Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.146.248.111

Message Too Old, No Replies

17 Aug - Supplemental again

     

Northstar

1:29 pm on Aug 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



My site went back to being all supplemental again just like during the June 27 to July 27th mess. My traffic also dropped back down. Is anyone else having this problem again?

Halfdeck

7:47 pm on Aug 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



But the point is, why is it in the supps in the first place? That's the $million question. At the end of the day, it's unique content that's relevant to potential searches.

I'm going through some of my supplementals right now and asking myself the same question.

- Title/meta descriptions .. unique and descriptive
- Unique URLS .. bogus URLs blocked, entire site checked using Xenu
- No www/non-www issues, though I do have a subdomain.xyz.com vs. www.xyz.com/subfolder/ problem.
- Snippet searches reveal no dupes (though long tail searches wrapped in quotes using text off supplemental pages seem to pull up zero results)
- meaty unique content pages, 300+ unlinked text I wrote
- content positioned in source above navigation
- less than 30 outgoing links on a particular page I'm looking at
- pages all validate the last I checked.

What else?

Considering Google has been more picky about indexing pages, I wonder if the supplemental caches were refreshed but Google didn't then evaluate them for inclusion into the main index? In other words, before BD, pages would first appear on the main index then slip into the supps eventually. Supplemental Googlebot periodically re-evaluated those pages and some of them returned to the main index.

So Google refreshed its entire supplemental index, but post BD I see at least two major hurdles to jump over to get back into the main index: 1) no supplemental issues (i.e. identical meta tags, urls resolving to the same content, etc) 2) TrustRank/PageRank.

In other words, a perfectly structured page with original content can be stuck in the supplemental index just because the domain lacks juice.

/speculation

At this point I'm *this close* to generating a few non-commerical spam sites to get a better feel for avoiding the supplemental index.

wackybrit

7:49 pm on Aug 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



My site has consistently had great rankings for the last few years. Just today it's all gone to pieces. Traffic has totally crashed (from Google) by about 90%. It still ranks, but far lower. Still got PR 7 (for now) and 2500 backlinks showing in Google. It's a .co.uk domain. I've never had the flip-flop.. just one major crash today.

g1smd

9:28 pm on Aug 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

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



Oh. One other link in the chain that I forgot to mention is where a site links back to /index.html from every page, but Google chooses to list www.domain.com/ as the root.

So, the PageRank rests with the URL that is being filtered out as the duplicate. Fix that by always linking to http://www.domain.com/ from within the site.

Within weeks the root index page will gain PR, and that PR will spread to lower pages and help a bit with some types of site spidering issues too.

AustrianOak

11:44 pm on Aug 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



"My site has consistently had great rankings for the last few years. Just today it's all gone to pieces. Traffic has totally crashed (from Google) by about 90%. It still ranks, but far lower. Still got PR 7 (for now) and 2500 backlinks showing in Google. It's a .co.uk domain. I've never had the flip-flop.. just one major crash today."

I hear ya.. many of us are in this predicament. But wait.. don't worry it's for the "best" as I am sure google knows what they are doing. LOL

Sit tight and watch the last 10% slip away like mine :)

g1smd

11:58 pm on Aug 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

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



Look to [gfe-eh.google.com ] for the latest tweaks. Other datacentres are doing all sorts of other things.

Whatever happens over there (gfe-eh) is likely to be the basis for what goes live across the board in the next month or so...

steveb

2:01 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member steveb is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



Looks like you can identify a domain with troubles by this search:

site:example.com -wwww

That's wwww not www.

Supplementals appear above the index page and all other results.

AustrianOak

2:48 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



If this is true then 99% of my pages have gone supplemental.

wanderingmind

5:42 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Steveb, what's wwww?

And I have 90 % pages as supplemental too, with -wwww!

wanderingmind

5:50 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Matt Cutts says ---

"...this is the same data refresh from June 27th and July 27th, just being refreshed again. Weve been doing it for ~1.5 years at this point, and Id continue to expect that well just keep refreshing the data to that algorithm every several weeks or so."

Now how do we go about figuring out what is in our site (or Google's data) that leads to such huge ups and downs with a refresh...

icedowl

5:56 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Looks like you can identify a domain with troubles by this search:
site:example.com -wwww

Okay, but how can you determine exactly what the troubles are?

As far my sites are concerned, Google may as well not even exist. None of the site:example.com varieties mentioned in this thread bring up any results that I'd consider to be acceptable. The results at the [gfe-eh.google.com...] version are just horrible.

skibum

6:02 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator skibum is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



Look to [gfe-eh.google.com...] for the latest tweaks. Other datacentres are doing all sorts of other things.
Whatever happens over there (gfe-eh) is likely to be the basis for what goes live across the board in the next month or so...

Gosh I hope that doesn't stick. Doesn't look good right now.

indias next no1

6:59 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



i am also affected . eventhough my site contain quality content, now i am getting bad quality content sites with a high ranking in SERPs.

worried and the only thing i can do is to simply sit down and watch the progress. Is this is right? or i have to do something to get back my position. Any advice?

regards

maurizio63

7:33 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



Matt Cutts says, Matt Cutts says ... uff...
[google.com...]

maurizio63

7:44 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



[google.com...]

www.mattcutts.com/blog/ - 36k - Supplemental Result
cached: 14 Aug 2005 21:25:46 GMT.

