Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
Continued from:
[webmasterworld.com...]
The same down-and-on problem here in Turkey.
But j3 goes on and off. No steady results. At least three different sets:
216.239.63.104 (I think with additional tweaks)
64.233.161.104 (still J2)
64.233.179.104 (J3)
That is my point. I am dictating new content every day and moving forward. I encourage others to get on with business also. Google will settle with time.
It is just I still remember the times when I used to first post here.
Times were very very different, happy days :(
It is just I still remember the times when I used to first post here.Times were very very different, happy days
The good old days hey Dayo, when this was a happy and fun place and rankings where not an issue :)
on 64.233.179.104 I just observe that much more results come here.
A project of me gets predominantly only Mozilla Bot visits (30.000 per day - the normal Googlbot 1.000 per day).
All these URLs visited by the Mozilla-Bot are visible on this Datacenter with cache!
On other Datacenters only the pure url is shown from these URLs!
It really hurts when you know you have a unique value site but yet are unable to show this to google or work out what you have done wrong. I appreciate Matt and GG are in a tight spot and can't admit any google failings but all we require is a simple answer to a simple question - Are we being penalised?
Meanwhile, just get on improving your sites...
Upto data Cache (deffo Moz Googlebot) - or old cache (maybe normal Googlebot)?
Ollllllllllllllld cache for me.
[edited by: Dayo_UK at 11:51 am (utc) on Dec. 6, 2005]
also, using macdar, the results are different than if you type the DC into your browser - this happened the other day as well. for me, the results on the above DC (when typing them into my browser are the best)
B*gg*r Me. (well dont)
You are right - I have pages crawled only my Mozilla Googlebot showing with up to date cache!
Unfortunately a lot of it is hidden under supplementals for a site:domain.com search for me.
Intresting though.
>>Spam reports are probably little more than a way to stroke you. I would expect that they have their own ways to look at things. Remember that they have their own chosen people evaluating the results. <<
You are totally wrong on this one.
Of course Google has its own spam detection methodes and tools. And yes Google has its own people to do the job. And if you are referring to "Google Eval Lab" of bunch of merry students chasing shadows and call them spam-killers, I and most of us here would just laugh.
Unfortunately, the tons of spam on Google serps show exactly how uneffective the folks of Google have been until now. I can't give exact examples in respect of the forums TOS. However, several fellow members have stickied me examples telling sad spam stories.
And how about the canonicals and supplementals issues? if the folks at Google have been so good at it, why the Hell those killer problems are still there?
When our kind friends GoogleGuy and Matt "Inigo" Cutts, have asked our webmaster community for spam-reports, most of us responded positively and acted in good faith. We seek co-operation with the folks at Google, and of course we expect them in return at least to keep us informed of updates and changes which affect our sites and business.
We are not asking for favors from the folks at the plex. Its just fair to expect them to meet our co-operation with co-operation from their side too.
If our good friends at the plex GoogleGuy and Matt Cutts, prefer to keep silent and not keep us informed. They themselves have chosen not to co-operate with our webmasters community. And they in turn shouldn't expect from us neither to report spam or send them feedback in future. The choice is GoogleGuy's and Matt's!
It hurts to feel irrelevant and to learn that you have been stroked.
But let us not mislead people. Google does as Google wants.
Spam is there regardless of "tons" of spam reports. And it will be there. So the wise go on with business and let others dither.
There does seem to be some results added by Mozilla Googlebot on that test DCs.
The serps are still a mess though - eg these results are just underneath all the supplementals etc on a site search.
Eg. for a site:www.domain.com www.domain.com you get pages and pages full of crap supplementals with the recently crawled pages at the bottom.
An utter pathetic mess. Unfortunately.
Cant seem to fix the underlying bugs :(
Of course if we knew what G were doing we might say progress - but from the outside looking in - it just looks like cr@p
I dont even know if GG visits this thread anymore but more constructive feedback - you know me - getting frustrated ;)
Say I have a site that 18 months ago was ranking OK, gets a good crawl which is still sort of visible with some supplemental pages....
This site declines in reputation for whatever reason (canonical, hijack, just because).... and the site does not rank aswell or get crawled as effectively... would the supplementals which were crawled when the site was well thought of then be able to outrank the currently cached pages of the site with its current reputation.
