Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
AlexK, that's a different domain. But the point is very well taken. You've found a pretty obscure query (~295 results) that the keyword stuffing spammers like to target. I'll check this out in more detail.
[edited by: Brett_Tabke at 1:03 am (utc) on Nov. 12, 2005]
I am the tipical update loser. florida, jagger whats up next.
Every time when I thing I do everything good and can not be hit. there is some update.
I am the tipical update loser. florida, jagger whats up next.
Every time when I thing I do everything good and can not be hit. there is some update.
emulate........waiting for finished jagger´s update
It's good to know there are other people in the same boat.
Come back alta vista eh!
Bek.
jajaja
tienes suerte con tu jefe ;)
Norma, Inglés por favor! Es bastante dificil entender algunas mensajes en Inglés, sin escribir en otro idioma....jajaja!
jajaja
tienes suerte con tu jefe ;)
Translate: You are a lucky man :P eazygoin ;)
bekyed: We have a t-shirt in our club which say: Only googlebot visits our page
Anyway had a quick look at this thread and seen GG said things were likely to go the 9 way - ouch for one site of mine. Anyway that's bias but for the keywords I watch the serps were looking pretty iffy. I hope the flux GG spoke of will clean up the mess I seen, if not I can see a lot of manipulation coming. (not from me)
Someone mentioned about the irrelevant results for 3 word keyphrases - i seen a lot of this. Results in the top 10 that had zero to do with the search i was making. They were appearing simply because the three words were in the page text - useless. I hope the flux will rectify this.
On a lighter note from me, G has finally found some appreciation for one content rich site of mine it's had in some kind of hate box for 2 years except for Google Images. Plus another site that I put online at the start of October is still hanging in there. That pleased me.
cleanup
Can you sticky me about sept 22nd please :-)
Is that for your sites or in general? I am certainly not seeing great results in general.
Mods may remove but it shows a good example of what I'm talking about. (no sites of mine show)
eg:
[66.102.9.104...]
What those result show in nonesense. Maybe GG could pass some comment.
One other thing i noticed this morning. When the results show is it normal for some of your search words not to be made bold? On a number of results i looked at there was no bold for the kw in the url, some did some didn't. The one's i noticed didn't had repeated kw's in url. Is this common and something i've missed in the past?
Is that for your sites or in general? I am certainly not seeing great results in general.
Not specifically my sites but the sectors I know well and have watched for the past 5-6 years.
I don't have time to watch millions of other search results.
I'll leave that job to Google ;)
Other keywords I am watching did not moved since yesterday. I hope that this is not the end. There are still some areas that needs cleaning up.
GG - only posted this morning that there is still flux to come.
I think/hope that for most sites we are only seeing first order effect on that DC.....
What i look at is all over the place.
Dayo_UK
I hope so too ;-)
(my first post in 3 years of reading through here, better late than never i suppose)
>>For Reseller: we covered a vast array of topics. To avoid academic research bias, I sectorized the group to cover different search arenas: research, hobbies, commercial, and so forth. Also note that these guys are not school kids.<<
Thanks for feedback. Much appreciated.
I wish you stay with us and start a new thread about the same. That would give us the right place to discuss the subject. I think your subject deserves a thread by itself.
You are here among friends :-)
Not to much so far.
Just because the site:domain.com shows domain.com first does not really mean any improvements.
However, I am seeing some sites where search site:www.domain.com www.domain.com shows the www.domain.com first - these sites are what I am watching at the moment - They do show slight improvements.
EG - I wonder ever so slightly if the first ordering is obv. what we are seeing by just doing a site search - the second ordering is actually applying rank to the pages based on the first ordering. (I dont know - just guessing)
The first ordering however, is still not 100% correct on sites that have problems.
I have a site with homepage PR of 4.
So the interior pages should all be, baring any strange activities/links, PR 4 or 3.
But this is the weird thing, the page is pretty new, only been through one PR update and I am quite sure there are no links to it other than interior links.
So why is it PR5?
Hmmmm.
Sticky me if you want to see.
Now, like it or not, as a measure of quality, the tests were sound. The sample size was reasonable. The results conclusive. Google was vastly inferior to MSN and Yahoo on this measure.
Personally, I have seen some terrible results in the few weeks.
So, your ratings "sweep", like in radio/TV/print, depends on when you do it.
I would be interested in seeing what your experiences are over (a) a wide range of DCs, and (b) a weekly basis. Only then can we tell what the actual end-user experience will be.
If I check .9 for my main key phrase from my desktop PC, my site is at number 1.
If I check the same DC from my laptop.....my site is nowhere!?
What?
Now, where did I see that plumbers course advertised?
Has it psread through all the DCs and visible to the public?
Thank you.
