Forum Moderators: open
IF GREATER THAN X number of similar anchor text links blocks reach Page A, THEN Penalize page A's relevancy for only that block of anchor text...
Unless that text is the domain name. Dmoz, Yahoo and a most of the authority hubs style their links with <a href=domain.com>domain.com</a> type links.
Does this mean that <a href=keyword-keywork2.com>keyword-keyword2.com</a> is ok? :)
IF GREATER THAN X number of similar anchor text links blocks reach Page A, THEN Penalize page A's relevancy for only that block of anchor text
As for myself, the most highly targeted keywords are the ones I have made the most gains in, so far.
I deny the conspiracies. It's not the case. ;) Seriously though, Google got to be where it is partly because we try our best to return the best sites to our users. We haven't stopped that tradition, and I hope we never do. Any short-term revenue from purposefully hurting our quality would ultimately do more long-term harm to Google (and its users) instead. I can say with complete confidence from my experience here that Google takes the long-term view about maintaining its quality. When we see ways that we believe we can improve our quality, we test it out a lot and then introduce those changes.
I think most of the data for this iteration has been folded in now. After any change, some people are going to be happy and some people aren't. We take feedback seriously (that's why I mentioned writing to webmaster [at] google.com with specific comments using the keyword "floridaupdate" several times on this topic already), but it's a fact of life that only a few urls can be on the front page, and if one site replaces another then someone won't like the results and someone will.
[edited by: keyword1dashkeyword2 at 8:38 am (utc) on Nov. 19, 2003]
I think most of the data for this iteration has been folded in now.
I assume people who are affected by this have practiced cross-linking techniques with similar keyword combos (which are now lost in the index) and have at least 500 or more backlinks resulting from cross-linking.
keyword1dashkeyword2,
if this turnes out to be the truth, I guess some heavily crosslinked pages would soon start shedding low PR link partners.
Instead of only shying away from from PR-less possible "bad neighbourhoods", now you would be looking for a minimum PR.
I don't think this is what G intends.
Personally, I'll just continue to look for sites that offer good content and may be of interest to my visitors, - regardless of PR.
I guess sites with links to and from other high-quality, on-topic pages should be doing fine in the long run.
And in the worst case, you always have the direct traffic from your partner sites.
Just my two cents,
Laurenz
anyone who has dropped significant who does not meet these criteria care to dispute?
I would also like to announce that I am now selling off topic text links, no, better yet, randomized text links.;)
Thirteen minutes left until 'tomorrow' is over at the Googleplex
I think most of the data for this iteration has been folded in now.
I'd expect a tougher time fighting spam next year.
Is doing internal linking using keywords on each page of a site with hundreds of pages wrong? I am not trying to fool anyone. I thought I was making the main subject matter more apparent to visitors and search engines by using the main keywords in the internal links. My sites have practically no outgoing links. They do have lots and lots of information, but their main subject is not really coming up in the results anymore. Should I change the internal link anchor text for some of the internal links? Or just sit tight?
<joke>
Or?
</joke>
But this is the first time these "sites" have appeared, and I'd like to have some faith that GG and Google will work on dealing with such trash, both specifically and algorithmically.
I personally think Google is having some problems at the moment and this will make any theory difficult to prove or disprove until all those googlies get things corrected.
BTW I wear a blue and tan hat with a little red most of the time ;-)
This particular one shows more backward links:
http://www-va.google.com
Would this be duplicated to all servers. I hope so :)
I think most of the data for this iteration has been folded in now. After any change, some people are going to be happy and some people aren't.
Are you serious?
- va has updated backlinks the rest still have old data.?
- each datacenter is returning different amounts of results from 80,000 to 200,000?
- PR has not been completely updated only through certain datacenter(s)
- PR for 1 site has gone up from 4 to 5 but has dropped to its worst position since the site was luanched over 2 years ago.
----------
Now maybe, when you say "I think most" do we take this as you don't really know and also it could take another day to appear in the datacenters?
I also start to feel quite insulted by your comments that you class some of us as black hats etc when many sites are of perfect quality with no spamming techniques.
Many of us here have followed your comments and acted responsible in the construction of good content based web sites, well structured for users and search engines. Many months of hard work has gone in to build these sites, including a lot of investment of money, time and programming.
Too say that some will be happy and some won't by being replaced at the top, this I don't mind, its understandable, I wasn't even first for my keywords. However its the fact the PR has gone up so much and yet the site has been bombed.
We have not been banned nor has the pages been penalized hence the good PR of all the pages, so my only guess is that this update is either not finished or has been over done.
GoogleGuy I will write to you soon, but I am responsible enough to wait for the update to finish before jumping in, if nothing changes I will write.
For now I suggest we all still need to wait another 24-48 hours.
but it's a fact of life that only a few urls can be on the front page, and if one site replaces another then someone won't like the results and someone will.
The official organisation for the search phrase I am talking about has been at #1 for the last two and a half years at least. I have been #2-5 for at least six months. I am now at 178 and they (.org) can't be found at all. Neither site wears a hat. So if what was completely relevant Thursday is now no longer relevant at all, we must question the ability of the new algo (or the old one) to determine relevancy. At this point I must say I no longer trust Google. When someone has a question and we can't find the answer I will probably still go to G for now, but when I view the results there will be doubt where there wasn't before.
When we see ways that we believe we can improve our quality, we test it out a lot and then introduce those changes.I wish I knew which secret datacenter you guys were looking at, cuz it can't be the same thing I'm looking at. Have you all run ad-aware or anything lately. Maybe someone has messed with your hosts files and you're really seeing ATW results when you search Google.;)
Nice comments Powdork
I will second that.
We don't complain we are not first just that sites have been dropped to 100-500 for no particular reason.
The shift in Googles idea of what is relevent and what is not scares me.
Maybe you are all looking at -sj the one we can't see perhaps thats the one has been updated? I hope so.....
;-)
Looks like GG is the only one round here who can sleep.
Here in Euroland we are still waking up to the nightmare :(
Hmmm perhaps I should go back and work for a big company again and not have to worry so much as you do when your just a small fish in the Atlantic :)
Well I suppose I had better stopped checking :-))
Amazed
You got it.
Big movements in deed an extra 5 links on this then -VA
Results are different not too sure yet any good but are different.
I show no backlinks on -mc
The best advise I have ever got is this:
Build your site with ONLY customers in mind. Forget all about SEO tips and tricks, most are pure speculation and do NOTHING to enhance the customers experience. Add linked content each day that compliments your site.
Simple, non-stressful and it works better than anything else.
Dave
[edited by: Dave_Hawley at 8:55 am (utc) on Nov. 19, 2003]
Thats what I have done, but its no good if don't have visitors to use it :)
Can you fold in the allinanchor data please? :)
I think many people, GoogleGuy, have experienced a massive site drop - to the point of total disappearance for their index page on a select bunch of keywords. But that's the problem. Nobody can say they "deserve" to be there for those keywords - so would anyone listen at the plex?
I don't think that Google is very much interested in the fate of individual sites. As long as there are more relevant sites in the top 10 or 20 results than in the other search engines that's presumably fine with them.
Laurenz
I observed somehing and would like to know your thoughts.For
some of my keywords there are some sites which either haven't
been afected at all or have appeared in serps out of the blue.
Most of these sites have links coming from thematically similar
websites or pages. I mean, for an instance, the sites at top
for hosting related keywords have links from hosting related
sites or the links pages have the keywords (hosting etc.) in
the title. Any thoughts?
[edited by: napoleon_bona_part_2 at 9:30 am (utc) on Nov. 19, 2003]
