| 7:33 pm on Jan 6, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|is my blog so weak in terms of rank or is my blog penalized? |
... or are your results personalized?
Worry about traffic not what you see in the rankings.
How's the traffic?
|Famous article fading away in SERP... Why? |
Maybe because you don't click on it as much as you click on others lately?
Remember your results are now personalized ;)
| 8:40 pm on Jan 6, 2010 (gmt 0)|
/Sarcastic scientist is sarcastic.
To the op: Why don't you file a takedown notice for cw infringement?
| 9:13 pm on Jan 6, 2010 (gmt 0)|
There's quite a bit of truth in what you're calling sarcasm...
Traffic is much more important than where a page appears to any single visitor in the results, because it's the only real determination of whether a page has passed yours on a large scale or simply your result set. I'm not joking or trying to be sarcastic... The results are now personalized and if the OP kept clicking on the other site(s) to see what they are doing and not theirs the other site could very well rank higher than theirs does in their result set, but not broadly or generally, so IMO traffic must be the gauge used to make the determination.
This is the way things are headed (and where they currently are), so get used to looking at the SERPs and gauging rankings differently than you have in the past.
| 9:41 pm on Jan 6, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I dont click on my results of course. Why are you saying that result are now personalized? what do you mean? (forgive my ignorance!)
i still do not understand.
my traffic is fading after the stumpleupon effect. it is basically going back to normal. but i was not talking about traffic here.
by the way...my article is crawling back to first positions..that's what it looks like now. if i look for the keyword or keyword 1 + keyword 2 i see that the article is going up and up.
is this a normal occurrence? Maybe Google was just checking it. however, other websites, which just merely copied my article are still on top.
| 9:53 pm on Jan 6, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|Why are you saying that result are now personalized? |
Personalized Search Now Default; SEO and Privacy Changed Forever [webmasterworld.com]
You really can't tell anything about where your article appears to other browsers in Google's results any more... All results are personalized by default whether you're logged in or not, so in your browser specific resultset the page appears to be moving back to the top spot, but that may or may not be where it appears when searching using any other browser, even on the same computer. The results are now personalized, basically in a browser specific manner...
| 10:07 pm on Jan 6, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|...my traffic is fading after the stumpleupon effect. it is basically going back to normal.... |
This is not an untypical pattern for social media-driven rankings.
Possibly StumbleUpon resulted in your getting a lot of blog links from other blogs. Such blog links generally peak early, while those blog posts are still on the front page, and then fade as the posts linking to you are archived.
With regard to your article, what time-frames are you talking about?
Also, is your article still on your home page? It may lose a bit of link juice as you archive it.
|first positions on SERP are occupied by websites which just copied my article even a few days (3-4 days) after i published it |
It's likely that the blog links weren't strong links... so the websites that copied you outranked you quickly, and are continuing to outrank you, because they are more authoritative on the article topic, and/or have more PageRank in general, than your blog does.
|Why don't you file a takedown notice for cw infringement? |
If they are outranking you for your own material, yes, file a DMCA notice and get the copies taken down.
| 10:28 pm on Jan 6, 2010 (gmt 0)|
thanks for your reply. now i understand a little better. yes the websites which are outranking me are more autoritative than my blog.
The article is still on the homepage because i put it on the sidebar under popular articles. (i know about juice ;)
If you want a brief story about the article here it is! (i wont put a lot of details because i do not want to be moderated!)
the article was written AROUND the very first days of this month. The *stuff* it described was not new at all to tell you the truth but i wrote it using some nice words...i made it appealing in one word and that's why it got a vast echo...never seen anything like that in all my life. For me and my knowledge it was like writing: "did you know that you can warm up water and have a hot bath?". lol!
A lot of important, really important blogs wrote about it in the Internet
that said none of them linked back to my blog...the other way around! other more popular websites who copied it got a lot of backlinks. that's life i guess! i am not complaining because it was rather funny! :)
| 11:52 pm on Jan 6, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Fame is fleeting...
| 12:30 am on Jan 7, 2010 (gmt 0)|
This has nothing to do with personalized search. Zero.
If you want to reclaim some of the authority you should contact those who copied your content in it's entirety and get them to take it down or eliminate all but a paragraph and give you attribution for it. Remind them that you are within your right to file a DMCA with their web host, search engines, and possibly their domain name registrar but that you'd rather settle it amicably. That usually does the trick and minimizes the possibility of creating enemies.
| 11:28 am on Jan 7, 2010 (gmt 0)|
No way i am going to do a DMCA...you guys have no idea how many famous websites rewrote and copied my article. That's life i guess. i can not be at war with the whole internet!
| 1:11 pm on Jan 7, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Screw that, get credit for your article! Even if the websites themselves won't comply, Google can I believe filter plagiarists out of their results. Do you want others taking credit for your work?
| 2:03 pm on Jan 7, 2010 (gmt 0)|
@Frank44 is your post CC copywrite?
It can be personalized results, make sure you sign out of igoogle. Also, clear all cookies and search again.
| 6:59 am on Jan 11, 2010 (gmt 0)|
If famous websites copied your work, that would explain them outranking you for it.
| 1:10 pm on Jan 11, 2010 (gmt 0)|
You can do a DMCA complaint about the articles you want removing, not the whole internet! At least be a little more protective over your content.
Your pages maybe failing because the other websites are managing to hold on to their visitors longer. Maybe look at doing some small changes to make your website look more appealing, and highlight similar articles you have as to keep your visitor longer.
