homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.237.54.83
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi

Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

This 185 message thread spans 7 pages: < < 185 ( 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 > >     
Google Updates and SERP Changes - July 2009
tedster




msg:3943983
 11:24 am on Jul 1, 2009 (gmt 0)

< continued from [webmasterworld.com...] >

I received a communication last night that discussed a buzz going around that Google is going to shake up how it deals with backlinks. Specifically that Google is going to give less weight to less relevant linkage. This source also heard from another direction that a big change was coming in the next few days.

Anyone know anything?

 

Hissingsid




msg:3950723
 7:30 pm on Jul 11, 2009 (gmt 0)

Goog has no way to figure out "relevance" outside of the words used in the anchor text.

I'm sorry but I don't buy that although Allinanchor:[search term] is currently returning almost identical serps to [search term] for the term I covet most.

I guess that I'm searching for an answer that I believe in. In a way it doesn't really have to be the whole truth just something that I can use as a direction. Something has changed, perhaps just for commercial terms, but something has changed and I want to do something about it.

Cheers

Sid

whitenight




msg:3950726
 7:33 pm on Jul 11, 2009 (gmt 0)

something has changed and I want to do something about it.

:)

We're still in update mode.

Let's see it finish up and then you'll start hearing some solid opinions/advice.

Whatever worked for you before, still works... You just might not see the concrete results until after the update is finished.

whitenight




msg:3950728
 7:41 pm on Jul 11, 2009 (gmt 0)

P.S.
My prediction is that it will be finished up by Tues.
And you'll see alot of big movement for select sites within that time.

cangoou




msg:3950730
 7:45 pm on Jul 11, 2009 (gmt 0)

This Tuesday?! The 14th?!

whitenight




msg:3950731
 7:46 pm on Jul 11, 2009 (gmt 0)

lol yes. If it's not finished Tuesday, I'll let you know. ;)

mercedesP




msg:3950733
 7:54 pm on Jul 11, 2009 (gmt 0)

They way I see "semantical relevance" I can only compare it to graphs where words are the "the nodes" and a "path" that conect two or more of those words. Then those paths are associeted with a value (for relevance between two specific nodes).
With enough resources available, following that "semantical" ghrap with an algorithm such as Diskjra, will find the shortest rout to "relevance"....
May be I'm just in my own little world with this theory, but if there's any resemblance to the "real" way of weighing
semantical relation-ships... we may as well forget to "study G" and start "styding our users" very closely.

tedster




msg:3950735
 8:03 pm on Jul 11, 2009 (gmt 0)

This idea about semantic relevance of the entire linking page is not original with me - but I thought it was an interesting idea so I'd throw it out there. Google wouldn't need to toss out "off theme" links altogether - they might just boost links that seemed really congruent.

Things do seem still to be in flux. One of the oddities I've been seeing the past few days has been the complete DIS-appearance of some urls that have VERY on-theme backlinks - definitely makes you go hmmm... Reminds me of the way that home pages sometimes go missing while the data churns.

whitenight




msg:3950743
 8:14 pm on Jul 11, 2009 (gmt 0)

One of the oddities I've been seeing the past few days has been the complete DIS-appearance of some urls that have VERY on-theme backlinks - definitely makes you go hmmm... Reminds me of the way that home pages sometimes go missing while the data churns.

:) yes, interesting indeed ;)

cangoou




msg:3950745
 8:22 pm on Jul 11, 2009 (gmt 0)

lol yes. If it's not finished Tuesday, I'll let you know. ;)

I was just wondering... You seem to be so sure ;-)

trinorthlighting




msg:3951229
 3:19 am on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

Seems like things are going back to normal now.

Love2Blog




msg:3951234
 3:42 am on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

Not for me

Love2Blog




msg:3951235
 3:43 am on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

In fact my sites are jumping from page 5-6 on an almost hourly basis

lethal0r




msg:3951403
 9:20 am on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

whitenight - why tuesday? are you privy to some inside information?

as of the 12th july my vists went right up back to where they were in early june.

that is one BIG sigh of relief from me.

cangoou




msg:3951404
 9:26 am on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

as of the 12th july my vists went right up back to where they were in early june.

Is it only the visits or is it the ranking as well? Meaning: Did your ranking improve for longtail-keywords or for your main keywords?

Shaddows




msg:3951418
 10:17 am on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

Ranking as good or better than before for high-volume terms and two-word phrases.

Affected longtail is still somewhat disrupted, some phrases back, others not.

Trafic (esp converted trafic) was only slightly down, will need more days of data to see anything statistically significant on that front.

whitenight




msg:3951483
 12:36 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

whitenight - why tuesday? are you privy to some inside information?

Quite honestly, my sources are infinitely more reliable than any possible sources inside the 'Plex.

You can follow my predictions from the Nov update for more insights on the hows and whys of my data - Nov Update [webmasterworld.com]

iamhrh




msg:3951498
 12:56 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

We're still not doing well. We were hit in the first wave of penalties mid-May (-50). We took down a bunch of suspicious looking links, fixed some other little stuff and submitted a reinclusion request about 2 weeks ago. Google told us it reviewed the request on July 10th. It was the canned response that everyone gets:
"If we don't find any problems, we'll reconsider our indexing of your site. If your site still doesn't appear in our search results, check our Help Center for steps you can take."
From what I've read, not everyone sees immediate results.. how long should we wait before we can be fairly certain that things are not going to get better?
One thing we've noticed that we thought was really strange is that we haven't been crawled since May 30th.
Has anyone else experienced this?

Shaddows




msg:3951502
 1:08 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

Anyone want to hazard a guess to the purpose of this chaos?

