Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.197.72.5

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

Message Too Old, No Replies

Part 3 Update Jagger

     
4:10 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:June 19, 2002
posts:1945
votes: 0


Continued from
[webmasterworld.com...]


if it rains they will need a replay!
4:15 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 20, 2005
posts:339
votes: 0


Anyone got any opinions as to whether a sitename.com and sitename.com/index would be considered as duplicate content?
4:26 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member g1smd is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:July 3, 2002
posts:18903
votes: 0


Yes it is a duplicate. End the link with the folder name followed by a trailing / on the URL.

Omit the index file filename itself from the link.

4:34 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 26, 2004
posts:1015
votes: 0


so what's the latest on J3?
4:39 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member g1smd is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:July 3, 2002
posts:18903
votes: 0


First effect might be that it sorts fully indexed pages (those shown with title and description in the SERPs) to the top, and URL-only listings to the bottom...

or else we are still waiting for it to actually start....

4:58 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:May 30, 2003
posts:932
votes: 0


Sorting: I think I'm seeing signs of this at 66.102.9.99 and 66.102.11.99.
5:07 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Oct 8, 2001
posts:2882
votes: 0


Would have thought GG would have jumped in over night (well my night) and jumped in if anything significant was happening on 66.102.11.104 & 66.102.9.104 (or .99 as people keep calling it.)

Sorry Dayo_UK, one of the other hats I wear kept me hopping yesterday. It looks like people probably noticed Jagger3 changes at 66.102.9.104, starting yesterday. I believe that data center includes Jagger1, Jagger2, and Jagger3.

5:09 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

joined:June 13, 2005
posts:199
votes: 0


66.102.11.99
66.102.9.104

all the new DC's show me my home page and MAJOR subsections now first on a site:www.example.com instead of the random mix u got before.

This is a definite major change. Generally traffix has dropped on my pages although I got an upgrade from 5 -> 6 on the homepage.. :(

[edited by: Ankhenaton at 5:10 pm (utc) on Nov. 5, 2005]

5:09 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1685
votes: 72


Jagger3 Beta-X

Hi Folks

To follow the progress of Jagger3, one can specify the DCs which have shown/ showing the different stages of Jagger3 while its in progress.

We can assume that the following DCs are showing at present Jagger3 Beta-2

66.102.11.99
66.102.11.104

66.102.9.99
66.102.9.104

While previously the following DCs had shown Jagger3 Beta-1 ;-)

216.239.53.99
216.239.57.99
66.102.7.99

What I like most in todays posts is that not so many fellow members are talking about Jagger2 and whether Jagger3 has started or not anymore. IMO, that shall allow us to focus on Jagger3 progress.

Good luck!

P.S. New part of Jagger3 thread has started while Im posting this message on the previous thread part. Therefore I'm posting this message again.

Dayo_UK

5:10 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


He he - Thanks GG

Is this DC still in flux - last night I noticed a few of my sites logically ordered in site:domain.com searches - not so many today.

Also.... I guess for us with Canonical url problems that if the homepage is top on the site search then it looks like G recognizes that as the homepage/canonical - obv canonical url problem sites have had crawling problems - Crawling likely to improve due to this?

So in other words - a way to go on this DC/new Index?

5:14 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

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


Still canonical problems it seems with Jagger3... :(
5:14 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1685
votes: 72


GoogleGuy

Thanks for taking time to update us in a Jagger3 weekend. Much appreciated. ;-)

5:15 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Jan 9, 2005
posts:1094
votes: 2


[66.102.9.104...] - so it it The Chosen One
My sites still doing badly :(
However, there is improvement in SERPs quality.
GoogleGuy, I am sure you forgot to give my sites green light :-)
Where do I report it?
5:15 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Oct 8, 2001
posts:2882
votes: 0


There's still a little bit of settling that will happen, Dayo_UK.
5:17 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 14, 2004
posts:199
votes: 0


How can we tell is our sites have any kind of indexing problems (canonical, dupe content) on the Jagger 3 DC?
5:17 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1685
votes: 72


GoogleGuy

When reporting spam, should the folk mention "Jagger" or "Jagger3"?

[google.com...]

[edited by: reseller at 5:18 pm (utc) on Nov. 5, 2005]

5:18 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

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


66.102.9.104

I'm not impressed yet with J3. It has picked the wrong home page [mydomain.com...] rather than [mydomain.com....] There is no reference to the non-www on my website. Maybe I should apply for a programming job with them.

