Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.167.61.200

Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & andy langton & goodroi

Message Too Old, No Replies

My site has been First Now vanished from Google

My site has been the first of its kind, I drop off Google

     
6:35 am on Sep 20, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 6, 2005
posts:1
votes: 0


For the past year I have experienced periodically being completely dropped off Google. My site has been the FIRST of its kind and is in all the natural search results on the first spot. I'm just a small business, but since spet of 2004 I have been vanishing off of Google every 6 weeks or so--recently it has been more often and for longer periods. Does Google discriminate against Older sites? Are they doing it so that we will advertise with them? Any help, advice, comment from a desperate single mother of 4!
7:21 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 20, 2003
posts:197
votes: 0


web_seeker: i don't think its really a comparison as much as a memorial and a metaphor, perhaps it is a bit insesative.

so Rita sounds good.

7:38 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1678
votes: 71


Folks

Its a cease fire now, where Google engineers are doing some "damage Assessment" before the launch of the next wave of carpet bombing. The same happened during Allegra and Bourbon.

I see you also relaxing with Rita Garbo. Or was it Rita Hayworth ;-)

Next few days you migt discover that you are dealing with nothing less than The Terminator himself.

Enjoy the cease fire ;-)

7:53 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 25, 2004
posts:7
votes: 0


What's to enjoy? The results are still crap. ;-) I've even stopped using Google for personal searches because it's become impossible to find what I'm looking for. The good news is that if they keep screwing up this bad, we won't have to worry about ranking in Google for too much longer! They'll be going the way of AltaVista, Excite, Lycos, etc... 8-)

-- T

7:59 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 20, 2003
posts:197
votes: 0


"Its a cease fire now, where Google engineers are doing some "damage Assessment" before the launch of the next wave of carpet bombing."

you think that the updated DCs will go back to what we saw yesterday?

edit: it doesn't appear as a rollback tho, there are more results on the updated DCs today than there was yesterday and than are on www now.

8:01 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 20, 2003
posts:197
votes: 0


and BTW when i say updated DCs I mean:
66.102.9.104 and
66.102.9.99
8:18 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1678
votes: 71


stargeek

>>you think that the updated DCs will go back to what we saw yesterday? <<

Not at all. Take a look at one of the Dcs I posted and compare its serps to the one you posted, and you shall see the difference. Im gonna sticky you a keyphrases to save your time. You may wish to pay a special attention to first 10 results ;-)

66.102.9.104 stargeek DC

216.239.59.104 reseller Dc

8:20 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 20, 2003
posts:197
votes: 0


reseller: sounds good
so far i've been unable to see changes on that dc.

edit: OK now i'm seeing 3 different data sets on www, your dc, and mine.

8:27 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member steveb is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:June 20, 2002
posts:4652
votes: 0


There is no www.
There is no "google.com"
There are only datacenters.
8:30 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1678
votes: 71


stargeek

>>edit: OK now i'm seeing 3 different data sets on www, your dc, and mine. <<

Agreed.

Therefor awaiting for the emerge of The Terminator ;-)

8:46 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 8, 2005
posts:6
votes: 0


Happy last birthday google (we hope)
8:47 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 20, 2003
posts:197
votes: 0


"There is no www.
There is no "google.com"
There are only datacenters."

agreed, and i should correct myself because the dc you are seeing on "www" varies by location I believe.

Dayo_UK

9:24 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


Reseller.

Thanks but No way ;)

The Reseller update is perhaps more appropriate.

Although if G are after affiliate sites then perhaps that is not the correct term :(

Let GG name it then at least we know it is official :)

9:39 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1678
votes: 71


Here is a very interesting reading!

Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt said in a phone interview with CNET News.com (Published: September 26, 2005):

"We're announcing tonight that in terms of unduplicated pages our index is now three times larger than any other search engine," he said, without saying how many pages are in the index."

What did he mean by; in terms of unduplicated pages?

10:08 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member steveb is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:June 20, 2002
posts:4652
votes: 0


[google.com...]
"To see for yourself, try searching for something very specific, or try a query that previously returned very few results. For example, you could enter your name or hometown, along with your favorite color or animal. Navigate to the last page to see how many results the search engine really delivered. (On the last page, you may have to click the "repeat the search with the omitted results included" link to see all the results.) Do this on different search engines for several queries and see what you come up with. As you can imagine, we've run quite a few tests like this, and we expect your results will be very similar to ours."

