Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
I'm thinking its time to move ahead and stop waiting for Google to somehow get right, to one day see all my dropped pages reappear.
So what to do? Options:
a) move ahead with new work and just try to forget the dropped pages/content
b)start over in some way... post the missing content to a new site and hope for the best
c) what else? Any ideas out there?
I've been ignoring this Big Daddy topic for a while because it doesn't affect me. Dozens of clients, all with normal, regular sized websites and NONE (that are out of the G sandbox) are affected.
That tells me something. I'm guessing Cutts' spam crew is up to something.
No offense to anyone with a 50,000 page website, but Google may simply not want your s**tuff anymore.
I see this as an indicator that Google is not fiddling with their ranking algo. If we can safely assume they are actually working at the 'plex, then my leap of faith is that they are fixing something in background right now.
Once I build a page, it's done. It may go through a few tweaks every now and then but for the most part, it is finished. Then I move on to the next page, and the next, and the next...I equate the chasing of the algo to those who are typically operating with a level of risk and like to be on the edge.
that posting should go straight into the WebmasterWorld library, nice one.
pageoneresults, message 17 of this thread
This also assumes that the person who is setting up the site/page knows how to best set it up right from the start. I suspect that pageoneresults does know that, but if someone who is less knowledgable has to keep going back and making tweaks to get the page as close to perfect for the engines as possible then that's what he has to do.
I personally do it exactly as pageoneresults does, but I do seo for a living so the pages are done well the first time.
No offense to anyone with a 50,000 page website, but Google may simply not want your s**tuff anymore.
yeah, throw these stupid amaz*ns and eb*ys of the index :)
maybe i can quote my wife here: size does not matter, it depends how you work with it *g*
but seriously: the changes and shifts in the last time are IMHO not depending on the size of your site, which can NOT be any indication of quality.
if you repeat 10000s of pages with:
green widget 1.99
blue widget 2.99
purple widget 1.49
without serious texts around it, you might have seen a drop with 10 pages to maybe 1 left over.
These changes right now are IMHO heavy dupe filtering and consolidation.
If you have a page with 50 named links to 50 different content subpages, it might be enough (for now) to just spider that 1 page, because you would be able to find the listed content on that page already... The rest will be spidered, if the level of pagerank demands it.
For my site, which went down from over 1M pages to around 200k, this would be an explanation. I have a lot of lets say "collections", which are made of single products (e.g. 6 or 8) bundled with a different price. But that one page links to the contained single products and if you know about that one page and you are a stressed spider, you might come to the conclusion, that you first should know about the bundles and then, when pagerank gets significant, you take the rest, too.
my internal pagerank is structured like that, it explains the drop from 1M to 200K, and basically makes sense in an academical way. That this might cut your traffic and income in half is your problem, not Googles... The downside of that is now, that people change their perfect site structures, which were for the users... now they shift to get the traffic with a "design for spiders", which makes no sense in an academical way. In their very good ways to fight se spam, google now triggers reactions of webmasters, which can not be good. But maybe it is the best way to clean the crap up?
2 pennies,
P!
Why should a small operation that knows nothing about Google loose pages? Because their internal pages are three clicks away from the homepage? Because they don't have enough external links pointing to their internal pages? Because they don't have enough PageRank?
I thought that was the big point Google was trying to drive home. Just run a quality site, the rest will fall into place. No, now the small operation not only has to build a good site, they have to go out and actively get links... something which Google never wanted to happen.
Google should perhaps be picking fights with SEO's and webmasters but when they go and kick mom and pop while they are sleeping... well, they just alienated allies with quality content.
Sure, it is their search engine, they can do anything they want. I hear people on here predicting Google's demise all the time. I won't do that. But this period of stagnation with the other search engines was an opportunity for Google to run away with the goal posts. They have not done that. They have not really improved their results by much over the last three years.
And I have to say that I am happy that they have not improved things much. (Their other web properties/endeavours are hurting beyond search which brings a smile to my face.) Their attitude sucks, they are arrogant. We are in time when things change fast. If they lollygag like this, I do expect something to come along that is better.
[edited by: arbitrary at 11:37 pm (utc) on June 2, 2006]
I do expect something to come along that is better.
Of course something will come along that is better. There is always something better. It is only a matter of time.
