| 12:20 am on Dec 25, 2007 (gmt 0)|
No way I can think of, John. It's a sign of how much the Google ranking algorithm depends on anchor text.
| 12:56 am on Dec 25, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Anchor text being in the anchor itself or in and around the anchor? I can only remove -terms but I can not +add terms...which is funny because I'm actively search for those +terms.
| 1:17 am on Dec 25, 2007 (gmt 0)|
John - You might want to try Google's allintext: operator. If I understand you correctly, this might come close to doing what you want.
| 1:57 am on Dec 25, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Thanks Robert, while it shifted some results in a query I still saw some results with the These terms only appear in links pointing to this page message. It looks like the functionality of that operator is broken?
| 3:37 am on Dec 25, 2007 (gmt 0)|
allintext: is one of those funny operators that Google doesn't mention on their official list of special operators [google.com] that Google "supports". But it still works, sort of, even thought it is undocumented by Google. As far as I know, the documentation for allintext: [googleguide.com] is on googleguide.com, which is independently owned.
As GoogleGuide website says "Google may change how undocumented operators work or may eliminate them completely." The results are often not what we think, and their support is apparently a low priority for Google.
[edited by: tedster at 4:09 am (utc) on Dec. 25, 2007]
| 3:51 am on Dec 25, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Well there are other search engines. Yahoo does twice the crawling that Google does on all of my domains for example. You'd think relevant search results would be a high priority for any search engine?
| 2:17 pm on Dec 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I know what you mean John, it aggravates me too.
What I have found is that if the top search results doesn't have the (bolded) search term in their title or snippet, I don't even click on those results anymore, because they usually are the ones with the "These terms only appear in links pointing to this page:"
So I scroll down to the entries below the top results and look for decent titles and snippets.
I don't know how many times I have clicked on the top results, scanned the page, not found the search term, then had to click the back button, to click the cache so it would highlight the search term I was looking for, to find out it was in links pointing to that page.
| 2:38 pm on Dec 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I also realized it is to my advantage to glance at the url where the info is coming from, to determine whether or not it is related, or a desperate attempt by a webmaster to increase the size of his website.
| 2:52 pm on Dec 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Roughly I'd say I check cached pages at least half the time when I'm not doing a casual search. I've been flagged as a bot a few times because I'm using the remove-term flag for half of the words in the English language.
Not sure what you mean by that last part? I prefer sites that have a minimal GUI and maximize their content area. For example a single relatively slim sidebar and a compacted menu. Of course we usually get the opposite: content's text is font-size -5px and everything on the sidebar is sized to do battle with header-one...which due to high standards of coding is mysteriously missing! ;)
| 3:33 pm on Dec 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|I don't know how many times I have clicked on the top results, scanned the page, not found the search term, then had to click the back button, to click the cache so it would highlight the search term I was looking for, to find out it was in links pointing to that page |
I agree w/ the above; it's a sure sign how much emphasis Gbot puts on the anchor text.
I'm no expert, but since PR is such a prominent factor in Gbot's algorithm, I don't think there's any real "fix" Google could implement, save a closer examination of just how relative the referring site is to the target.
I do know, however (from speech recognition contacts) Google is working very hard on improving it's extended natural language searches, and that folks at Google see some rather advanced AI evolving from this that will allow Gbot to "take a bigger snapshot" of websites, examining them from a more comprehensive standpoint, if you will, that may help a lot with non-related website's links..
| 3:40 pm on Dec 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I do that too. I block third party cookies as well. I do not like how some sites literally outsource their own content. I'll typically stay clear of those sites. It's common method intended to get around ad-blocking on a couple sites I do visit...though now less frequently. Forcing an ad, a cookie, and outsourcing content will not only make me even less likely to give someone that click, I'll be less likely to revisit unless their content is beyond amazing, and frankly that's never.