Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.226.133.245

Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

They're at it again with the -sj server

different serps and backlinks

     
1:13 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 23, 2002
posts:48
votes: 0


Looks like they are testing the www-sj.google.com server again. I see 384k backlinks for yahoo and the serps are different.
6:17 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 7, 2003
posts:90
votes: 0


Maybe I don't have enough knowledge on the way that google works, but the deepcrawl finished on my server 4-26, so how can the dnace be starting? Seems like a very short time to rebuild what must be a very massive database
6:21 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 6, 2002
posts:88
votes: 0


The last deepcrawl was for the next update, not for this update, would i say!

daamsie

6:27 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


If this is a new algo that is filtering out more hidden text - I can see that there are some results that have changed because of it.
6:32 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 29, 2002
posts:130
votes: 0


Boy, I hope this isn't a peek at what is to come. #1 position in some of my keywords has all of their backlinks (200+) as guestbooks. And #7 has hidden text plus a javascript re-direct to another search engine. Yikes!

[edited by: Bio4ce at 6:33 am (utc) on May 2, 2003]

6:32 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 19, 2002
posts:93
votes: 0


The sj index is showing recently added pages but these can't possibly be the new serps. You don't add new quality content and links and go from position 1 to page 3.
6:33 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:June 20, 2002
posts:385
votes: 0


I wouldn't get too excited about this. It is clearly old data including old DMOZ entries that don't exist any more.
6:36 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 22, 2002
posts:681
votes: 0


It's not all old data -- there's a recent news story that I see. I'm not saying it means anything, but that it's not all old.

daamsie

6:36 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


It is clearly old data including old DMOZ entries that don't exist any more.

There is a LOT of new data in here as well though .. strange about the DMOZ entries, perhaps they are just testing the new algo on a cross-section of available data in that center? Funny that people would see the results on www.google.com though!

6:40 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 22, 2002
posts:681
votes: 0


Okay, this is what I've noticed -- my expired domains seem to be back where they should be. If they're testing, I approve! ;)
6:41 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 5, 2003
posts:807
votes: 0


I'm seeing a possible boo boo that was deepcrawled two deepcrawl's ago but not added in the last update show up in this update, er test. The boo boo was that on one of my sites every file was deepcrawled with two different URLs, so now each file shows up twice in the test as

widget and widget.shtml

It was two deepcrawls ago that it happened and I though the googlebot noticed it in the last update and only listed each file once!

Oh well, geting double the hits for one month sure won't hurt! :) :) :)

6:43 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 19, 2003
posts:203
votes: 0


4x4 showing 384,000 for www.
661,000 for all others.

Ok, It's too early for the update, so what is going on? I got my keyword placement for new site in the top 10 for now...

Can anyone explain this?

6:52 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 25, 2003
posts:970
votes: 0


I see results for february for some keywords. IMHO this is not the preview of an update but definitely some testing with old date mixed with some new data.
6:54 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Jan 3, 2003
posts:143
votes: 0


I hope -sj is not sign of the new algo, yahoo's backlinks are way too low. I have 2 clients that are squeaky clean lose 40-50 spots on their main kw's and they are missing 75% of their backilinks?

is this the update where they stop counting backlinks under PR4?

6:57 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 19, 2003
posts:203
votes: 0


My new site went live about March 10. If Yahoo is showing 384k will this pump up page rank for DMOZ?

I hoping to get my PR7 Back!

6:44 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 5, 2003
posts:807
votes: 0


www [google.com] now shows 384,000.
6:47 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:May 5, 2002
posts:825
votes: 0

6:49 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 5, 2003
posts:807
votes: 0


Then try to explain why www is showing 384,000 just like www-sj is. er it just was.....

[edited by: Jesse_Smith at 6:51 am (utc) on May 2, 2003]

6:50 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:May 21, 2001
posts:2149
votes: 0


I think he is right - it is real
6:51 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 5, 2003
posts:807
votes: 0


Now it says 661,000 again, though I've seen it go back and forth atleast twice.

[edited by: Jesse_Smith at 6:52 am (utc) on May 2, 2003]

6:52 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member nick_w is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 4, 2002
posts:5044
votes: 0


It isnt. Please let's not debate it, in the linked thread above GoogleGuy says it's to early.

It doesn't get any more authoratitive than that.

Nick

6:52 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 22, 2002
posts:681
votes: 0


Isn't this how it happened last month, back and forth with the backlinks?
6:52 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member tigger is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:July 16, 2000
posts:3558
votes: 0


try reading GG posting "Ugh. It's too early to start all this again"

That kills it for me

6:52 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:May 5, 2002
posts:825
votes: 0


Not sure what you're seeing:

link:www.yahoo.com [google.com] Results 1 - 10 of about 661,000

6:53 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:May 21, 2001
posts:2149
votes: 0


I SAW it to. I have been doing this for long enough to know an update when I see it. I think google guy is playing with you.

It was 384,000 - just like he said - it is off my browser or I would do a screen capture

[edited by: Chris_R at 6:54 am (utc) on May 2, 2003]

6:53 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 5, 2003
posts:807
votes: 0


If they were testing, why would they test on www?! For about 10 minutes I saw it go back and forth twice. New number, old number, new number, then now old.
6:58 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member nick_w is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 4, 2002
posts:5044
votes: 0


Well, there's no doubt the sj- is showing differenct backlinks.

I'd still say with 99.9% certainty that it is NOT the update. GG is usually very straight with the folks at WebmasterWorld and is usually on-hand to confirm updates.

He says it 'aint so. I'll go with that for now...

Nick

7:02 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:May 21, 2001
posts:2149
votes: 0


I'd like to clarify what I saw.

I always check the datacenters - not this www2 & 3 stuff.

There is something different for the sj datacenter, but apparently this was the case before.

I have never noticed this not being the update before - and have watched it go from one datacenter to another in previous updates. Now that I have better things to do with my time - so I haven't been tracking this one.

Anyway to sum up:

1) I see a different number on SJ - and it appears to be a different index
2) I have never seen this before (in like 15 updates or more that I have watched) WITHOUT it being an update
3) Googleguy knows more than me

So I will go with number 3 and withdraw my agreement

7:05 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 5, 2003
posts:807
votes: 0


:::Ugh. It's too early to start all this again.

He's just saying he's not ready to watch us all go bonkers. All my files that were deepcrawled for the first time in the last deepcrawl are now in the new index that's showing up.

And can some one try to explain why they would use www to do tests?!

7:06 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:May 1, 2003
posts:17
votes: 0


GG didn't say it hasn't started.

He just said "Ugh. It's too early to start all this again"

He needed to be more precise and say: "The update hasn't started yet".

He may have just woken up and was voicing misgivings about having to read another thread so soon about the update.

Does "this" mean a discussion, or does "this" mean the actual update?

7:09 am on May 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 5, 2003
posts:807
votes: 0


If it does the same thing as last month, staying at one server for about six hours, then we will probably know with in five hours if it's the real thing. I just think that any one that does tests on the main server has gone nuts, and a few of us saw the change on www!
This 515 message thread spans 18 pages: 515