suddenly finding my pages.
I need to start recording searches and positions to know for sure if there is a steady recovery. What I am really looking for is for the healthy site:search to move to 'the web' searches. I think that will be the sign that things are really improving.
| 6:44 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
As an ancillary tidbit, I notice that my Sitemap, which usually will get visited at least once a day, has not been fetched for several days, and I manually invoked the fetch.
Not sure if this means anything or not, but if I keep typing, it eases the pain via distraction............
| 7:23 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|I'm seeing healthy site:search on 126.96.36.199 with a 'UK only' search |
Do you see supplementals at the end couse for my site I don't see them anymore?
| 7:32 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I'm seeing healthy site:search on 188.8.131.52 with a 'UK only' search
Yeah ...u r right..i m very excited about the new results..my site is just rocketing like anything...fingure crossed...and hope it will bring up good traffic after X'mas
| 7:53 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
For my sites, I'm seeing 4 things in the supplemental results.
1. Pages like (not actual), www.mysite.com/health.php/asthma.php. The two .php files are my actual files, but I don't have my files set up that way. All my pages are www.mysite.com/pagename.php. What does that mean?
2. Files that had a redirect over a year ago, have popped up back in G as supplementals.
3. Interior pages that are no longer linked to due to the seasonal nature of them.
4. All pages that are supplemental have old cache dates.
After these supplementals, I have my regular pages (non-supplemental), index and all other interior pages follow. Cache dates are 19/20 of Dec.
We've been white hat and in the top three for many keywords which are now kaput. Around since late 90's
On the data centers I've checked, we are not rebounding.
| 8:50 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
No recovery for my site on 184.108.40.206
| 9:03 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|But something was surely "tweaked"... |
One thing that I think might have been tweaked - or tightened, or whatever you want to call it... the critera that sends something into the 'omitted results' filter. I have a site that lists a number of events in my state; it's dynamically generated, and the only difference in the page titles is the city in which the event occurs. For the first time, those got all lumped into omitted results, EXCEPT for the cities that are three or more words long. It used to be that a one-word difference was enough to keep them out of the omitted results. So I have to rewrite my script that generates the titles a bit, and instead of the city, use the titles of the events.
| 9:30 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
For better ordered site: operator (at the moment), you may wish to try:
I'm not so sure, but I see the results don't include supplementals.
| 9:36 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I'm getting my robots.txt file as number 1 on most dc's (site:search). Anybody else seeing this?
As an aside, on [220.127.116.11...] I get the usual supplementals at the top, but no robots.txt, so there is a bit of movement there.
| 9:37 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|For better ordered site: operator (at the moment), you may wish to try: |
It doesn't look good to me and I don't hope that's the upcomming results. My site has only 22 pages in it -- all the supplementals has dropped out.
| 9:44 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|For better ordered site: operator (at the moment), you may wish to try: |
Depends on which site you're looking at. It's great for some and pathetic for others. There are supplementals.
I have noticed something interesting regarding one page that is very popular across all search engines. It shows up twice if I doe a site:domain.com search and has a supplemental. Never seen a page show up twice. I did notice that each instance has a different cache. I edited it twice within a month period after it had been unchanged for over 10 years.
| 9:58 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I can't wait to see how things look Tuesday morning. Looks like something's up but it's too early to pass judgement yet.
| 10:08 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I might be standing corrected on Tuesday morning.
But for now, I have started to believe more and more that we are in the middle of a X-Mas Bad Data Push ;-)
| 10:12 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|But for now, I have started to believe more and more that we are in the middle of a X-Mas Bad Data Push ;-) |
Maybe, but it's a loooong weekend and a lot could happen. The slowest traffic would be tomorrow and the next day. That's when I would fire the big guns.
| 10:21 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Well, my page rank is now 6 instead of 5, but I dropped from number 2 to number 7 and now I am number 9....? Most of my major pages have still not come back.
| 10:27 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Don't worry. I have faith in our friends at the plex. They usually fix a bad data push within a day or two. Question is; are they going to tell us about it this time as Adam did in June 2006?
| 10:29 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Thanks Reseller, I sure hope so!
