Forum Moderators: open
I think the solution to this problem is easier than people are making it out. I think the problem is not having enough support for your keywords. To be more specific, since Real Estate is the big topic, what kind of real estate do you offer?
Hi vbjaeger,
As you know I've tried to clean up all of the possible things that are in my control with regard to my site and index page. Thanks for your help on this which is very much appreciated. I think that everything that you say here is spot on and even if there is something else outside of your control it is still a very good thing to do anyway, both imediately and in the longer term.
The thing that still confuses me however is this. If my site is #3-#1 for all of my secondary phrases and used to be #3-#1 for my main two word phrases. If there was something wrong with it why is it still #1 for secondary phrases. I think that I know but I keep having moments, actually days of doubt in which I think "OK I've sorted all of the possible problems with my site now all I have to do is wait" and then I think"what if its just that Googles new technology is broken".
By the way you know I had a bit of cross linking with a secondary site, well, I didn't want to lose the referals from that site so I have put a meta refresh page that redirects outgoing to my main site. I've put this into a folder that is disallowed to robots through my robots.txt file. Now I point all of the links to my main site at this page. Do you know if this solution is OK SEwise?
Best wishes and thanks again
Sid
I am not sure about the links. As I mentioned, I am no expert, but it sounds ok. Is the link intended for your visitors or for google?
As far as secondary phrases, we had the same thing happen. I think it just has to do with how competitive the phrase is... I am also seeing some of our secondary phrases slipping, but I have not touched them since pre-florida
Glad to help, let's see if it works. Let me know either way. Happy new year!
[edited by: vbjaeger at 12:09 am (utc) on Jan. 2, 2004]
I think that I know but I keep having moments, actually days of doubt in which I think "OK I've sorted all of the possible problems with my site now all I have to do is wait" and then I think"what if its just that Googles new technology is broken".
When you have moments of doubt Sid, re-read the lines below:
I've tried to clean up all of the possible things that are in my control with regard to my site and index page....... ....... and even if there is something else outside of your control it is still a very good thing to do anyway, both imediately and in the longer term.
I think they are wise words ;)
I think it just has to do with how competitive the phrase is
It appears to me that phrases have been targeted by the new algo rather than individual words. Therefore, word combinations which are recognized as *units* are subjected to different ranking criteria than the sum of the individual words.
Both Yankee and Sid have noted that word proximity no longer holds the importance it held before. Could it be that word proximity is just as important as before except for certain specific searches where the recognized phrase takes on a new value?
Could it be that word proximity is just as important as before except for certain specific searches where the recognized phrase takes on a new value?
I think word proximity is important if it helps describe your site/topic. What sounds better when you read it?
1) PR of 5 or greater
2) a high number of backlinks
3) the two words anywhere on the page (not next to each other)
These results are not relevant. Just because a quality site has two words on it's page doesn't mean it's a good match for a search phrase.
PR and backlink count matter much more than word proximity, and that is a major flaw with Google's new algorithm.
I dont think it is that simple. I got rid of crosslinks 2 days after Florida started and was no where to be seen, only to return late Novenmber to page one. The recent PR and links update took me from 151 links to 35 and PR6 to PR5.
I am still holding strong on page one where I have been for 2+ years, while all around me are directory links. Something is wrong, but it cant be blamed on any one or two things.
It isn't a major flaw. Word proximity is toward the spammiest end of the algorithmic ingredients. It should be a very low priority.
What we see now is authoritative sites with low relevance replacing non-authoritative/spam/piffle/crap sites as a majority of the weakest third of the results. (The straight redirects/framed sites and pure mirrors at the bottom of course.) This is a very positive improvement, and frankly one that Google should be able to fix within a few months. Once these micro-relevant authoritative sites start ranking well, they can be compared with the other sites that rank well, as true authorities on a topic. A single page news story will not have the same breadth of algorithmic assets that the index page of an authoratative niche site will, particularly in terms of linking from other high ranking sites on the topic. If google would now look at the top 100 results as a universe unto itself, it would be easy to cull out the micro-relevant sites.
Not counting the elimination of the jillions of worthless redirect sites, which should be job 1 right now, Google's results set simply needs to have some concept of theme or topic-rank or localrank introduced to boost some of the niche sites and depreciate some of the micro-relevant sites (like newspapers articles and Amazon pages).
Again, besides detection of some obvious spam, the "major" flaw in this algorithm is the complete absence of theme or context. Given that Google has made more than one acquisition of theme-type technology it is a pretty logical bet that the next generation of results are intended to judge and rank local authority more accurately.
