| 1:40 pm on Apr 15, 2011 (gmt 0)|
There is an update going on now right? My keywords have been all over the place since yesterday....yipes!
| 1:48 pm on Apr 15, 2011 (gmt 0)|
yes, i saw some shifiting on my serps too (international)
| 3:01 pm on Apr 15, 2011 (gmt 0)|
yep without doubt my google referals are 50% down on yesterday ( biggest day of sites history )
| 3:10 pm on Apr 15, 2011 (gmt 0)|
From what I have seen in U.S a deep crawl means they are getting ready to push your site down even further. It is just the Panda's way of showing its love, buy pushing big brands, big money sites up higher.
| 3:11 pm on Apr 15, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Still trying to work out if my domain has taken the quality hit, or just certain pages. But I'm guessing that if a www.facebook.com/note.php page from my Facebook page outranks the original article then it is probably the domain...!
If the quality check is algorithmic, shouldn't the rebound be pretty quick? So if I remove the offending pages/signals, won't G see this on their next visit?
Obviously links will be harder to remove, but generally...?
| 3:20 pm on Apr 15, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|If the quality check is algorithmic, shouldn't the rebound be pretty quick? So if I remove the offending pages/signals, won't G see this on their next visit? |
You'd think so, wouldn't you? But that doesn't seem to be true for Panda (in terms of rebounding), as far as any of us have been able to determine. If you find out differently, do let us know.
| 4:23 pm on Apr 15, 2011 (gmt 0)|
This is very messy, some real random results being seen in my sector. Because of my market im looking at the car website that got hit in the biggest loosers and they are really boucing around.
| 5:39 pm on Apr 15, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|You'd think so, wouldn't you? |
Not if a large number of the sites that make up your backlinks profile ( and those secondary sites that are in their backlinks profiles etc etc )haven't done anything to improve themselves ..then no ..don't expect to head back up..
It isn't only about your own onsite experience improvement work ( or lack of it ) ..but also about all the people who link to you be they others sites or forums etc...it is just like any other algo from Google in that respect..
| 9:14 pm on Apr 18, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Google is now having a love affair with social and it's stupid! It's not creating good results.
I'm getting a lot of useless results just so they can have some social show up. It's really quite stupid and I'm surprised Google is going in this direction. They really go tit wrong!
| 9:25 pm on Apr 18, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Larry page was clear about it. they need to make the new facebook or they will be in difficult
| 9:48 pm on Apr 18, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I am getting traffic from queries that include offensive language, racial slurs, and other obscenities because the linking pages happen to contain those words (on page). The semantic indexing isn't doing a good job of targeting phrases. They really should filter slurs and obscenities, at least when they are being targeted to a page that doesn't contain those words. I don't use this language on my site, and I shouldn't rank #1 (yes number 1) for those queries! I've only noticed this since Panda.
It's a horrible mess and it's only getting worse. It feels like a dream I can't wake up from.
[edited by: crobb305 at 10:42 pm (utc) on Apr 18, 2011]
| 10:40 pm on Apr 18, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Not trying to scare you, but I noticed the same thing (ranking high for obscenities, sex terms, etc.) on one of my tech related sites a few months ago. Along with a sudden spike in adsense clicks.
Not long afterwards, half of all my sites were banned. (as in de-indexed)
| 10:49 pm on Apr 18, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I think you did exactly that now xD
| 10:59 pm on Apr 18, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|I think you did exactly that now xD |
haha. I don't scare all that easily. I've seen a lot of things, but I don't see anything about the actual links to my site that would suggest to Google that I am doing anything wrong. The links from those pages are normal. It's the content around the links, from one of their recent blog posts, that is causing the inappropriate phrase targeting.
| 11:12 pm on Apr 18, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Today (18th) had highest number of Google referrals since Jan 31st. Are they still turning dials?
| 12:28 am on Apr 19, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|Today (18th) had highest number of Google referrals since Jan 31st. Are they still turning dials? |
My 3 NON-pandalized sites yes, but the pandalized one no change.
| 2:09 am on Apr 19, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|I am getting traffic from queries that include offensive language, racial slurs, and other obscenities because the linking pages happen to contain those words (on page). |
I just searched some technical stuff about 301 redirect and I clicked 7th result, virus tried to attack my computer. My Norton stopped the virus. What is wrong with Google? this is really BAD.
| 2:41 am on Apr 19, 2011 (gmt 0)|
You guys should check out the latest Forbes magazine. There is a pretty good article about the recent algo changes featuring Matt Cutts. It gave me some good insight as to why one of my sites may have been affected and why another is way up.
| 2:59 am on Apr 19, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Or barring that, share some of the insights.
| 4:01 am on Apr 19, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Google wants to save the newspapers is the theme of Forbes article (and buy some good press at the same time.) It's bound to fail IMO, way too many people are now online and CNN is my homepage, I don't need Google to send me there for everything. And I also know about Amazon and NYT and Drudge and MSNBC. The small techie sites will eat Google alive as they start to lose traffic, right or wrong they will not care.
Apparently Google set out to destroy sites like Huffpost but they actually increased in visitors, content quality I'm sure wasn't the factor in the increase.
Ironically, now I read so many British, European and Canadian news sites that I would have never discovered if not for certain web portals. So a boring web is not a web anymore. I suggested Google put links to top ten 10 sites on each category and save billions in search R & D
| 4:23 am on Apr 19, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I believe there is a site called news.google.com for News. They need to show news in the web section? FAIL
| 2:25 pm on Apr 19, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Is anyone seeing sites with a lot of high-quality outbound links getting a free pass from Panda 2.0?
Apparently sites with weak outbound links are getting penalized; maybe the flip is also true.
| 2:32 pm on Apr 19, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|Is anyone seeing sites with a lot of high-quality outbound links getting a free pass from Panda 2.0? |
A couple of weeks before I was hit, I did a sitewide link cleanup. After several years, many links were dead, pointed to new/unrelated content, or the site owner had placed a 301 (I though I could improve quality by just eliminating the redirect and link directly to their intended page). I also deleted some links that I thought were poor quality.
I have wondered if I fell into a filter for a period of time while the link profile gets recalculated. I improved about 30% of my outbound links in one day. Hopefully I didn't remove too many. I have also been trying to fit more of my outbound links into context, rater than linking from a "Resources" list. I fear that they could be deemed "paid" links if they fit the mold (or if the site I am linking to was Pandalized -- see my next point).
Since Panda, I've had a feeling that Pandalized sites could now be "bad neighborhoods" and that links to them might be dangerous. I'm talking about the hard-hit sites that I always thought were good quality -- not content hubs. The sites that I link to probably shouldn't have been Pandalized, but they were. Maybe there is some bleed back? If just a few Pandalized pages on your own site can cause a sitewide penalty, what about linking to other Pandalized sites? The penalty effect seems very severe and dramatic, so I can't rule it out.