Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.221.49.52

Message Too Old, No Replies

Big Daddy Part 6

     

jdancing

5:33 pm on Mar 24, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



< continued from [webmasterworld.com...] >

It seems nearly all the data centers are showing some form of bigdaddy results now. I am not sure if there is a 100% bigdaddy/not bigdaddy distinction anymore.

The only two DCs I see that are showing different results are 216.239.59.104 and 66.249.87.104 and those results seem to be from late December, early January, at least in the sectors I monitor.

[edited by: tedster at 5:31 am (utc) on Mar. 25, 2006]

Seo1

4:10 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Jr

One more time

The site is not mine

I did a search for a crappy site....

that is what I found as an example.

You can chill with trying to teach me SEO 101

Thanks

Seo1

4:11 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



What is phantom traffic junior?

bufferzone

4:21 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Anyone knows how to formulate a search in Google that will present only/exclusively supplemental results for a site in the SERP. This could be practical when trying to change the title and META descriptions on pages where this is not yet done

JuniorOptimizer

4:30 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Phantom traffic meaning I can't see it in my version of Google, but somewhere out there on some data center is seeing it.

mfishy

5:19 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



1) Same title on all pages (as mentioned)
2) Same meta description text on all pages

I guess the moral of the story here is before crying wolf... read the google webmaster guidelines

Can you point me to the part in Google's "webmaster guidelines" where they talk about meta descriptions?

Seo1

5:44 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



[google.com...]

Create a useful, information-rich site, and write pages that clearly and accurately describe your content.

Make sure that your TITLE and ALT tags are descriptive and accurate.

Check for broken links and correct HTML.

Seems pretty clear but others may need to read between the lines.

g1smd

5:52 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

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



There is no <alt> tag.

It's an attribute. :-)

JuniorOptimizer

5:55 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Semantical pedantics fireworks.

nohllywd

5:58 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



has anyone else noticed when u do a search on g__gle and hit one of the results it sends you to a site of Their Choice?

g1smd

6:05 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

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



Yeah but, when the discussion moves on to talk about <title> tags and title="" attributes, people are going to get left behind if someone uses the wrong name...

Seo1

6:06 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



There is no <alt> tag.

It's an attribute. :-)

I took zee line from Googles webpage...

and to think the person who wrote it is probably a millionaire now ;-¦

Peace

bobmark

6:47 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



"Create a useful, information-rich site, and write pages that clearly and accurately describe your content.
Make sure that your TITLE and ALT tags are descriptive and accurate.
Check for broken links and correct HTML.
Seems pretty clear but others may need to read between the lines. "

Maybe we should have a contest to find the least information rich site with the least original content and the most duplicate content lifted from other sites and that ranks top 10. Can't be more than a few thousand.

JuniorOptimizer

6:54 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



All of my beloved lost traffic is back on [216.239.53.99...]

Does this mean I'm getting a payraise?

Seo1

7:07 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



All of my beloved lost traffic is back on [216.239.53.99...]

Does this mean I'm getting a payraise?

Well...only if you make sure you get other targeted traffic so the next time Google flexes...your boss doesn't lose money.

scenpro

7:42 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Are you sure this is the 'ONE' because if it is ( it's been flickering all day). I've been getting hits and when I check my pages are gone. I'll be very happy for the first time in a while

mahoogle

7:52 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Something is going on big today....Are traffic has just about dried up.

bobmark

7:57 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



" Something is going on big today....Are traffic has just about dried up. "

If you look at the pattern across dc's, this mess is a long way from fixed (unless Google thinks the BD index SHOULD contain hundreds of thousands of pages deleted in the past 6 months). If Google was a ship it would be taking on water and drifting aimlessly without power.

kamikaze Optimizer

8:03 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I do not know JO, but that DC which is showing 100,000,000 results for my KW has a news article Posted Tuesday, Dec. 17, 2002 in the top 10.

You figure it out.

Seo1

8:18 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



My clients websites are still ranked after a couple years on the front pages for highly competitive terms..whats with the date being an issue kamikazee?

gcc_llc

8:20 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



Traffic dried up today for me as well and that DC shows old supp results that were gone yesterday. Now they are back.

tebrino

8:20 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I'm not sure will it stay this way, but I see plenty of spam on first pages on some datacenters.

300m

8:21 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



I am starting to see a shift on various data centers. My fingers are crossed as I have been toiling away all winter making back up plan upon back up plan, just in case.

Edit*
Additional Info

I am going to assume this is only isolated to a couple of DC's as I am running kw tracker and i am actually doing well on that DC (which i have been doing all month long)

[edited by: 300m at 8:35 pm (utc) on Mar. 29, 2006]

kamikaze Optimizer

8:29 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Seo1:

The date of the article is an issue because USA Today, CNN, Fox..., blah, blah, all write about this KW at least once a week, for an example, right now Google News has 1080 fresh news articles for this KW, and that DC is showing one from Dec 2002, thats my point.

It is old, very old content to be on page one of a KW with 100,000,000 results.

scenpro

8:37 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I just did a cache check and one of my pages was from Dec 2005 BUT the rest of the pages around it were from March 26,27 2006
what than means I don't know. Another page I have was ranked so high on a very very competitive keywords it's ridiculous (for how long I don't know) Fool me once, shame...ect

smokeybarnable

8:38 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



so what do you think? Is it time to redesign the web site based on the recent changes or wait it out?

kamikaze Optimizer

8:55 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



SEO1:

yeah, the more I look at DC: [216.239.53.99...] I can just tell it will not stick, it certainly will not rollout to the other DC's.

I have seen this before, G has not added all the filters and/or brought in other factors, i.e. back links.

That DC is a carbon copy (with a few minor exceptions) of the live Google from three years ago.

Seo1

8:57 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member




Seo1:

The date of the article is an issue because USA Today, CNN, Fox..., blah, blah, all write about this KW at least once a week, for an example, right now Google News has 1080 fresh news articles for this KW, and that DC is showing one from Dec 2002, thats my point.

It is old, very old content to be on page one of a KW with 100,000,000 results.

------------------------------------------------------------

It may be old however it may be very very relevant and cited very well by Authority sites.

unfortunately you need to look past yourself and your feelings when loooking at things with Google if that makes sense...

kamikaze Optimizer

9:03 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



SEO1, please trust me..., I am not caught up in emotions, my site has never moved once, it just stays put right up top of the serps and does very well.

I know this KW better than anyone, I remember the day this article came out over 3 years ago, it is nothing special. It is not SEO-ed, in fact it is a PR0. It has zero back links.

I does not belong in the top 10.

300m

9:08 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



I can beleive KO's statement. I have seen several instances of old crusty pages that may have had some kind of relevance a few years ago, but is no longer relevant. Especially old news articles.

Seo1

9:26 pm on Mar 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Well after KOs description it and seeing others issues seems old black hat spam is back?

at a 100mil competing with no backlinks showing it wouldn't make front page without black hat bolstering it somehow..

This 218 message thread spans 8 pages: 218
 

Featured Threads

Hot Threads This Week

Hot Threads This Month