| 4:27 pm on Dec 25, 2006 (gmt 0)|
In fact technically there is nothing called google.co.uk, but IPs and datacenters. Google.co.uk is just UK flavored datacenters, if I may say.
I have noticed [webmasterworld.com] the first sign of changes in backlinks on DC [188.8.131.52...] on 20th December 2006. Since then the backlinks on DCs kept changing.
At the moment there are around 29 DCs showing what you call "reverted" backlinks. Among those DCs are the DCs which I hit for google.co.uk, I assume:
As to what will be the next move you ask about, I must say; who knows. At the moment everything is fluctuating on the DCs and signs of major algo updates are there, IMO.
Lets wait and see ;-)
| 9:22 am on Dec 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Haven't checked backlinks, DCs or anything much yet, but the traffic on a .co.uk site of ours seems
to have taken an unbelievable nosedive today. Looks like this started over the weekend, as
the following will illustrate:
Dec 22 (and prior): 17,000+ (uniques)
Dec 23 : 14,000+
Dec 24 : 13,000+
Dec 25 : 10,000+
Dec 26 (Today) : 99 so far
At this rate (unless something changes soon), we'll be lucky to cross - or even reach - 1000 uniques today.
I'd say something's the matter, for sure ;-)
This site was started just a bit over 6 months ago, so OPs observation about BLs having
reverted to 6 months ago certainly seems to hold merit.
Fortunately for us, this site is a part of a long-term business plan, currently not in the 'revenue phase' nor critically
dependent on Google traffic, otherwise I'd be writing murder threats to Google or suiside notes here ;-)
| 11:00 am on Dec 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
do the popular datacentre checker seo tools follow the google api thereby not offending the automated software prohibition?
a .co.uk site, 6 months old with 17,000 uniques/day in December 06, that is a fantastic achievement, 1,000 uniques per day, now , that would be internet joy for me
[edited by: tedster at 2:39 pm (utc) on Dec. 26, 2006]
| 8:38 pm on Dec 26, 2006 (gmt 0)|
In the 12 hours or so since my post above, our uniques count has reached 800+.
Somewhat interestingly, the GoogleBot has devoured some 4000+ pages off our site during these 12 hours, which is at least slightly above the normal rate. I wonder what gives.
I'd have thought that the crawling rate would be (more or less directly) proportionate to the number of BLs? If there is some substance in this, how is the bot crawling our site as usual, when it 'knows' no BLs to speak of? Could it be that the crawling bot is in the know of the real BLs, while the ranking algo 'sees' 6-month old status?
Google, you sure move about in mysterious ways, your wonders to perform!
[edited by: Web_Savvy at 8:41 pm (utc) on Dec. 26, 2006]
| 3:37 am on Dec 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I've noticed over the last 3 months that backlinks keep showing (at night, in the uk, I must admit) link count from 3 months ago, and during the day, recently assigned link count (at the last PR update) during the day - ever flux indeed...
| 11:21 am on Dec 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Okay, so it does seem like this is not just a "showing" old backlinks, but actually ranking based on those old backlinks. Our traffic hasn't taken as bad a turn as some of you, we are down 50% on the worst affected sites only.
| 6:07 pm on Dec 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Please bear in mind the fact that our site in question here was launched just a bit over 6 months ago, with a completely fresh (previously unregistered) domain and all.
If Google is presently using 6 months old backlinks data in the ranking algo, there would be practically none for our site and hence the near to total obliteration of our pages from the SERPS.
Sites that have been around for longer times (probably yours too), with a good number of BLs existing 6 months ago, are not likely to see such a drastic reduction in traffic.
| 6:39 pm on Dec 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|a .co.uk site, 6 months old with 17,000 uniques/day in December 06, that is a fantastic achievement, 1,000 uniques per day, now , that would be internet joy for me |
Thanks for the compliments (Blushes....)
[We (painstakingly) built something of value for our users and then let a small number of them know about it. Thereafter, they (the users) took over, and bookmarked it, told others about it, and yes, linked to it. GoogleBot did (most of) the rest. Our actual traffic generation plan is not going to start before late 2007.]
| 11:11 pm on Dec 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Our backlinks were updated in September but never went live, with exception of a few evenings here and there. This means that our backlinks haven't been updated since May or before. 7 months with no live backlink update. Must be a record.
| 1:08 am on Dec 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Hmmmm, it's all over ... lasted three days according to my stats, now everything is "normal" and backlinks are as they were 3-4 days ago.
I wonder what that was all about?
| 9:47 am on Dec 29, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Goog for you that it's over, Mike.
Doesn't look so good for us yet, though.
Since my earlier post here, our traffic has been steadily rising at a 'phenomenal' rate of about 100 uniques per day ;-) and it'll probably reach about 1400 today.
Google, with its wonders, and yes, its mysterious ways! :-)
| 2:17 pm on Jan 1, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Okay, nevermind. Today backlinks jumped back again to six months ago. BUT! This time traffic seems unaffected?
| 8:02 pm on Jan 1, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I can't report much about the changes in our reported backlinks (because we don't track/check this, so I won't know what was showing earlier), but I can certainly report a 'no change' status in traffic; it'll barely reach 1200 or 1300 today.
Repeating the last line of my post #:3202647 above :-)
| 9:52 am on Jan 3, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Okay, for past couple of days backlinks have been bouncing around between most recent and six months ago. Traffic seems to be unaffected.
Is this a UK-only problem/datacenter update?
| 10:37 am on Jan 7, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Wow, now I have no backlinks and Google.co.uk themselves are showing only 13,000.
What on earth are they up to? This must be backlinks data from years ago!
| 10:42 pm on Jan 8, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I am seeing the 105k plus backlinks i had now down to 0 on IP 184.108.40.206 - is this real or is something major going on?
| 9:28 pm on Jan 7, 2007 (gmt 0)|
System: The following 2 messages were spliced on to this thread from: http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/3211507.htm [webmasterworld.com] by tedster - 5:56 pm on Jan. 8, 2007 <small>(EST -5)</small>
I touched on this <earlier>, but something just popped up which is something I'd like to throw out there on its own.
The backlinks showing using link:http://www.example.co.uk on Google.co.uk has been fluxuating for some time now. We have gone from having 200ish showing, to 12 showing (what it was six months ago) to 0 showing. It has been bouncing around between these figures daily. BUT, today I checked Google.co.uk's own backlinks which were showing at 13,000 which is what they continue to show no matter what changes occur in the number of backlinks showing to my site.
What could be going on that would cause my backlinks to fluctuate wildly between new data, old data, and no data but for Googles own backlinks to stay exactly the same?
[edited by: tedster at 10:57 pm (utc) on Jan. 8, 2007]
| 10:53 pm on Jan 8, 2007 (gmt 0)|
How Google reports on backlinks doesn't mean anything that we can use, in my view. They've never reported on all the links, but only a sample. They may choose new ways to pick that sample from time to time, but for years it has not even included all the high PR backlinks. I have not seen that changing and so I almost never check the Google link: operator any more.
| 9:42 pm on Jan 9, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Well, our (UK) site seems to be making a slow and steady recovery.
(Please refer to my earlier posts in this thread for further info on this)
Yesterday, for the first time since December 22, it crossed 3000 uniques and it looks to be all set to cross 4000 today.
Will report major movements here as and when they occur.
| 10:32 am on Jan 14, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Come on Google! Three weeks of rotating the backlinks number daily, when does it end?