If someone is searching for
red widgets
the serps are now dominated by high backlink count sites that have a title of
red apples and green widgets
This has nothing to do with red widgets!
Sorry, but google needs to remove spam in other ways, not by lowering the importance of word proximity.
Also "proximity" is not the same as "exact phrase". You seem to actually be complaining that Google is overvaluing word proximity!
The traffic to my sites has gone up. The problem is the traffic is not relevant to my content. That's what a good search engine does, and Google used to do.
This is a very positive improvement, and frankly one that Google should be able to fix within a few months. Once these micro-relevant authoritative sites start ranking well, they can be compared with the other sites that rank well, as true authorities on a topic.
Hi Steve,
I agree that if my micro-relevant (by that I mean specialist, in the top ten off-line authorities on a very small niche) sites like mine go back in among the authority but of little relevance sites then this will be a very good thing and we should clean up.
I think that the point that everyone who has not been directly affected by this event miss is this. If I search for the most appropriate broad(ish) term my site is at #540 if I add one more word which slightly narrows the term my site is at #1. If I search for another closely associated 2 word term my site is at #1.
My question is why. Why does Google think that my site is the most relevant for every single term around the main topic and has now decided that it is ranked at #540 for the main term after thinking it was #1 for that term for the last two years? If you can answer that I will be very impressed.
Best wishes
Sid
The problem is the traffic is not relevant to my content. That's what a good search engine does, and Google used to do.
And what Altavista DOES.
Just as an experiment, next time you perform a search and the results look pretty spammy try the same search on AV and see what comes up.
Since Florida I've looked into which search engines give "quality" results as opposed to "quantity" and none provide the quality of altavista.
Google has a bit to learn about relevancy...
Why does Google think that my site is the most relevant for every single term around the main topic and has now decided that it is ranked at #540 for the main term after thinking it was #1 for that term for the last two years?
Hey Sid, happy new year to you!
I think I know the answer to your question, it's called a f - Fil ... dang, just can't say that word! It's called a ffff -- FILT#&%$$$$$.
I give up, I better go and make a cup of coffee.
Don't worry, it's moka, I don't drink FILTER coffee.
The traffic to my sites has gone up. The problem is the traffic is not relevant to my content. That's what a good search engine does, and Google used to do.
How are you deteriming this?
My guess is he checking his web logs to see which search words are bringing his visitors. Happy New Year!
I'm checking my referer log files and analyzing the search terms people are using to enter my site from google.
The pre-florida log files are excellent. Google's quality of referrals has significantly decreased.
Example...
optic widget = not in the top 800
optic red widget = #1
What is wierd is that the phrase "optic red widget" is not on any of my pages even though all the words are.
So what this seems to mean is that the narrow phrase of optic widget does not have relevancy for my pages according to Google, yet when interjected with another word that happens to be on the page, it shows us as being the most relative. The problem is that my site has nothing to do with optic red widgets. The word red is there in reference to infra-red.
This is the problem I am seeing on lots of results. Narrow 2 word phrases for popular searches seems to be broken.
How do the serps look for these terms?
If someone is searching for
red widgets
the serps are now dominated by high backlink count sites that have a title something like this
red apples and green widgets
This has nothing to do with red widgets! Yes, red and widgets are near each other (some people's definition of proximity, not mine), but they need to be right next to each other to return relevant results. Google used to do this, but now they put a higher scoring weight on backlink count than having two words right next to each other.
Are you suggesting that the SERPs are rubbish?
Because they're not. They are crap
Word proximity is not the only casualty here, so is word position and density in my book.
Yankee, searching with quotes is a great idea, it says I am looking for this specific match - something similar to word proximity which of course has now been devalued.
Since explaining to surfers how to search seems unrealistic I'd say develop additional pages where proximity doesn't matter at all and the words are spread out.
My problem is that when the 3 words that exactly describe my service are used in the search query my entire site is excluded from the SERPs. Add my city to those 3 words and the site comes in well past 100. It seems to me that my only recourse is to go for a new domain on a new server and make a "new" site.
Not nec~y a problem. The other quality sites will have disappeared too. Now surfers will either have to search harder, or move to another SE. And if your site is a good one - you'll still be found. Google is likely to be the loser.
The 100 other site ahead of mine for this 4 word search are way off topic and yet they appear before mine. This is all the result of what I perceive as a filter excluding my site for those 3 evil keywords.