There didn't appear to be any data-processing or data-set rebuilding.

There wasn't any obvious site-supression

There has been no re-folding of data as yet (unless anyone else has seen churned sites staying at the top)

"Quality filters" do appear to have been missing BUT there has been precious little in common between the muck that rose to the top- so what filter(s)?

Sites that were affected were only caught on a few terms. Can we posit that it was a semantic 'issue', rather then a page-scoring issue? i.e. G was comparing how words related to each other, rather than pages.

Suggestions, observations and analysis welcome.

whitenight




msg:3951510
 1:25 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

There has been no re-folding of data as yet

It started oh...so... slowly on Sunday, which is why there have been some reports of "returns" in this thread.

What are your guesses Shaddows?

Simply need to put "the Force" to use.
You know what's going on, even if it's not the "typical" analysis.

Shaddows




msg:3951541
 2:44 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

Well, I'm struggling. There were no meaningful patterns that I have identified. Any analysis by SITE gives me nothing. On some terms, ranking remained intact, while others they disappeared.

It's not down to anything intrinsic to the site, page, domain or other 'structural' information. So, its not raw link volume, trust, PR, navigation (megamenu or otherwise), schema, Branding, 'good neighbourhood', link trading, server issues, hosting, scripting, dynamic/static.

It COULD be co-occurance, anchor text(multi-generation, not single), on-page semantic analysis, off-page semantic analysis, cross-page SA, natural languge analysis, anchor text variance or any number of language-based criteria that elude me.

But frankly, I don't think it was any of that.

What it looked like to me was a new penalisation model or mechanism. Lots of stuff that should be penalised from a QA POV were floating round the SERPs. At the same time, other some rankings were severely depressed, "-950" style.

The bunch of non-similar penalties applied in May could have been used as a control group, to see how they performed within the test environment.

Possibly things will be clearer when normality returns, but the lack of discernable patterns is frustrating.

Anything slightly less cryptic to share?

lethal0r




msg:3951616
 4:04 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

thanks for the link whitenight.

Did your ranking improve for longtail-keywords or for your main keywords?

main keywords higher, longtail i cant see any difference yet but its early days.

UK_Web_Guy




msg:3951630
 4:29 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

What about age of links, or age of theme of links?

So, for how long has this domain been known to be associated with x, based on this add weight.

You can rule out same style anchor text, imo

lethal0r




msg:3951668
 5:07 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

the nov. 2008 serp changes thread is fascinating reading, i wish I had read that before stressing out these last 3 weeks. now I see that what is happening now is the same thing again, no penalty at all.

so it seems google has a basic (or old) dataset which is used as a fallback for when they update their algorithm. then the updated algorithm (or ghost dataset as whitenight calls it) takes weeks to run before it is added to the basic / old dataset. how does that sound?

trinorthlighting




msg:3951670
 5:10 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

I am seeing the home page url's return like tedster mentioned the other day disappearing. I guess they missed that quality data for home pages once again.

whitenight




msg:3951701
 6:01 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

I guess they missed that quality data for home pages once again.

They didn't "miss" them last time, remember?
(otherwise, how could i have predicted it?)

That was MC playing a little cat and mouse game(read: part-truth, part FUD) with me/us on how these new updates do their funky "roll-in" nowadays.

It's ugly, but as before, all the goodness of the algo is right there for all to see.

So now's (the next 48 hours) the time to be getting screen captures to see what gets moved, removed, and added back in... for further analysis ;)

so it seems google has a basic (or old) dataset which is used as a fallback for when they update their algorithm. then the updated algorithm (or ghost dataset as whitenight calls it) takes weeks to run before it is added to the basic / old dataset. how does that sound?

It's close enough for the purposes of "not stressing out" :)
Glad you read it and understood.

trinorthlighting




msg:3951737
 7:17 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

I was being sarcastic there when I mentioned they missed it! ;-)

So when they merge sets, it is looking about 4-6 weeks now. Makes sense now and this historical data backs it. I have a feeling this type of update or merge also causes a yo-yo as well due to the differences in data centers.

sirkevon




msg:3951779
 8:10 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

It started oh...so... slowly on Sunday, which is why there have been some reports of "returns" in this thread.

A couple of my rankings for two main keywords returned from the void over the weekend on one of my sites. :) Took me by surprise so there was definitely something afoot! Unfortunately, I still have a handful of other rankings from a different site that did not get their original rankings back. I'm nervous about this next impending update. It's either more good news or the next set of bad news.

cangoou




msg:3951781
 8:12 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

Any datacenters which are worth looking?

@whitenight: Thanks for pointing to the Nov 2008-Thread. It was very informative - and quite funny to read ;-)

tedster




msg:3951807
 8:48 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

Something new for me - a SERP with 13 result positions. Ten positions are "regular" results and the other three are Universal Search results from Images, Videos and Books, starting at position #4. It's actually 4 images, 2 videos and 4 books! Now I wonder if we might even go to 14 positions on one page by blending in News, Blogs or some such.

In this case I'm happy with the SERP because it pushes some "criticism" pages down below the fold for the first time. But on some searches, seeing so much top-level page real estate going to Universal Search might be problematic.

whitenight




msg:3951815
 8:56 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

a SERP with 13 result positions.

yep, i saw it and immediately wanted to throw my shoe at the screen.

It's looks like a Yahoo home page portal.

I'm assuming it's part of the overall update process... at least I hope it is.

santapaws




msg:3951820
 9:13 pm on Jul 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

its the future.

This 185 message thread spans 7 pages: < < 185 ( 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved