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)
Brett, Vitaplease, Or lawman, please put this thread out of it's misery, it is has gone astray, and it is totally off topic now.
Maybe an entire sub-message bored dedicated to data center watching and updates?
And yes, I know how to spell...
The "test" DC data is still hopelessly ancient. This DC seems intent on throwing me above 1000 pages again by refusing to obey any 301 from the past several months.
Hey Googleplex, what's up with that? Why do you insist on not obeying 301s, even ones you previously did obey?
>>The Jagger update was done a month ago. <<
Correct. But this thread is about Update Saga not Jagger update ;-)
And you may ask; whats Saga Update about?
The answer is: Its about Google attempts to correct things that hadn't been corrected by Jagger. For example:
- bring back the search quality to acceptable level
- 301/302 issues
- canonical issues
- supplemental issues
- cleaning spam
I hope this helps.
>>The "test" DC data is still hopelessly ancient.<<
Yes. Very ancient indeed!
I got wiped out at the start of jagger (went url only then supplemental)
Today, in the last couple hours, traffic has returned to semi-normal levels. While my google.com search still doesn't return my site as recovered, mcdar shows that it seems to be coming back on a lot of DCs.
<--- Stoked
>>MC says that where you might have a problem is when you have repeated sentences/phrases or pages on multiple domain, sub-domains and multiple sub-directories.<<
Yes. Thats how I understand it too.
I am seeing a lot of shuffling in my sector...
Well, hello, everyone. I took some time off of monitoring this thread to see if adding content and tweaking SEO would help where some of my sites have dropped.
I, too, see shuffling in the various niches where my sites compete ... and a part of me thinks it's crazy to try and tweak on my end when *G* has clearly not stopped the tweaking on theirs. I am happy to report that in all cases, I have seen a steady climb back up.
Most of my sites now have solid ranking, if not the stellar places they enjoyed in the SERPs before Jagger, so I don't hate Google.
I am still of the mind that content is always the answer, along with white hat SEO and strong relevant links, both reciprocal and one-way where possible. I have also taken a page from some of the early hints here and de-optimized some pages.
Just wanted to chime in and say hello. I can't say I missed the sage, but I always learn something when I read the threads, and I am grateful for the exchange of knowledge and experience.
I thought at one point, that link exchanges were being penalized, so to speak, but a couple of sites with stronger link programs didn't move down at all, so I am not convinced of that theory.
Any feedback?
I also made a few of "Jagger" reports to Google re" sites that were not relevant ... and in a couple of cases, there was a desireable change ... thanks to *G* for those.
Cheers, MJ
The 64.233.179.104 is showing as my default google.com also, in Central America
Has anyone seen this and had any changes afterwards?
The "test" DC data is still hopelessly ancient.Yeah, i'm still number one there.
We have a rule at home that I must go out in the garden when smoking. Great at summer time. Not great at such cold winter. I'm gonna report the family to Human Rights Watch org :-)
I wrote in a previous post that when testing some of my keyword phrase on the test DC, both Yahoo and MSN were on top 10 of the serps. Not because I have anything against the friends at Yahoo and MSN, not at all. But those two have nothing to do with my keyword phrase. I.e I was getting very poor serps as to search quality/ relevancy.
However, I can see now that the two sites are no more there at top 10 of the serps on the test DC when I run the same keyword phrase query. And the serps of the test DC look more relevant now than before.
But its still old files we are looking at when dealing with the test DC.
Wish you all a great X-Mas shopping Saturday.
Wish you all a great X-Mas shopping Saturday
Foolish wish to those who got hit by Jagger ;-)
Although this is a bit OT - maybe I did not explain myself to well.
Say you have three pages as such.
Page 1
Bobs Page on Fish
Fish fishy frog frog etc
Page hosted by mysite.com
Page 2
Claires Page on Dogs
Woof woof, Doggie etc
Page hosted by mysite.com
Page 3
Daves Page on Cats
Meow, Purr, Stroke etc
Page hosted by mysite.com
If you search on "Page hosted by mysite.com" Google would only return 2 results from your site then omit the rest. (with an option to show the omitted results) If you search on Fish "Page hosted by mysite.com" you get page 1 returned, Dogs "Page hosted by mysite.com" page 2 returned and Cats "Page hosted by mysite.com" page 3 returned.
Google have always done it like this -eg filter the results to 2 pages returned from a site - cant really argue with that IMO.
If what people are seeing is that Page3(or 1/2) would no longer get indexed due to the other 2 pages or Page3(or 1/2) is not ranking for the terms unique to them then yes G may have problems...
Hmmmz - about killing the thread - until this is settled I think it is best to have somewhere to talk about it - otherwise another thread will just get changed into the discussion of what is happening with the test dc etc.
I agree if people don't want to read our ramblings regarding what G is supposed to or not be doing then they shouldn't read it
As for happy X-mas shopping, not for me I'm trying to regroup and rebuild
Jagger is over - the saga will continue!
Or maybe it is some kind of a soap opera that will never end.
I see very static results over all DCs for my key phrases. My main site is still between heaven and hell. I don't expect anything will change in the next few days.
