Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
By MIA, I mean that your site is x.com, x is a unique name, and yet when you search for x, you find all kinds of weird sites above you (sites that link to you or mention you) and your site is way down in the results.
I believe Walkman and Chico Loco are similarly afflicted. Are there others?
If so, perhaps we can figure out what we've done wrong (or what wrong has been done to us). I can't for the life of me think of a single thing that would warrant the mistreatment.
I realize there are multiple threads on Allegra, but I'd love to start one that is exclusively dedicated to those who are still in the index but you can no longer find your site. It used to be #1 and now it's say #15.
Just to be clear, if you've been dropped completely from google, this isn't your thread. If you used to be #1 on "blue widgets" and now you're #50, this is not your thread.
This thread is exclusively for the MIA, the forgotten-souls who have been relegated to the Outer Siberia of the Google Index where even those who know and love you cannot find you.
I know of lots of other sites that are similarly effected.
One thing I have thought of and Marcia touched on in another thread is that my site has started to get listings in Yahoo and Ask - I am wondering if a psuedo directory that uses Yahoo or Ask results is now inflated my backlink count enourmously and pushed me into a sandbox type situation.
A search for keyword1keyword2.com lists my site in position 23 like this:
keyword1keyword2.com/
Similar pages
I recently used google's remove pages tool to get rid of many pages which were banned by my robots.txt (Google had been ignoring my robots.txt). For those that don't know, Google's remove page is just a way of forcing it to use your robots.txt, which it should be using anyway. The pages that I wanted removed were several hundred contact forms which differed only in the id of a querystring.
I have an affiliate skyscraper banner on the right-hand side of some of my pages (for a complementary service to the one that I offer).
Up until this update I was not re-directing from the non-www to the www (I am now).
I have an Adwords campaign promoting this site.
It is not listed in DMOZ, but it is listed in Yahoo!
I recently changed the left navigation using rowspan, so that it appears after the main page content in the source code.
I did notice that there is now a keyword1keyword2.NET website that I had not seen before.
Can't think of anything else, still up-to-date cached version and pagerank of 4.
as far as sitewides: I have one site that disproves that and second thee's no way G would do that. It's plain stupid, unless it's done manually, and even then you can't be sure. Suppose I have a blog and forum about foot fetish (I don't. Really ;)). I also link sitewide to your political website, because I like it. It's just yourwebsite.com and it's listed along with the other dozen or so of my favorite sites, totally unrelated to foot fetish. Will Google penalize them for "having sitewide links" on 20,000 pages? How many of these scenarios exist? Way too many to start essentially banning sites based on that.
To add insult to injury... Adwords is now selling clicks on the term now to competitors and the top placed ad has our unique company name solely as the title which redirects to an affiliate tracking site for a major competitor.
Also I have several sited that dropped several places after Alegra but its normal and I can deal with that. However I got no explication for this actual mess.
sure he does. Just ask Geico and SearchKing
When comparing the sites MIA to our other sites that show up properly, I have found one main difference.
When searching mycompanyname.com the result displays just the URL, no title or description. When searching for www.mycompanyname.com the result shows the title and description of the site.
With the sites still showing up with a search for the unique company name, G returns the title and description for both Up until this update I was not re-directing from the non-www to the www.mycompanyname.com.
Upon further review of our sites, I notied the sites not showing up does not have one inbound link pointing to mycompanyname.com, they all point to www.mycompanyname.com. The other sites that show up properly has a mixture of inbound links to both the non-www and www domain.
Could anyone else check their sites that are MIA and let me know if all of the inbound links are pointing to www. I doubt much would come from it but it is the only thing i can narrow our sites specifically down to.
PS We do not have a redirect from non-www to www, nor do I know how to do this. Is this something most people do?
Will Google penalize them for "having sitewide links" on 20,000 pages? How many of these scenarios exist? Way too many to start essentially banning sites based on that.