Then, Google, you should be embarrassed. Forcing people to go to the last page to click a link to bring up your "real" search results is embarrassing to say the least.

Then, to state the obvious, no Google employee has earned the right to say "unduplicated pages". Google has not demonstrated *any* ability to know what those two words mean.

10:28 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 8, 2005
posts:6
votes: 0


"We're announcing tonight that in terms of unduplicated pages our index is now three times larger than any other search engine,"
........
how many of you fellow webmasters have 2-20 times more (ghost) pages then you really have?
I run a site with 1200 pages and a search site:www.mysite.com gives 11000 results! Is that the way google trying to proof that they have the largest index? Cary on Google...Keep on blowing the balloon until it booms......and then RIP.
10:30 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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


Is that the way google trying to proof that they have the largest index? Cary on Google...Keep on blowing the balloon until it booms......and then RIP.

[webmasterworld.com...]

10:32 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 31, 2003
posts:1091
votes: 0


(On the last page, you may have to click the "repeat the search with the omitted results included" link to see all the results.)

Not all the results but the most you can see is 1000.

10:36 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:June 6, 2003
posts:520
votes: 0


Guys just got in from a long day on my day job. Can someone fill me in?

Are we in the beginning of a new google update? Or is this the middle or end?

How long will this update last for?

Please Advise. I have not been kept up to speed on how google now updates their index.

Thanks in advance for your response.

11:03 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 9, 2003
posts:90
votes: 0


JoeHouse, no official update yet, just a pissing contest to see who has the biggest index... Slurp is going nuts & Google is inflating index count.

I keep asking myself, who cares who has the bigger index? I hate to say it but saying "Yahoo it" or "MSN it" doesn't have the same ring as "Google it". The only people that care IMHO who has the bigger index is the SE's themselves. Is all of this index count BS meant to drive stocks up or what?

11:05 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Jan 22, 2002
posts:959
votes: 0


> Is all of this index count BS meant to drive stocks up or what?

Possibly. It should be the QUALITY of the results, not the quantity.

I just wish Google would remember how they became successful and at least try and bolster their support structure for webmasters.

11:14 pm on Sept 27, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 9, 2003
posts:90
votes: 0


I sometimes wish I was back at my old job in TV (I was just a low level grunt) because someone needs to pick up this underground rumbling and make a national story out of it... there is a lot of "meat" to this whole SE war taking place... any reporter with half the knowledge of myself could make a great special about all of this.

The general public won't stop using Google even if the results get horrible because Google is so implanted into everyone's psyche... heck my grandmother that thinks her computer is haunted knows to use Google. Hmmm, were is Stone Phillips phone number :)

12:09 am on Sept 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 28, 2004
posts:112
votes: 0


Eric Schmidt:
"We're announcing tonight that in terms of unduplicated pages our index is now three times larger than any other search engine," he said, without saying how many pages are in the index."

That pretty much confirms that this "update" is not an algo change but, as previously noted in this thread, the inclusion or reinclusion in the index of many scrapers, near-duplicates, old redirects, deleted pages, URL-only listings, supplemental results, and other junk URLs.

All of them extremely information-rich and useful, I'm sure.

1:24 am on Sept 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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


That pretty much confirms that this "update" is not an algo change but, as previously noted in this thread, the inclusion or reinclusion in the index of many scrapers, near-duplicates, old redirects, deleted pages, URL-only listings, supplemental results, and other junk URLs.

Are you suggesting that the update (if it is an update) is complete? That doesn't appear to be the case, to judge from the minute-to-minute bouncing that I'm seeing for several competitive keywords and keyphrases.

1:27 am on Sept 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 28, 2004
posts:112
votes: 0


No, it doesn't seem to be complete. There are still pages being shuffled in and out of the index for many of the keywords I've been watching.
3:40 am on Sept 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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


>> No, it doesn't seem to be complete

It never is complete...especially in the begining of an update cycle. They're always fine tunning not to harm innocent sites.

5:46 am on Sept 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1678
votes: 71


Good morning Folks

Maybe we are just looking at the reason(s) why THIS update hasn't been recognized yet as an update.

It will be embarrassing for Google to say that there is an update underway to clean the index of duplicates while Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt announcing at the same time that Google ALREADY in terms of unduplicated pages is now three times larger than any other search engine.

