Page is a not externally linkable
photopassjapan - 12:43 pm on Nov 14, 2006 (gmt 0)
Altho i don't agree... or would like to not agree on internal navs not playing a role in this <:) We'll see. And there are supplementals on our site that have been crawled within a month, and nothing changed for them. See, unique metas or no unique metas, being crawled or not, pr0 pages are now supplemental while pr1, 2 ,3 ,4 ,5 are not. That's it, really, nothing to do with each other directly, that's what my post was all about, telling our experiences of meta NOT being linked to supplementals. Being crawled can be an indication allright but only because frequency is tied to the PR of the pages linking to the ones in question. ( Or not, but that's what i believe :P ) To me it still seems that links on a PR0 page are less likely to be followed on-spot by Gbot. Links from a PR2 page are crawled at least twice a month, as many times they're indexed, as opposed to links on PR0 pages once in a month, or sometimes one and a half months. Which left us wondering that okay, they're not crawled that often, but when they will be indexed again, the supplementals they point to will get out, right? These are links after all. The answer was NO, they only got out if the referrer page was at least PR2. ... An interesting observation though: - Supplementals don't come up for any search, not even unique strings found on the page. ( you said it, and it is so ) BUT - If you do a search for some string that is matched by at least ONE normal page from the same domain, and a supplemental as well, the supplementals are carried onto the result pages on the back of the normally indexed page. So in such cases...
Interesting how this conversation turned away from "what makes supplementals supplemental"... i was interested in that :)
Also on a sidenote... in my opinion meta has nothing to do with going supplemental, nor with the "health" of a URL, at least not directly. If all else is unique, meta only finetunes relevance, i'm seeing sites with sitewide metas and no metas at all that still rank well. Same metas could be but a trigger for further examination... i don't know, but what i DO see is that they are grouping otherwise normal results in an undesirable way, displaying the relevant highest PR/directory level page instead of the MOST relevant, and stuffing pages as "very similar" in the omitted search results list. ( But similar is not same. )
End of the story.
If your site comes up for a search, it either shows two results ( query is matched in normal and supplemental page as well ), or none ( query is matched in the supplemental page only ).