Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
>>i have sites with hardly any content on them, but because they have no ads, they are craled and indexed perfectly. I have sites with tons of unique content, but have ads. Which have been effected badly.<<
The sites with unique contet could have been dropped for other reasons (than the presence of ads) which are discussed on this thread.
So, how in Google's robotic eyes are we Offensive?
RE reseller's prvious post :Its the combination of these 3 things which might results in a site being marked as Offensive:
- Presence of PPC spots
- Presence of affiliate links either as such or with a short snippet (ending sometimes with something like: learn more..)
- Lack of real content
I.e we are talking about Thin Affiliate
Something in the same direction as per "Google Spam Recognition Guide for Raters".
basically we are not talking about websites being penalized, but sections. And the sections include ads
I'm sure that most of us could cite examples of pages that have ads and/or affiliate links but do just fine in Google.
It's always possible that ads or affiliate links could trigger a penalty or filter if the site was already in a "grey zone" for other reasons, but that's only conjecture.
I placed an ad sense add on all my pages and the site dropped within a week.
Def "junk pages" site which has ppc source of income.
Ad sense and affiliates.
Googles Ad sense dep. shot the search engine department with the release of their publisher revenue source.
It gave the word a crapy web full of duplicate junk, and this stuff is only there because of revenue potential for webmasters.
I think the best things for a site to have is a paypal button or a shopping cart of your own and 'a join our affiliate' button, as this shows you offer your own products and people likely copy you.
You just have to think 'what is the ideal web?' and do that to your pages.
Or hide your affiliate link buttons on another site that you feed clients to from your main sites.
>>I agree with MikeD.
I placed an ad sense add on all my pages and the site dropped within a week.<<
But MikeD wrote:
" i have found adsense doesnt effect my listings, but other types of ads will."
So as such, AdSense alone hasnīt affected his site.
>>Or hide your affiliate link buttons on another site that you feed clients to from your main sites.<<
Why should anybody do that. Nothing wrong with affiliate marketing. It is a legit business model, and I personally encourage people to joine reliable affiliate programs.
I understand from GoogleGuy and from "Google Spam Recognition Guide for Raters" that it isnīt the affiliate marketing that they are targetting, but Thin Affiliates.
>>Hi reseller-
As far as real content goes, our site has enough "real content" to fill up a shelf at Barnes & Noble- and it's all original. We use a minimum of PPC per month. The affiliate marketing, by comparison, is maybe less than 20% of our total content pages, which are updated several times a week. We have numerous up-to-date quality press mentions in many top newspapers and national publications, on and offline.<<
Congrats. It sound like you have a great site.
But even great sites drop from the index or lose ranking on the serps. We read also on this and other threads that even some educational non commercial sites dropped. Thats how the new Google operates, unfortunately.
However, and as I mentioned previously, sites might drop for other reasons than the presence of PPC, affiliate links and lack of real contents. Educational sites are a good example of the dark sad side of what has been taking place since Feb. 2005.
A general statement which isnīt related to this particular post.
And NO..NO. Iīm not Anti-Google at all. But when I see decline in Googleīs serps quality, original sites dropped, duplicated sites still there, spam sites still on top of the serps while Mr. Eric Schmidt keeps talking about "large Index" instead of QUALITY serps.. then I feel sad, frustrated and speak my mind.
Instead, Google ranks first:
a supplemental result...
that recently reappeared after six months after having the URL removal tool used on it...
that has a cache from three days ago, which does NOT include the search term...
that has ransom note from the page from last year...
that only mentions the word once in the body text
Google folks, this is miserably incompetent search engineering.
As of a few days ago I have put up a new page on the URL of this supplemental result, which for a site: search shows a fresh date with the proper ransom note of a single link to my sitemap. Still, Google ignores the currently cached content of the page, and instead ranks it based on what was there over a year ago.
I put a page back up on this URL so I could get it crawled and 301 it somewhere so that it would no longer show up. Now it seems I am going to have to do whatever it takes to make every Supplemental listing disappear, otherwise Google will insist on ranking that first for any search for words on those pages.
MSN and Yahoo! BAN SITES that have this kind of adsense.
Don't put all your eggs in the same box.
You can easy rank on Yahoo and MSN without using Adsense pasted in your pages. Think create separate sites for them.
Keep talking
Yes Steveb
I am seeing this also - which takes me back to my post to see if the homepage seems to have a problem.
But yes I am seeing this with internal pages too - A freshly crawled product data page being beaten by a supplemental page that links to the product page from November 2004 which is now a 404.
Whoever, made these decisions - I hope you are not to arrogant to correct them.
The calculation of Canonical URLs still does not work - whether this was broken when the 302 thing was patched I dont know - but why oh why have you let this continue!
Supplementals Index - are you having a laugh? - Pages cached a year ago out ranking pages cached days ago? Pages that have long been deleted on the site still appearing.
Please Google dont be to arrogant to fix your problems.
Cheers
Dayo :)