Did Adam tell us before, during, or after the fact?
| 10:39 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Not sure whether it was "during" or "after". Only the folks at the plex know exactly the schedule of a bad data push ;-)
| 10:41 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I see a really wild data refresh going on, it's really ...wow weird, not much quality going on on some industries I watch.
But as usual the guys at googleplex are just taking advantage of chrismas for running all this, I think (and hope, for me and for them) that what we are seing is temporary.
| 10:41 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
"Bad Data Push" IMHO = Unfounded Baseless Speculation
Why Reseller are you pushing this, what do you see that tells you this? Newbies here with problems are going to think you actually know what you are talking about. Lets see a bit of the logic that has brought you to this conclusion, that you are so convinced is true, you are putting it forward as fact to be refuted or not later.
Back to Watching,
| 11:10 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|They have to sort this issue sorted soon since I've already been receiving e-mails from AdSense advertisers who target our sites therefore not only are their enquiries reducing, my AdSense earnings are and the knock-on effect to that is Google's receipts. |
None of the other so-called new top results have AdSense therefore they are committing financial suicide at the moment in my sector!
Unless Adsense is a factor in the current SERPs swings. I'm running out of ideas about standard reasons for my penalty, so now I'm considering conspiracy theories.
Not that I'm not willing to adapt to new algos, but I can't afford to spend so much time on websites if I don't know what the **** is going on.
| 11:25 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|"Bad Data Push" IMHO = Unfounded Baseless Speculation |
Speculation, but not unfounded. Reseller has based his theory on the site: queries showing strange results, which have been the result of a bad data push in the past. I'm hoping his theory is correct ;-)
| 11:33 pm on Dec 23, 2006 (gmt 0)|
The site command has been quite questionable for sometime now, and has been the subject of many posts and discussions here in WW and other forums in recent months.
Back to Watching
| 12:08 am on Dec 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Thanks again for the info Reseller.
All I have to say, is that something for sure IS going on, too many webmasters have been "hit" around the same time, and I really see nothing in common with most of them, not to say there isn't, it's just that I, myself, do not see it.
Wish someone over there would tell us what's up, but, I think not!
| 12:11 am on Dec 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Martin40, I agree. Also, that is what is just so frustrating. Spending hours and hours and hours, and still no results, and not even knowing if what you are doing, is right or wrong!
I think I am just going to sit it out and see what happens. No sense keeping on working, if we don't even know what it is.
| 3:47 am on Dec 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|Speculation, but not unfounded. Reseller has based his theory on the site: queries showing strange results, which have been the result of a bad data push in the past. |
Speculating and getting lucky once because you spot something strange isn't something I would bet on for accurate predictions. Things look weird all the time and someone is complaining about something almost every Fing day here. Sometimes you can really tell something is wrong when the noise is deafening. I only hear a murmur but maybe it will get louder as we go. Right now wild guesses because things look strange are not terribly compelling arguments.
| 4:00 am on Dec 24, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I've been seeing some strange results for keywords I normally check. The strangest is when the search returns a result set of under 100,000 when it normally is a mid 8 digit result set.
In addition the folks who took over #1 slot from us in 2005 are nowhere to be found
There are other such results being shown, in addition it appears that as far as that site is concerned the long tail isn't anywhere near what it was.
Traffic is down close to 50%. Now the site normally has a tail that reaches well into the 6 digits in terms of keyphrases returning us.
So is something going on, well this critter says yes, now as to what I don't really know.
This is also our slow spell and the niche covered is also a bit depressed at this time, however the strangeness is in fact there.
| This 165 message thread spans 6 pages: < < 165 ( 1 2 3  5 6 ) > > |