Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
Forum Moderators: open
For a webmaster-related phrase, we are at number 3 right now. For a similar phrases with a regional twist, we are third. For the same regional phrase combined with a somewhat less important webmaster-related phrase, we are first. So...progress. Nothing to complain about at all. Good luck to you all. :)
"OTOH, more (dynamic) pages in the index."
I have to agree. Although my new personal domain on which there is nothing but my sister's Kafka project unsurpisingly is not in the new index. My employers site which I was only able to tweak ever so slightly due to office politics has improved in rankings.
And the backlinks to our one product increased a rediculous amount which was also not unexpected. For the first time I hope the index holds up relatively the same, if for no reason then I can say "I told you so".
These backlinks all come from dynamic pages. Our dynamic demo site still is not in the index. This will be my next goal.
This site of course has been very informative.
Does anybody know if backlinks registered by Google can increase during the update? Or those we get the first day are what we get till the end?
Hoople: we don't report all the links we see, so I wouldn't worry about that. The PageRank still gets counted correctly.
whoz1: it's still a little early in the update, so I'd wait for that first.
Muskie: I think we're always going to be getting better at dynamic pages.
and finally, europeforvisitors: I want to take the last paragraph of your post and just frame it. Avoiding the shortcuts and just adding great content is a surefire SEO technique that helps you, users, and Google. :)
A new site high in the serps though - a one page site, cloaked (the cache version would blow your mind) - site is just an affiliate link - ie absolutely no content - it has a high PR and all it's back links are similar cloaked pages with affiliate links - all presumably owned by the same persion (they all look alike)
I guess this is one for the SPAM report. It always is irritating when you work hard to create a great content rich site and some schmuko sneaks in through the backdoor - but I know they won't be around for long - Google will filter out that blatant abuse.
Happy thanksgiving to all!
Another matter for all who care to chime in:
I worked my tail off over the last 6 weeks trying to get 54 theme related links from PR4 and higher sites. Google found about 32 of them but not the best 22 which I believe they will eventually.
I was a low pr 4 last time. Looking at my ranking on www2 and www3, I jumped from 72 to 11 and 53 to #2 and 23 to #1 and #2. The sites that are behind me about the next 10 places back, 12-22 and 3-13, 3-13, approximately that amount, are PR 5 currently.
Does the fact that I have so many PR 5 sites BEHIND me (on www2 and www3) mean it is relatively safe to assume that I graduated to PR5?
Anyone think this method would work in trying to figure your new PR?
Firstly this is my first post..so please bear with me ;) and also, just to let you know that this site you've got here is fantastic!
My query regards the Google Dance - I updated my website about one week ago, the "Freshbot" as its called visited on the 26th and it got added when I do a search on www.google.com. It is the new version of my site I see in www.google.com
But when I go to www2 & www3, and perform the same search, the website gets listed, but with the old content. Is this common practice, and will the result from www filter through to www2 & www3, or will the old content from 2 & 3 filter back and overwrite the new content stored in www?
Im relatively new to the SEO...so please bear with me if this question sounds "old hat" to most of you!
Maybe Googleguy can give us some light on the issue.
He probably won't. He gets about 100 questions a day from posters here. I've seen him reply to ones where the answer will benefit many others, but for something minor/trivial like this, probably not. The directory results under www2 and www3 are probably in "everflux."
If you have questions of minor importance (like mine), it's probably better to direct them toward the group or the "old" members (Preferred member and above).
ADDED> I don't presume to speak for GG, just stating my humble opinion on querying him.