5:18 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Oct 8, 2001
posts:2882
votes: 0


My sites still doing badly :(
However, there is improvement in SERPs quality.

I don't see that very often, idolw. :) If you want to report spam, then use the kw jagger3 at [google.com...]
But if you want to report indexing (non-spam) issues, then do a search on google.com and click the "Dissatisfied? Help us improve" link at the bottom right part of the page. Use the keyword jagger3 in that form as well.

5:19 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Oct 8, 2001
posts:2882
votes: 0


sailorjwd, there's still a little settling to be done in the next few days. Kangol, if you see your urls for the searches that you expect to see them for, you're probably in good shape.
5:19 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 30, 2003
posts:625
votes: 0


66.102.9.104

If this is more or less the final result then serps in my areas look good and solid. No spam etc

A little dull, in as much as there is little change, but then there never is in my area at update time.
All my sites are up maybe 1 position or so, so cannot complain

5:20 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:June 2, 2005
posts:4
votes: 0


Great, thanks GG. I think most of us suspected J3 at work on that DC. Do you know how long things will take to settle and then propagate to other DC's?

Dayo_UK

5:20 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


>>>>There's still a little bit of settling that will happen, Dayo_UK.

Last night I was very encouraged - the sites that I monitor for a site:domain.com search were in the format.

Homepage
Recently Crawled Pages
Supplementals/URL Onlys

Although I have seen a few sites where the homepage has not been indexed recently - and they were not in that format - so I guess it was below the recently crawled pages?

Soooo - even though the rankings (as in ones user use ;)) were still rubbish for the sites with the problem it looked like G understood the most important page - which is good for the future I hope :)

Today - not so many sites like that.

Ok - so let it settle before the Canonical url reports come in.

I bet you would be happy if you never had another one of those reports ;)

5:24 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 30, 2004
posts:234
votes: 0


Thanks GG. Good to hear that those DCs are jagger3 where my site is showing up again slowly.

Did some heavy removal of dupe content after being hit on Sep 22nd. I hope my site will return completely within the next few days. Is there a chance to see more of my site?

5:25 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 16, 2004
posts:308
votes: 0


GG - thanks for the update.

Just to confirm - if I want to ask about indexing problem; should I be clicking on the "dissatisfied" link now or what to see what happens over the next couple of days?

My site has plunged down the SERPS for nearly all keywords but I don't know why - is there still a chance this should change?

5:26 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member g1smd is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:July 3, 2002
posts:18903
votes: 0



What would you call a search where:

site:domain.com lists 400 non-www pages and ZERO www.domain.com pages, and

site:www.domain.com lists 70 www pages that are all old supplemental pages from a year ago?

Is Jagger3 going to fix this?

Note: the 70 www pages that appear in the site:www.domain.com search do not appear in the site:domain.com search! These pages re-appeared in the SERPs about 3 or 4 months ago, after having been previously fixed by adding the proper 301 redirect way back in March this year.

In some datacentres those 70 pages recently turned into URL-only listings, and in others they are still fully listed. Those 70 pages (and a few dozen more) are excluded by robots.txt as they are cgi pages. The non-www version of the same cgi pages has always been URL-only in the SERPs; Google respected the disallow right from the beginning.

5:26 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 14, 2004
posts:199
votes: 0


Thanx GG,
I started to see my one of my site (after 6 months) ranking in the first 30 results. Is great. I also rank for some of the internal pages :).
5:27 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 7, 2002
posts:63
votes: 0


GG,

Not sure if I have ever seen G offering the same page appearing at 2 different positions (url with no trailing "/" and the same url with a trailing "/").

Hope the proceeding flux sorts it out.

5:27 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Feb 6, 2005
posts:1685
votes: 72


Dayooooooooooooooooooo

Happy Canonicals Day :-)

I see you in business again soon.

Jagger3 ... You Rock!

5:29 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

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


Thanks GG. I shall keep my fingers crossed.

I also added a <base href to the homepage... maybe that will help?

Dayo_UK

5:30 pm on Nov 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


>>>I see you in business again soon.

Not counting chickens yet :)

I think the flux might bring more than a lot of people expect - eg sites which dont rank now Might be in a different position in a few days, and more sites will get effected after a good crawl.

This 516 message thread spans 18 pages: 516