Halfdeck

8:23 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



That's because he's creating cannonicals on purpose :) mattcutts.com/blog/ is in the main index. www version is supplemental.

mbucks

9:07 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



Matt Cutts was right all along; just some of the Google-speak was too cryptic to understand what the long term implications of some things really are; and I can see that there are certain types of spam that these actions can severely cripple; as well as legitimate sites where the owner does not take enough care with their site architecture, or cannot interpret the symptoms of what is going wrong.

I'm now sure you're right and this is where google needs to have a re-think. The owners of businesses with good, honest websites like ours seem to have little chance conforming to google's ever-evolving requirements.

The people that will have time, resources and eventual rewards when they

take enough care
will be specialists and spammers.

colin_h

9:24 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)



I agree with Mbucks. It's all well and good saying we're getting rid of spam (although I don't believe they are and can prove it, but I'm not about to get a load of good friends into trouble), but if it just means that the only sites that can get onto Google are the professionally built one - well, it's going to get very boring, very quickly.

It's just like the problems we're encountering all around the world today ... deal with one type of situation and you end up hurting a lot of innocent by-standers. Google used to have the reputation of seeing and nurturing the bigger picture, I think the game has got too big ... even for them.

Spammers Win .... Game Over ;-)

Cheers

Col

jetteroheller

9:32 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

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



The pattern of my infected domains:

All subdomains from me

a,b,c,l,n,p,r,w,www

Good from June 27 to July 26

c,p,r

Good from July 26 to August 16

l,r,www

Now since 17 July

r

night707

9:34 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



All important entry pages of a large quality content site are supplemental and traffic is down to zero since Aug 17 just like after June 27. Almost 1000 unimportant urls are not supplemental.

dawlish

9:35 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Very strange. One site which has been online since 2000 has been hit again. Made a recovery late July following the drop at the end of June and has now dropped off again. Home page has slipped a page or two for a number of terms and a significant number of the news items have gone supplemental.

Site is an specific industry news sites, not commercial at all. No banners, no adsense or advertising of any kind. Not sure why a data refresh has this effect. I wonder if the next data refresh will see it return again?

night707

9:40 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



dawlish

do you use google sitemap, tracking and the no index tag?

dawlish

9:58 am on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



night707,

No google sitemap, tracking or index tag.

Just a robots.txt file to exclude access to cgi-bin.

Northstar

12:04 pm on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



The worst thing about this is there seems to be nothing you can do to fix whatever is happening. When my traffic went down on June 27th I made no changes before that. When my traffic came back up on July 27th I made no changes. Now it is back down on Aug. 17th and no changes were made. My site was stable for years now in the last couple months it is on a roller coaster and I can't figure out why.

night707

12:21 pm on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Nortstar

exactly the same with my site. How do treat outbound links in general?

diddlydazz

12:47 pm on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Google really need to sort things out

this is getting a little beyond the joke

dazz

Northstar

1:47 pm on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



night707:

I run a directory/search engine site. I get thousands of inbound hits from reciprocal links per day. My sites is pretty popular but still half of our traffic comes from Google. That said, with Google controlling the 3/4 of the search market it is kind of hard not to rely on Google a lot for traffic these days.

night707

2:19 pm on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Northstar

do you know, if also sites without any link exchanges have gotten cut off from Google traffic by this June 27, July 27, August 17 rollercoaster. Are you selling outbound links?

Northstar

2:46 pm on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



night707:

No I don't sell outbound links. I don't think this has anything to do with sites doing reciprocal links. I have friends that run similar sites as mine and they didn't get hit on any of these dates. So far I don't think anyone has come up with a reason why this is happening.

JoeSinkwitz

2:47 pm on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member



I certainly noticed movement on June 17th (lasted 3 days for me in the abyss before returning), read the threads on June 27th without it affecting me, was in the abyss again on July 27th (for almost a week), and now this time just moved from #1 to #13 with a supplmental now listed as the first result on a site: command.

Aside from simply moving down versus dropping completely (was solid for a few years before June), it looks like the allinanchor reporting is now either discounting more of my links or is appreciably counting blog links for a few of my competitors whereas I didn't see any big changes on the last data refreshes.

We've all watched the MC video and read every thread on here when it comes to data refreshes, but I think we're still missing something. What is it that changes during that push time that wreaks such havoc?

Cygnus

Bewenched

4:51 pm on Aug 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



Ok .. so I go over to <an online tool> to run querys on cache date vs pages in the index.

What I found was the datacenters that show cache date of aug 11 have the most pages and the datacenters that show cache date of aug 16 have the least pages. At least for us. The swing in total pages is over 100,000 pages between the two cache dates and no major changes were made to our site.

I wonder when the next PR update will be.

[edited by: tedster at 6:06 pm (utc) on Aug. 18, 2006]

This 95 message thread spans 4 pages: 95
 

Featured Threads

Hot Threads This Week

Hot Threads This Month