Sorry about that, I should have been more clear. I'm not suggesting Google would ban a site for using those kinds of paid (i.e. run of site) links.
What I'm suggesting is that google simply stopped passing whatever benefit the sites on the receivning end of those links might have been getting (i.e. stopped the PR from passing, etc.)
It does look as if that might have been the case, as several of thse that were "artificial" Pr6's & PR7's have dropped to PR5 or less (while we maintained our "real" PR6).
I’ve stopped doing adWords any more because without the free traffic from Google it does not worth it.
What on earth does a paid advertising campaign being "worth it" have to do with free traffic? If a paid campaign isn't profitable, no amount of free traffic is going to make it so.
When searching mycompanyname.com the result displays just the URL, no title or description. When searching for www.mycompanyname.com the result shows the title and description of the site.
I hadn't checked that before (I had to click on the "repeat the search with the omitted results included" to see my site in the results), but this looks like an effect rather than a cause.
It seems to point towards a penalty being applied to my domain name (with the WWW) rather than any of the other theories.
" you find all kinds of weird sites above you (sites that link to you or mention you) and your site is way down in the results."
Yep! thats me. When I type www.URL.co---- It comes up #51. Other than that its gone.
You dont think google has added Brett's How to rank for search engines to the bad neighbor list do you?
:)Joking Brett
Site is close to 6 years old, It never came back to former top rankings from Flordia, but for most part pages showed up low first to third page results.
Now "poof the magic algo" has sent it into the abyss.
Weird its up in MSN.
Wish I knew what to do.
Other sites built the same way doing fine #1 to #3 on most pages.
The only explaination I can come up with is this site plays in a BIG Adword money area, 10 mil+ page returns, where the others are in more of a niche field.
Special algo for certain keywords?
Yes I know more competition makes it harder to compete, but to dissapear?
Build more niche sites.
All our sites are MIA (does this stand for "Missing in Action") in the sense that they used to rank #1 for company name (PR7's) but are now buried way deep.
My theory is a duplicate content filter (we were guilty) and I put this to Google by email. We actually got a quick reply which was a nice surprise but they assure me that we are not penalised in anyway. I am not convinced...
I have checked the home pages on those members profiles quoting them in this thread and need to let you know that you do have a duplicate content problem.
It seems to me that Google has gone OTT on duplicates and decided to shoot the whole site rather than the pages affected.
Places you might unknowingly have a dup problem:
1. News feeds / Syndication feeds
2. Bought in glossaries / other content
3. Accidently have a page appear under two URL's - this is easy to do if you move a page and dont 410 the old page.
4. Places where members can write - they often post there copy to more than one site!
If we all update our profiles to show our home pages we can all check this theory further.
from what Ii can tell: They'll you that ONLY if they didn't manually penalize or ban you. So, you're not "banned" but the algo ranks sites and we can't do anything.
On dupe issue: I have none of that dupe stuff, but how could G drop a site for posting for example a AP story, Reuters or a syndicated column story? Of if you have a forum and post the entire article (many still) or even a few paragraphs
exactly - it's not reasonable but Google do tend to over react.
For instance, what about cross linking penalties - why can't I link my sites together as it is a logical thing to do. If I were to design my sites without the search engines in mind I would heavily cross link them all. Tesco are allowed to put their car insurance leaflets by the checkout so why can't we do the same thing on the web without being penalised. The correct action would be to ignore links between sites of the same owner when calculating PR, not penalise the sites involved.
2:A site I control has disappeared completely for company name, was #1 for about 3 years. White hat absolutely clean
3:Strange one this, a site I have, niche deicated to one author, homepage has completely disappeared for search on authors name, was top 5 before, however internal pages have 100's of #1 matches for authors name plus any other relevant word!
Any ideas on this? point 2, when using the site: command the homepage is still there but is now listed as a supplemental?
one even has a wrong link: instead of [domain.com...] google links to [domain...] - google is broken imo.