Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.210.27.34

Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi

Message Too Old, No Replies

Google Update Bourbon Part 3

     
8:35 pm on May 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 18, 2004
posts:321
votes: 0


Continued From:

[webmasterworld.com...]



My whole site has a new cache date of May 25th. Maybe once these other sites around me get recached, I won't hold such an honorable top position. But at least Google has found my pages worthy to sit in the Search again.:) It seems strange to look at the stats and see Google in there, after 6 months of just seeing Yahoo and MSN referrals.

My website has plenty of outbound links, but they are on relevant pages. The problem my site has always had, was a lack of "inbound links." I got tired of searching for people to link to me (with all the spammy sites around) and gave up. So my pages have acquired some links naturally I guess(and I'll bet I still don't have more than 30 inbound links for the whole site) Still have a PR4, which I've had since it disappeared in Nov.

[edited by: Brett_Tabke at 8:54 pm (utc) on May 27, 2005]

10:50 am on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 21, 2005
posts:2264
votes: 0


I saved off the first 1200 or so posts coming back into town, and got to read the first 550 or so on the plane ride back.

That's admirable. Now why can't I get employees with that level of committment instead of lazy louts who take two weeks off each time they sneeze? (No, and before you ask, I'm not running the offices of a borough council)

11:12 am on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:May 13, 2003
posts:151
votes: 0


That's an obvious one - do you provide scooters, pool tables, lava lamps, and lunchtime massages in your office?!? I thought not ;-)
12:00 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 21, 2005
posts:2264
votes: 0


LOL. And here's me thinking it was his love for us Webmasterworld members :)
12:24 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 8, 2004
posts:527
votes: 0



I want to know if the "somewhat more changes" will include rescuing the websites stuck in the Purgatory.

But, more importantly, I want to know who many posts GG had to read before figuring out I'm the biggest whiner!

;)

</whining></boatloads>

12:26 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:June 1, 2004
posts:1987
votes: 0


There is hope yet!

Some url-only and/or MIA pages now have cache dates of 30-May... No pages had been crawled since 20-May.

Maybe G is saving the best for last :)

12:32 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Dec 29, 2003
posts:5428
votes: 0


are you employees multi-millionaires because of your stock options? ;)

"That's admirable. Now why can't I get employees with that level of committment instead of lazy louts who take two weeks off each time they sneeze? (No, and before you ask, I'm not running the offices of a borough council)"

12:47 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 28, 2002
posts:564
votes: 0


There's been quite a bit of off-topic stuff in this thread so I hope everyone will forgive me for pointing out that, Walkman, that's an incredibly irritating quoting style you've developed recently. Automatic quoting is disabled on this board for a reason.
12:57 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:May 25, 2005
posts:7
votes: 0


I concur. Please stick to the topic! I don't want to read about your personal lives and vendetta with Google. I want to read ABOUT Google.
12:59 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Dec 29, 2003
posts:5428
votes: 0


sorry to incredibly irritate you,
just on a 500 post thread it's hard to know who said what and to whom.

on another note: they are days I feel grouchy, mad at Google, mad at God, or the mailman or whomever, but I keep don't take the anger out on other people.

1:02 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 29, 2005
posts:49
votes: 0


Google Guy

Another thing I have seen posted about is 301's being ignored ...

Well I have had a 301 redirect up from a domain to my main website (refered in my previous post)for well over a year now.

However in the allinurl: command I find 92 listings from this other domain.

This site did not always have a 301 up ... but the main site was reorganised approx 6-9 months ago and the listings found under the other domain include pages created during this reorganisation. The 301 has been up for much longer than this. It appears that google has decided to attribute these pages from my main site to the site 301'ing?

How is this possible?

The other thing is we removed php sessions off the site in september 04 i find over 100 duplicate entrys for our quotation page (now defunct serving a 404) with differing php sessions. Now you would have thought that these would have fallen out of the index .. obviously not!

The most rediculous thing is if you do a allinurl: command on the other domain it only comes up with 11 pages yet 92 appear in the allinurl: command for the main site?

What is going on?

There is soo many problems i cannot begin to even explain.

Will bourbon sort out these problems? I doubt it can untill the spider takes the whole site.

Cheers,

Broker Boy

1:10 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Dec 29, 2003
posts:5428
votes: 0


anyone noticing heavy crawling? I can't access my logs right now..
1:27 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1858
votes: 106


Folks

Iīm talking in general, and this post isnīt directed to any specific fellow member.

