Forum Moderators: open
Kackle - can you explain the "dictionary" for me? And how I might benefit from it - Im reading your posts hard but dont see where youre coming from.
Sure. But you have to act quickly. Google will fix this one just like they fixed the hyphen.
1. Google is depreciating pages/sites that are over-optimized for certain keywords or keyword combinations. It does this by looking up search terms in a dictionary of target keywords or keyword pairs that it has compiled. This dictionary is Top Secret, because if you knew what was in the dictionary, you could avoid these words in your optimization efforts.
2. If the search term or terms hit on a dictionary entry, the search results for that user's search are flagged. This means that before the results are delivered, the order of the links, or even the inclusion of links, are adjusted so as to penalize pages that have overoptimizated for those terms. Most likely the title, headlines, links and anchor text are examined. It's possible that external anchor text pointing to that page has also been pre-collected and is available for scanning, but this is much less likely. (Besides, external links are not something within your immediate control, so don't worry about it right now.)
3. You want to find out which keywords that are relevant to your site are in Google's dictionary. Compile as many relevant keywords you can think of that searchers might use to find your site. Now take these words singly and in pairs, according to how users might search. Run two searches for each combination and compare the results.
4. If the results are strikingly different for the pre-filter and the post-filter search on a particular term or combination of terms, it means that some variation of those terms has been flagged because something was found in Google's dictionary.
5. Do lots of searches and you can come up with a list of "sensitive" words that you'll want to avoid when you re-optimize your pages.
It's a nice weekend project.
"New User" posters should be paying attention to the isolated posts from members here who have more than 500 posts to their credit, instead of latching onto whatever bizarro idea some newbie concocts.
That's right, then you could also post how the latest Google shuffle dropped you from all SERP's.
Dave
Welcome to WebmasterWorld all new posters :)
It's not a general attitude that new posters have no valuable points to make and i don't really think that it was steveb's intention to say that either. It's just that these threads naturally lend themselves to all kinds of theories and speculation, some of it might even turn out to be valuable information, but not all will.
I'd personally just say that it's easy to get carried on in the debate sometimes, especially as things like these is what a lot of members make their living from... please try to keep a good tone even when you disagree with someone - readership is always much larger than the number of posters ;)
/claus
There are pages and pages here on an idea that exploded into a million pieces when it was discovered the phenomenon held true for all individual words, but in the meantime some posters actually went out and made changes to their sites. Not good.
Kackle explained it much better than I could or did in his/her last post.
I am open to hear anyone give a reasonable explanation of why adding the exclusion with nonsense letters in it brings up pages that have been dropped in the serp.
But the fact is that at the moment using the same keywords in a normal search and an exclusion search (with nonsense letters) does bring up different results for certain keywords. When as Kackle pointed out the results should be the same only minus the pages that have the nonsense text on them.
<eddited for spelling>
[edited by: BradBristol at 1:39 am (utc) on Nov. 23, 2003]
[edited by: Newman at 1:40 am (utc) on Nov. 23, 2003]
KW KW
google.com #0 out of 1,300,000
allinanchor #5 out of 2,410
allintext #5 out of 1,280,000
allint title #3 out of 2,950
KW KW -whatever #4 out of 1,210,000
KW KW KW
googl.com #1 out of 138,000
allanchor #1 out of 170
allintext #1 out of 137,000
allintitle #1 out of 329
KW KW KW -what #1 out of 120,000
I hope this helps.
I have a contender for least relevant SERPS on the new index [users.htcomp.net...] (a real estate site selling ranches) is top ten for jewelry. Can anyone beat that?
Not only is that result completely non-relevant, but the word "jewelry" does not appear anywhere on the page!
I have a suspicion that the page used to have relevant content for "jewelry".
Nope. Check the cache. Then check the listed title & snippet for this page in the SERP. The Top-10 jewelry listing for this real estate page was based on it's current real estate content. The snippet is particularly interesting - note that there are no bold words, as there were no keywords matches anywhere in the content! Not exactly what I would expect from a Top-10 listing on a extremely competitive search that returns almost 23 million results!
But check-out the back-links, a number of them are from jewelry-related sites. That doesn't mean that this site is, though (obviously, not, in this case!)
Perhaps somebody smokin' somethin' at the 'plex suddenly decided that top listings should now be selected based on the "theme" of the backlink sites?
What I have noticed is that my 3 word anchor text is holding me at #1 in the natural results but for any combinations of 2 KW's my index page is gone except when I use KW KW -whatever.
Yes, all of these tests are helpful. So, either your third keyword was a "Get out of jail" card or the filter only goes two keywords deep. What was your third keyword? If you try it alone, is there any evidence that it's in the dictionary? Probably not. Then the next question is, can you come up with other "Get out of jail" keywords for the third term? What happens if you use KW KW KW without the -nonsense term?
Finally, what happens if you use KW3 as the first term in your search, and follow it with KW1, KW2. Any difference?
So many questions, so little time....
allintext: keyword keyword...and compared to the -asdfsaf? I'd have thought it to be identical, but it seems it's just very similar.
As i see it, it has the same effect as doing a quoted search ("keyword1 keyword2"). The keyword-dash-keyword did the same thing, didn't it? It seems like an operator that means "all searchterms are equally important" or something like that...."exact phrase"?
/claus
edit:added last part
keyword1-keyword2 on Google just does a phrase search along the lines of searching for "keyword1 keyword2". It limits results to pages that have that exact phrase on the page, or possibly in anchors.
[edited by: claus at 3:51 am (utc) on Nov. 23, 2003]
Not only is that result completely non-relevant, but the word "jewelry" does not appear anywhere on the page!
The results look fine to me. You will always end up with a couple of spammy sites in SERPs
Dave
[edited by: Dave_Hawley at 1:50 am (utc) on Nov. 23, 2003]
Search for "Googlebombing". Anchor text of inbound links can make a site rate high even if it has no relevant content.
The results look fine to me. You will always end up with a couple of spammy sites in SERPs
It was not a spammy site. Please re-read my post to see what I was getting at.
Well, if the update was supposed to be done Wednesday, and it's not, when will it be done and things return to normal?