Also, do you put a copywrite notice on your pages? This might help reduce the amount of copies.
| 1:55 pm on Jan 11, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Frank44 if your not gonna follow the advice of martinibuster and or others good suggestions in fixing your issue then it is going to happpen everytime you publish an article.
Sooooo the next time you write a great article or article and it gets wacked in the serps by other sites that copied it you know why, and there isn't a reason next time to ask what happened now is there.
Don't be a wimp stand up for yourself and do the right thing take control of your content.
| 4:07 pm on Jan 11, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Frank, you've been very clearly told what you must do and your response was basically, "well, obviously I'm not going to do that!"
so, in the future, every time you write something original, it will get stolen and you'll be in 64th position.
| 4:23 pm on Jan 11, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|No way i am going to do a DMCA...you guys have no idea how many famous websites rewrote and copied my article. That's life i guess. i can not be at war with the whole internet! |
Ever think that some of these famous websites are famous because they steal content from people like you? Don't let the big boys take advantage of you, they're taking your content because it's free $$$ for them.
| 5:13 pm on Jan 11, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I have to disagree with many here. I would never consider filing a DMCA complaint in this case. I'm more concerned about the lack of an attribution link, than some creative copying of our content.
The only caveat would be a major authority site copying your content verbatim. I've found that those that take it all are typically personal blogs with an audience of 3 family members, and not worth pursuing. You will seldom find a major site taking the complete article without changes and proper attribution. If you do, a friendly email will probably suffice - and the so-called "writer" taking credit for it will no-doubt get fired.
Also keep in mind, with all of the backlinks to you, you become the "authority" site for the article, so any duplicate content issues are not a concern, and the smaller blogs that copied your content will soon go away.
So the main issue is getting the source backlinks.
In our case, all of our articles are easy enough to find, so if we see some major sites that didn't link to us, we'll send them a nice email thanking them for posting a portion of our article and ask for a source link at the bottom. Virtually all are more than happy to do it, and it is generally an unintentional mistake when they source it elsewhere.
As far as your position in G, I would give it a little more time on moving your results to the top. Every few months we'll put together a huge article that gets major distribution from several thousand websites in two or three days. The industry leaders (with PR7s and PR8s) generally get Google's top spots for a few weeks, while we site back on page 3.
After a month, we are generally on page 1, and often move to the top a few weeks later. I think this is due to Google's algorithm sorting through the backlinks to determine who really is the authority on the article, since it is used to being gamed in a variety of ways, and needs to make sure that you are indeed the originator of the content. This is soley dependant on the backlinks, so that is why it's important to have these thousands of links pointing to you - rather than be concerned about whether they copied too much content.
If I ever filed a DMCA complaint against a major site over content infringement, I can be assured of NEVER having these outside sources of eyeballs looking at our articles. With some of the "monster" sites having more than 1 million views a day, I would be an idiot to throw away tens of thousands of referrals per day - and equally imnportant - not have the valuable backlink from these authority sites.
Frank, after the dust settles, you should be at the top and gain a lot of traffic from both organic searches and those who copied some of your content. The bottom line (in our case) is to ultimately get more long-term traffic to our websites - and referrals from quality external sites also go a long way to build up return visits and strength the sites.
| 5:31 pm on Jan 11, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Steve, that was a very well considered opinion. You put your finger on what I was wresting with about this question. There is such a big difference between dealing with a major player - usually a big corporate entity - and being down in the trenches scrabbling with the minor sites and the one-man bands.
If a major site failed to give attribution to Frank's coverage (even just "as first reported" with a link) I'd say start out any communication by assuming it was an oversight caused by a busy, high pressure schedule.
Heck, you might make some good networking connections and your blog could get future coverage in their articles, too. They might even feed you some hot tips!
| 8:54 pm on Jan 11, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Congrats, Frank, on achieving even fleeting fame!
>>how many famous websites rewrote and copied my article
Out-and-out copies do deserve a takedown notice, rarely will a quality site steal a post wholesale. But, using a similar headline and copying some chunks is pretty close to fair use. It's proper to cite the source, though, and a link is usually expected not just by the original author but by readers who may want to delve deeper.
I agree with tedster's softer approach - some friendly communication might result in dialog and even some future coverage.
| 3:01 am on Jan 12, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I agree w/ Tedster and netguy... Ask the "big players" that copied your post nicely to give you an attribution link WITH the link text you want using Tedster's technique of giving them the benefit of the doubt for the "oversight".
However IF they don't respond by linking to your article as you asked with the desired link text, I would DEFINITELY submit a DMCA request.
| 8:34 am on Jan 12, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I'm also with Netguy. DCMAs are absurd unless and until they apply to Google itself first and foremost. If one is happy to get eyeballs on the content from Google, then why not also be happy with the eyeballs from other reputable sites. Trying to get attribution would be great. Writing another great article and this time embed you own link and attribution next time round from the start is even more positive.
The reason that you are fluctuating is because initially, Google finds your site and content, but because Google finds it from social media, the inbound links are transitory and often nofollowed. When the content gets picked up by a bigname site, the content has many good links by default whilst on the home page of those sites. As time goes on, these sites aso depracate your article. Even their link juice only goes so far and unless they direct it at the cost of other news, they'll lose traction over time.
By contrast, you've kept the links on your home page and will presumably get more deep links to the content. So over time, Google tends to get attribution right... Although the user still started at GOOGLE to find the content, not your site... But that's a different argument.