Having said that, nothing done or said have dismissed the possibility of algo changes during this update or dismissed the possibility that they are also targetting sites/pages related to affiliate marketing among other things etc..

Lets wait and see what will happen during the next phase of this update ;-)

5:55 am on Sept 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 8, 2005
posts:6
votes: 0


good morning Reseler ,is not funny that this thread has now 48 pages and 477 messages ,but no ww insider(Brett or GG) has not mention anything yet?.(not even mention at the front page of ww)
6:23 am on Sept 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1678
votes: 71


I wouldn't blame our generous host Brett for anything. He said on September 22, "Lets put it on ice till something more definative comes up"

[webmasterworld.com...]

And neither GoogleGuy or Matt Cutts said anything definitive about this update yet.

Having said that, we should keep in mind that those two kind gentlemen are both employed by Google and we should expect that they are there to serve the interest of Google as commercial organization.

Moreover, neither GoogleGuy or Matt Cutts is expected to say anything that contradict what Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt say.

Therefor the killing silence of GoogleGuy and Matt Cutts!

6:24 am on Sept 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1678
votes: 71


by mistake have posted a duplicate while editing my previous post... sorry

[edited by: reseller at 6:25 am (utc) on Sep. 28, 2005]

6:25 am on Sept 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 28, 2003
posts:155
votes: 1


This update reminds me of 2002, when the Webseed network had a major penalty imposed by Google. Webseed was a network of content based sites; it provided the content management system and made it easy for writers accepted into the network to have their own domain and appear on the web without any knowledge of html.

That's how I started. There were thousands of content based sites in Webseed; many of them high ranking in PR and SERPS. Then the penalty came and the bottom fell out.

What Google decided it didn't like was Webseed's habit of linking "related" results from their network in the footer. What you had was thousands of sites interlinked artificially by Webseed. At first, it worked great - new sites got links from established domains and within a month or so were indexed in Google and off to the races. Webseed shared advertising revenue with the writers - sort of, but that's another story.

Anyway, somewhere along the line, Google decided that Webseed was little more than a link farm and thousands of innocent writers were left in the dust. Webseed folded. Writers with no HTML experience either left the web...or found a new web host and struggled to learn HTML. Like me.

I joined WebmasterWorld and learned what I needed to get by. I bought a domain intending to have the best site in my field and to work my way up to the top of very competitive SERPS - and I made it. I provided original content for hundreds of projects and occupied the top of the tree for the past three years. Now I'm in the toilet.

Why am I feeling deja vu? Because in my haste to put up pages, I used a simple navigation system...home page, description of the separate sections, plus links to "featured" articles; sitemap, a simple listing of all pages with complete urls; and then separate category indexes, almost like subdomains, to allow me to offer a thumbnail pic and description of the various projects available on my site. And on individual pages, I gave a hand selected (not dynamic) list of "related" pages on my own site that readers might find interesting. I should have learned from Webseed's mistake!

For months now I've been feeling disheartened...because the site that dominates the SERPS for my search terms is a directory...all it provides is links to other pages on other sites. Those links are buried in the page under the heading "Free Widget Plans" or whatever...below the listings for Amazon books, with text description of the book about widget plans that is relevant to many other affiliate offerings but only incidentally to the "content" of the page itself. If you can call links to pages on another site your "content."

This is NOT a scraper site. Links are hand selected and do have some relevance. But still - they are just links, never mind that this site is in DMOZ as a "directory" and is obviously regarded by Google as the world expert in my field. Bah...

Here's the conundrum for me: this site is doing fine and dandy, thank you, because none of the scraper sites bother to scrape a directory that is little more than links itself. What scraper sites hunt for is sites like mine...those with original, valid content that until now were regarded with some respect in Google.

Not any more. Apparently, because I have linked to my own pages with snippet keyword phrases that make sense to readers, I'm now a "spam" site that is worthy of nothing more than supplemental index.

I haven't returned a reciprocal link for ages. I get natural links and think that should speak for itself.

I was proud of my site and what I had accomplished. This update makes me ill. I'm now being outclassed in a lot of search terms by Amazon book ads. So much for Google's slimmed down index...I'm sure that readers looking for solid information on the net are going to be thrilled with links to books they can buy at their local Chapters.

This 1014 message thread spans 34 pages: 1014
 

Join The Conversation

Moderators and Top Contributors

Hot Threads This Week

Featured Threads

Free SEO Tools

Hire Expert Members