Forum Moderators: open
The only reason Google has the traffic that it has is because of the quality results(until Sat) that it produced.
As far as the user can see, it is still returning extremely high quality results.
TJ
<added: in fact, as far as I can see it is still returning extremely high quality results>
[edited by: trillianjedi at 2:27 pm (utc) on Nov. 18, 2003]
It looks to me like a points scoring system. When you get too many points you get demoted for your keywords. So far as I can make out you score points for:
keywords in title
keywords in headings
keywords in normal body text
keywords in outgoing links
keywords in the majority of inbound anchor text (especially links internal to your site)
to me it seems if you have a couple of these it doesn't seem to cause a problem. But if you score in most of them you get the royal boot.
What is the typical number of googlebot sessions in a 24 hour period during which they are visiting?
I have seen the googlebot has had a few sessions on my site in the last 24 hours. I'll take it as a good thing.
I see doorways and redirects intop 20 for some very competetive terms.
I also see tons of slightly on topic results.
[edited by: textex at 2:50 pm (utc) on Nov. 18, 2003]
What's important now is - is our "over-optimized" websites doomed for life or is there something we can do to correct the situation (other than throw away the domain and the company name, since in my cas this is the same etc)...
Nightmare i tell ya
Has no one considered the possibility that Google may be trying to improve the quality of its search results?
Of course, in fact I'm sure that's what they're *trying* to do (I don't think it's some big conspiracy to sell more AdWords), but I think something quite big has gone wrong for seemingly a number of sites.
And if they are trying to correct excessive SEO (ie the title, text and anchor text are all the same - not spamming, but optimized) it's not working very well. If someone is searching for (as I mentioned before) 'Widgettown FooCorp Resort and Spa' and Google doesn't show that site in the top 100 listings then it's clear something is wrong.
GoogleGuy mentioned that there'd only be a "small" amount of data added today sometime... I don't think a small amount is going to help much.
[edited by: canuck at 2:49 pm (utc) on Nov. 18, 2003]
Is anyone else seeing this? Has their been some sort of shift in inktomi & AV algos or are people flocking away from google?
It appears *at this point in time* that Google used to give more credit than I thought to internal backlinks and anchor text pointing back to the homepage. Now it appears that they give almost none.
That's the exact opposite of what I've seen for my sites.
OK So let's assume there is a penality for "over-optimization" with anchor text links - I think this theory makes sense. What's important now is - is our "over-optimized" websites doomed for life or is there something we can do to correct the situation (other than throw away the domain and the company name, since in my cas this is the same etc)...
I don't think it's as simple as Google's saying, "Hmmm...Widgets.com has links to "widgets" and "widgets" in the title of its home page. More likely, it's a combination of many things that, when taken together, create an artificial pattern.
Instead of trying to second-guess what that pattern might be (or how it's detected), the safest approach may be to simply do what comes naturally. In other words, try to think like an editor, not like a bleeding-edge SEO. Stick to the basics: useful content for the reader, descriptive page titles and headlines and links, etc. Resist the temptation to over-optimize, and you're less likely to run up a "spam score" that can result in a correction.
In relation to Google, you might ask yourself if you're trying to help Google or trick Google. A title that includes the word "Widgets" is good spider food. A title that says "Widgets Blue Widgets Red Widgets Widgeting and Widgetizers from Widgets Inc." is more questionable, because it's obviously artificial.
Interesting theory but I can see sites that are highly optimized (as you describe) doing very well. On the other hand, I have a site that has almost zero SEO and none of its incoming links have been solicited. The site can no longer be found when searching for KW1 KW2 but can be found when you search KW1-KW2. The answer to this mystery lies in the hyphen. Does anybody have any theories on how/why the inclusin of a hyphen displays the missing sites?
Here's hoping!
"Choose the best search for your information need"
is no longer being maintained here.
nice relavancy!
That theory definitely doesn't work for educational sites... in the searches I just did, most of the top-ten sites (including mine) have the topic in the title, heading, links, and text body. Google may devalue those factors beyond a certain point but it certainly isn't penalizing for them; otherwise these educational searches would not look so good and relevant.
Of course, educational sites tend not to view each other as 'competitors' exactly, so we're all linking to at least some of the others. This may stabilize those sites somewhat against spam or spam-busting techniques, maybe?
Anyway, I find it hard to believe that Google could be penalizing anyone for getting too many links or having keywords in the title or anything like that. If so these educational sites would be dropping like flies, and instead, the educational searches look better than ever. My personal guess is that some of these missing commercial sites must be getting caught in an automated spam filter of some sort; hopefully the innocent ones are being released as fast as possible upon review. Or maybe some factors that favor commercial sites just haven't been factored in yet. I'm just idly hypothesizing, really. But I *don't* think it could be possible that links, titles, or headings could be getting penalties given the search results I'm seeing on educational topics! Pick a history topic of the sort that kids might be studying in high school and type it in yourself to see. (-:
Europeforvisitors I have a real problem with this theory of yours.
How can Google realistically lessen the relevancy weight of a site which happens to be linked to it using a logical description of itself?
How can Google realistically lessen the relevancy weight of a site which has a domain name which describes itself?
How can Google realistically lessen the relevancy weight of a site which has a TITLE which describes itself?
How can Google realistically lessen the relevancy weight of a site which mentions things about itself in the body of its own text?
I realise you say "if they reach a certain threshold" but I personally think if there was such a threshold then it would need to be set very very high.
Imaging a site selling all coloured widgets. It's homepage want to mention each colour of widgets individually and naturally link of to pages which are colour specific. This site could have the majority of its inbound links with the search term "coloured widgets" in them. It could logically have the phrase "coloured widgets" in the TITLE and meta description. Also in the main body of the text it could mention the phrase **** coloured widgets (where **** = colour) many times in conjunction with each different colour of widget.
As a result of this, this site could have many inbound links with the phrase "coloured widgets" in them. It would have the same phrase in the TITLE and Description and it would also mention the same phrase many many times in the body of the text and logically in the internal text links - ALL PERFECTLY LEGITAMETLY.
So if you had to draw a threshold line I would say it would have to be mighty high.
[edited by: needinfo at 3:18 pm (utc) on Nov. 18, 2003]
My site does not contain any keyword1keyword2 so I do not think that explains it.
thanks!
Yes, what you are saying is correct: inclusion of the hyphen would make pages containing kw1-kw2 more relevant. Unfortunately my pages do not contain any "kw1-kw2" either :)
Whats the URL of data center 8?
[edited by: prodigyfx at 3:45 pm (utc) on Nov. 18, 2003]