EG. What I am seeing is old supplementals outranking the new cached pages - it seems to have thrown the whole site askew and G can no longer determine the root.
I understand your frustration I'm in the same boat as you along with Dayo and many others but I really think you should try to chill a bit bud
I cant find any url only entries on the test DCs for the sites I monitor....
Must be some (esp for like links to major sites which have banned indexing in robots.txt) - but a lot less at any rate..... hopefully the clean up of supplementals will follow? and then hopefully that will resolve the determing the root page problems, hijacks, canonicals and world peace. (Perhaps not the last one.)
That is being very optimistic though.
Many older sites have big problems. And I think I know why: They changed their structure too often. My main site exists since 1999 and I changed URLs more than once. Also my site used to be found under several domain names.
After allegra I did a huge cleanup. All old domain names are 301-redirected to my main domain. However there still remain supplementals with so many old garbage. Even for an long time abandoned IP-address supplementals are still to be found.
I can see Googlebot trying to crawl old domains and old URLs. Why don't they stop doing that? I've tried everything, mostly 301 redirects but also 404 and 410 responses. Why does Googlebot still want to crawl these sites? Simply stop that! Or stop that after 6 months but stop that!
My dream is a Google reset button where I can tell Google: "Okay forget about the past. This is the new version of my site. Delete everything you had crawled before from my site and start again."
GG and Matt - you're about to loose your biggest fan reseller. Don't risk that. Tell us what is going on.
[edit]clarified a bit[/edit]
I'm beginning to think it is not worth the effort to
continue with Google
I still have some URL-only on this DC, but they are ones that I've specifically excluded in robots.txt. I changed robots.txt recently, but some of these URLs (for example /cgi-bin/ types) have always been in my robots.txt
I cant find any url only entries on the test DCs for the sites I monitor....
For one of my sites, they query "site:domain.com" comes back with three results:
domain.com
sub.domain.com
domain.com/page1.html
None of these are URL-only. All have full descriptions and titles. But keep in mind that this is "1 - 3 of about 305,000". Most of these are URLs for pages that I have blocked via robots.txt. Many others are pages that have been 301'ed. But a few are links to pages that are still there and that are not blocked via robots.txt.
The query "site:domain.com -sub" returns 171 pages, ALL url-only!
The query "site:sub.domain.com" returns "1 - 1 of about 302,000". That 1 result is the same as the 2nd sub.domain.com result from the first query above. Link title and description are both present.
I don't know exactly what is going on here, but it seems that any time you have modifiers on site: queries (such as my "site:domain.com -sub" query), old results are pulled.
I really wish that Google would clean this stuff up. These SERPs seem to have been really inconsistent for a long time now.
And FYI, all of these queries were done on 'www.google.com'. This isn't even the test DC...
-S
yes, there is some action. Compared to my local Google some articles gained positions, others are gone.
That one singular-plural article I'm spotting for is now #1 again on that DC for the singular key phrase.
Keep on spotting guys...
[added]
results on 64.233.179.99 seem to be older ones. None of my latest sites show up on them. Also it has a more pages in the index from my main site than on my local google.
[/added]
How does that compare to the test DC though?
lol WebmasterWorld will not let me call you by your real nick.
That's funny! Must be the triple-x. :)
The test DC shows similar results. The site:domain.com query has about five more pages, all with titles and descriptions. The site:sub.domain.com query shows some recent changes to my site and thus more pages. The "site:domain.com -sub" query shows about 50 fewer pages. More of the pages have titles, but there are still plenty with URL-only.
-S
Please don't be offended, but your experience with a site in operation for 8 months hardly qualifies as definitive. You seem to be smugly self-confident because your site is weathering this storm unscathed, but there are many watching this thread that could say the same things you are saying, but have been inexplicably hurt by this update.
Our main site has thousands of natural incoming links, etc., etc.,and although we have seen several important positions drop, we have also seen many rise to the top. Overall, we seem to be about even.
But you are ignoring the fact that with this update, many sites that practise the most blatant spam techniques actually seem to be doing better than pre-Jagger. So if you think that your simple formula is responsible for your good fortune, you may be wrong.
BTW, the uptick in traffic since December first is called the Christmas Holidays.
[edited by: texasville at 4:58 pm (utc) on Dec. 6, 2005]