If you spam Google with thousands of spam useless pages:

- You are going to hurt me and thousands of other content publishers.

- Your spam pages are going to push my content pages down on the serps to places where they neither belong or deserve.

- You are going to encourage others to spam Google and hurt me more.

- You are going to kill Google which still bring me referrals though allegra took away 75% of them.

- As a publisher I have my differences with Google, but I still wish them well.

So please..

You want to talk about spam and unethical methods.. find some other places to post...

Dayo_UK

1:50 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


reseller

I am sure that your traffic will return now a 301 is in place. (Well 95% sure)

But it takes a while.

Unless Google is about to change the way it handles things.........

1:53 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 9, 2004
posts:139
votes: 0


Folks
Iīm talking in general, and this post isnīt directed to any specific fellow member.

If you spam Google with thousands of spam useless pages:

- You are going to hurt me and thousands of other content publishers.

- Your spam pages are going to push my content pages down on the serps to places where they neither belong or deserve.

- You are going to encourage others to spam Google and hurt me more.

- You are going to kill Google which still bring me referrals though allegra took away 75% of them.

- As a publisher I have my differences with Google, but I still wish them well.

So please..

You want to talk about spam and unethical methods.. find some other places to post...

Spam will stop growing only when Google starts to tighten their Adsense policy on scraper sites.
Giving the option to adwords advertisers to block their ad from displaying on scrapers is NOT GOOD ENOUGH and will NOT stop the growth fast enough.

Unfortunately, spam will just double in $ize with every update and Google shareholders are the ones to rip the rewords.

[edited by: max_mm at 1:57 pm (utc) on June 1, 2005]

1:57 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1858
votes: 106


Dayo_UK

>reseller
I am sure that your traffic will return now a 301 is in place. (Well 95% sure)<

Thanks for the kind encouraging words. And thanks for suggesting me to do the 301. Much appreciated!

2:03 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Full Member

joined:Jan 12, 2004
posts:334
votes: 0


Nope URL cant be allowed - best to edit out. - thanks.

Also the tool is not much use really - as you have found out yourself.

Although some urls are displayed they are normally connected to this site. EG - A google search of this site or a link to a tool at Search Engine World - in essence a sister of this site

<snip>

Ok, it's the first hit, the UK site. So now, can others check this? It has to mean something because my sites that were NOT affected don't show they've been banned.

[edited by: lawman at 4:26 pm (utc) on June 1, 2005]
[edit reason] Neither Tools Nor Links To Tools Allowed [/edit]

Dayo_UK

2:06 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


Clint.

The site just seems to check if your url is listed. A ban from google would mean even your url would not exist in the system.

EG - search for www.yourdomain.com and nothing comes up.

You may have a penalty - but a ban would mean no listing at all.

Not what I meant regarding urls being posted - sigh

2:15 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1858
votes: 106


max_mm

>Spam will stop growing only when Google starts to tighten their Adsense policy on scraper sites.<

But until then, we all can do something about it by reporting spam to Google

[google.com...]

Can you imagine the power of thousands of content publishers reporting spam directly to the folks at Google?

Call it operation "Help...Self-Help" ;-)

2:24 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 21, 2005
posts:2264
votes: 0


Clint, I sent you a sticky to explain why we're picking on ya :)
(It should clear up the questions you have about the linking policy here)

reseller, do you have any reason to believe G actually does anything with those reports?

2:29 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 9, 2004
posts:139
votes: 0


Can you imagine the power of thousands of content publishers reporting spam directly to the folks at Google?

I don't think they even look at those reports anymore. LOL, they are probably working on an algo that automatically index those reports and places them in a junk folder according to relevance. The algo has a problem with redirects and the reports end up being deleted.

It is all about the money now my friend. Nothing more nothing less. Stuff content as long as viewers click ads and dollar targets are met. That’s G's new mantra unfortunately. Spam makes thier shareholders lots of $$. Why fight it?

2:55 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Full Member

joined:Jan 12, 2004
posts:334
votes: 0


Clint.
The site just seems to check if your url is listed. A ban from google would mean even your url would not exist in the system.

EG - search for www.yourdomain.com and nothing comes up.

You may have a penalty - but a ban would mean no listing at all.

Yeah, now if we can only determine WHAT that "penalty" is for, we'd all be in much better shape!