However there is still hope - meanwhile I do some offline work to make money and I'm going to start two new sites this weekend. (for Dayo: yes, I will lay some more eggs into some baskets ;-) )
We are talking about duplicate penalty for phrases. Not talking about the number of pages returning. One is penalized for having the same phrases in different pages in ones site.
I am quite surprised to hear that Jagger is over. It seems that Google is trying to figure out what it does. Based on all the changes, it seems they are smoke testing it.
Our decision is to let it stew and look at alternatives and our other profit centers. One choice that seems to have been offered by this saga is to strip Adsense from one site that has catalogs, and as a result, a huge number of duplicate phrases. If what I have gleaned from this board is correct, removing adsense will make it more popular in other search engines. If google has its dupe filters so high and is down to penalizing on phrases, we have to give up on them for that site.
Those of you who are watching data centers, keep feeding information. We will tell you how pulling adsense helps or does not help.
I've just removed a load of dupe content from one site, the daft thing is it was warning people to the type of content on the page, but as G is hitting me for that - or not depending on what you read I've now removed this! so to keep G happy I'm changing pages to please them - inst this daft, we were always told to build sites for humans not SE's now to please the SE's we are having to revert to pleasing the SE's first
I was just loking at a site where they have about 250 'widgets' for sale. Of those, about 200 have the same content, but the URL, model number and price are different. On checking, these are very high up in the SERP's.
There are many commercial companies who advertise space, or sell 3rd party products, and the webmaster has no input to the content, as the retailer writes his own product details.
I find it hard to believe that Google would penalise such a site, as they must realise that websmasters often don't write all the content of their pages.
I agree with Eazygoin - I personally dont think G penalize for that.
But what do I know - my site is doing cr@p too. :(
The trouble with 'playing with sites' to see what sticks is that the effects of changes may take weeks to kick in, even when the changes show in the cache. I'm sure google does this to create 'fog' for us webmasters. I think all external links take time to pass pr so experimenting with this is a long drawn out affair. Changing internal navigation may produce results more quickly. I would look at the following:
1) Back to basics. How would Google establish the relevancy of a page to a search term? The internal navigation from the home page must be an important factor. If a 'broad match' theme runs from the home page and each subsequent page develops and focuses on that theme, this could be a good signal. e.g. 'Widgets' links to 'big widgets' and 'little widgets' and these link to 'red big widgets' and 'red little widgets' ect. etc. In other words, creating an internal 'hilltop' structure which slowly focusses on a theme. Too much internal navigation linking to off theme pages may signal lack of focus and thus lower overall relevancy.
2) On theme topics that are not covered by your site should have external links to other relevant sites. This may be a signal of a genuine and comprehensive resource.
3) Comprehensive content. If google knows the broad match terms for a keyword, it will expect to see those words on a page.
4) Relevant links in. You may have lost the effect of previous killer links to your site. With Google's awareness of linking tricks, 'quality links' are more important than before. Other sites that link to you may have also fallen in value. Helping them may be another trick to help yourself.
Overall I think 'focus' is the key. Too much variation within a site may lower it's credibility. This could be flagged up by internal linking and, to some extent, the external links you have. If all your in bound links come from sites that are not focused on a theme, or from a site whose theme is not related to yours, they probably count for little. If your site covers many themes, you may fall into the 'directory' category. I suspect this will mean that you will usually be second choice to more focused sites. A few 'directories' do get good rankings for various search terms covering very different themes, but these are few and far between, and may be because the search phrase just happens to ring the right bells. These directories often only get rankings for the odd phrase but fail to pick up traffic for many phrases associated within a 'theme'. A niche directory will qualify for being 'a focused site' and pick up many variations. It seems that Google will show the odd 'preferred' directory and dump the rest in preference to more focused sites. So the trick may be to make your site focused and make sure this theme is reinforced throughout the site.
Just my 3pence worth...
Worth a lot more than that! Sounds like exactly what has happened to my site.
We sell 'widgetery' but obviously there are many kinds of widgetery and we sell all of it to one degree or another.
I have started to split the site up, building new sites focussing on each kind of widgetery - unfortunately our customers like our site *because* they can buy different kind of widgetery.
I've already started one seperate shop, and already Google links the two together - how can Google not think that we are just spamming Google by having four different sites selling widgetery which only appears slightly different when a machine is looking at keywords, and yet not focussed enough when on the same site?
We have gold widgetery, silver widgetery, costume widgetery and body widgetery - the site used to rank on page one for all four of those major phrases, but no longer, and nowhere at all for just 'widgetery'. The various widgetery sections are then split up into gold widgets, silver widgets etc, and then again into silver curb widgets, so we have a lot of subections.
I really wouldn't know how else to organise it. I've put the body widgetery on a seperate site on the premise that it would be easier to optimise the site for one two KW phrase than for several, but that site doesn't rank for that kw because it's 'sandboxed' (or whatever). :) Ok in MSN and Yahoo though.
< 100 'Different' sites all registered to the same person and on the same server and linking to each other (even for user friendliness) is probably entering spamming territory and will suffer imho. >
That very approach has worked extremely well for one site in my main sector, which is now number one for hundreds of kw's! I'm hoping they will suffer eventually, but I bet they've had a good Christmas!