As far as Google SERPs go, what I have noticed is that the more specific the searches get the worse the quality of the results becomes. So if you search for 'widget' you are more likely to find a good site than if you search for 'blue small metalic widget'.
Back to my point about google ranking on page rank and links. Google claims its an up to date index? When is the last time you saw a pr or backlink update?
Just because it is not updated on the public index doesn't mean it is not updated in the back-end of the Google databases.
Their attitude sucks, they are arrogant.
hehehe, new economy 2.0 ;-)
I agree with some of your points, on the other hand I believe, the quality of the index improved in the last 3 years, but that involved a lot of victims from the small site owner side. That is the really sad part of that story, I would agree.
Cheers,
P!
Thus, index......
the quality of the index improved in the last 3 years, but that involved a lot of victims from the small site owner side. That is the really sad part of that story, I would agree.
There is a disconnect here; Google is not here to make anyone's business flourish (mom and pop or otherwise). It is, however, here to serve it's clients with the most relevant search results possible. I am not saying they are doing the best job of presenting relevant search results, but at the same time I can't complain if my site isn't showing up in the results, where I think it should. Google doesn't owe me anything.
I just think it is bad for Google's search results if they are making it more difficult for mom and pop shops to be found in their search engine... and I am not a mom and pop by the way. Back to the topic of this thread.
80% pages gone, 50% revenue gone. So the 800k pages made half the money while 1 fifth of the pages made half the cash.
So what do the remaining pages do that stops the revenue loss being 80%? An 80% revenue loss would make more sense, unless the remaining pages are more content rich. Im not saying the missing 800k were junk but they werent making the same bucks as the 20% that remain indexed.
I still think the missing pages issue is related to duplicate issues. Sticky me some sites to prove me wrong, it would be helpful.
All of those sites are maximum 24 pages ,does that tell you something ,in my opinion that is what Google wants small sites on topic and not heavy SEO.Can anyone confirm or deny this? Is it better to have smaller, on-topic mini sites, instead of broad and big sites?
I have over 30k pages spanning 7 years. I have not lost any pages and have maintained my high rankings (popular keywords and phrases) with Google, Yahoo and MSN.
I don't believe that the size of your site is the problem alone. Maybe in conjunction with some other variables.
Just went through this thread and only 4 are showing a home page in their profile, seems like these days WebmasterWorld is mostly filled with putative AS spammers...I'd guess that's about average for WW, but maybe you're on to something, although I would be the anomaly if you really meant to say "punitive ass spammers"?
Just went through this thread and only 4 are showing a home page in their profile, seems like these days WebmasterWorld is mostly filled with putative AS spammers...
Wow, there is some genius reasoning. We don't have our homepage in our profile so we are all spammers.
My site thats been going around for a few years has been losing pages like everyone else is down to 30% of my site showing using Link: command
But! a new site thats 1 month old now every page indexed according to link:!
So old sites lose pages new sites get fresh content in fine - this is just daft!
P.S
>We don't have our homepage in our profile so we are all spammers
its not the site in my profile - I'm a spammer too :)
Re: the BD issue, I'm continuing as planned with setting up quite a few new websites in a travel related framework. Apart from a possible issue with the use of nofollow which I've mentioned in another thread, things are going as expected.
Were all spammers, just some admit it and others don't. Who invented the term SE spam? Search Engines - don't believe the hype.
Everyone forgets that when their revenue gets cut someone got a boost, share the love guys.
*big hugs all round*
Back in the old days after an update, people would be posting this seems to work or that's a no no now, or ah I see they rate this now.
Whats this update out to prove?
Lets not have the usual its not an update rubbish, looks like an update, acts like an update, its an update.
Perhaps everyone is running adult sites and cannot post their hompage link.
;)
Bek
I wish it would take away some of those "post your review of TiddlyPlace" pages that have no info at all on TiddlyPlace, give us more of the pages that actually have something on them. [Even Y playing this game.]
only 4 are showing a home page in their profile, seems like these days WebmasterWorld is mostly filled with putative AS spammers
Can't help smiling when I read "Mom and Pop sites", there's usually a crappy SEO/over-enthusiastic amateur somewhere in the background...
Better to be a dumb ass amateur in the background, than a professional dumb ass in the foreground, eh mate?