Dayo_UK

2:59 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


Duplicate Content Penalty!

You have domains with the same content as your main domain.

You also have duplicate content on your non-www and www.

We have gone through this - I have recommend the apache forum where if you explain your circumstances in full - no doubt someone will help you.

You can ignore this advice or take this advice or you can keep on thinking that it is something else - upto you.

3:10 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1858
votes: 106


oddsod

>reseller, do you have any reason to believe G actually does anything with those reports?<

I really donīt know, but hope so.

Maybe GoogleGuy can tell us more about it.

3:27 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Full Member

joined:Jan 12, 2004
posts:334
votes: 0


Duplicate Content Penalty!
You have domains with the same content as your main domain.

You also have duplicate content on your non-www and www.

We have gone through this - I have recommend the apache forum where if you explain your circumstances in full - no doubt someone will help you.

You can ignore this advice or take this advice or you can keep on thinking that it is something else - upto you.

Naa, not everyone trashed has dupe content. I've by no means been ignoring your advice, in fact, that's what I've been working on for the past 2 days. Some are helping me via Sticky Mail, but it's not working. So right now I'm about to go over to the Apache forum to try and find out how to edit my htaccess file for my domain redirects and www/non-www issue. I know the latter is of no consequence because I put the headers of the poor content, spammy, irrelevant sites that are now in top positions through the header checker, both their www and non www versions, and unfortunately they are all showing the exact http code 200 as mine are showing. :( So, apparently the dupe issue with www and non www versions isn't the cause. (I fail to see why G would penalize sites for that anyway since it's THEIR fault for indexing a www site and the non www version as separate sites and dupe content when it's not).

Dayo_UK

3:34 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


Well - Cool as long as you are looking into this. :)

Tell me (well dont - just trying to underline a point/theory) if you had a site which had sub-domains on the following lines:-

hotel.domain.com - PR7
holidays.domain.com - PR8
travel.domain.com - PR0

and they all had exactly the same content of a hotel directory - do you think Google would index all three? or look to ban three? or of course ban two and keep one?

Well hopefully best case senario is that it may keep 1 - previously you would have thought it would keep the one with the highest PR - well that aint always the case so it may keep travel.domain.com - rankings dive.

It may well be exactly the same situation as domain.com and www.domain.com - if Google cant realise that they are the same site then one or both will get a penalty.

Just a theory.

3:37 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1858
votes: 106


Clint

You may wish to view the following 3 threads concerning 301:

[webmasterworld.com...]

[webmasterworld.com...]

[webmasterworld.com...]

3:46 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 19, 2005
posts:367
votes: 0


It is all about the money now my friend. Nothing more nothing less. Stuff content as long as viewers click ads and dollar targets are met. That’s G's new mantra unfortunately. Spam makes thier shareholders lots of $$. Why fight it?

max...

Adsense is an expense to Google. It is the Adwords advertisers that generate the jackpot for everybody to take their cut. Made for adsense spam hurts everybody except the scraper/spammers. It would seem to me that you are way off target with that statement. You are right that Google is concerned about their bottom line...and I would hope they are concerned enough to get rid of these parasites.

3:46 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 22, 2003
posts:118
votes: 0


www/subdomains

What if....

<<
hotel.domain.com - PR7
holidays.domain.com - PR8
travel.domain.com - PR0

and they all had XXexactly the sameXX SIMILAR content of a hotel directory
>>

Suppose you tagged two of those sites with [google noindex nofollow] so they would still appear in other SEs?

Would Google ignore the duplicate content? (Anyone experimented with this?)

Also, on a single domain site, I have pages that are very useful to customers that Google is showing as URL only - I'm hoping that [google noindex] will let me keep using them without an effect on other pages in the site....

How effective is [GOOGLE, NOINDEX}?

Dayo_UK

3:52 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


Wattsnew - I was talking about exactly the same content. Not almost the same content :) - Hopefully Google would just down rank one with similar content (depending on the search term that returns the most relevant site). Depends where the line is of course.

Eitherway IMO robots.txt is a better option that NoIndex in both the cases you explained.

4:06 pm on June 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Oct 27, 2001
posts:10210
votes: 0


Dayo_UK, if a site owner had three subdomains with identical pages, why shouldn't Google ban all three? Surely you wouldn't argue that the site owner wasn't trying to spam the index?
This 789 message thread spans 27 pages: 789