Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.167.40.25

Message Too Old, No Replies

Does [site:example.com ***] really show only Supplementals?

     
12:05 pm on Sep 14, 2006 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:May 27, 2005
posts:614
votes: 0


According to other sites this hack shows Supplemental Results.

If so I have over 11000 which is totally crazy.

(Make sure you have a space between example.com and ***)

Also are there other hacks like this around. There were allusions to others but no definite examples.

[edited by: tedster at 4:25 pm (utc) on Sep. 14, 2006]
[edit reason] use example.com [/edit]

7:17 pm on Sept 14, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 13, 2004
posts:801
votes: 2


It appears you are correct. I believe it does only show the supplementals. Excellent!

Supplementals can be outdated copies of pages with outdated URL paths, so there could be many, if you've changed your directory or navigational structure.

7:21 pm on Sept 14, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:May 26, 2000
posts:37301
votes: 0


I first ran into this Google hack trying to research which urls they had indexed without the "www" for a domain. So I tried [site:example.com -www] and [site:example.com -inurl:www] -- and noticed that I was getting an all supplemental result (but unfortunately for me, it included urls with the "www").

I'd still like to find a way to get JUST the no-www urls. However, the way this buggy result actually works is probably more widely useful.

7:53 pm on Sept 14, 2006 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 30, 2004
posts:234
votes: 0


** seems to show the same result - saving one keystroke ;-)
8:10 pm on Sept 14, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member

joined:July 26, 2006
posts:1619
votes: 0


That's awesome! I've been trying to figure that out for months. Most of mine have very old cache dates so once google makes it around I feel pretty good that they will pull out of it. At least that's the wish I'm putting on the google altar ;)
8:51 pm on Sept 14, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:July 6, 2005
posts: 95
votes: 0


One thing I did notice about using this command, it puts the page title and snippet in bold, well at least on my machine it does.

It does appear to return a fairly accurate count of supp pages.

9:55 pm on Sept 14, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 29, 2005
posts:45
votes: 0


The snippet in bold I think is a way to give quick guidance on where the dup content is.

At least in our cases. sometimes is the title (and it was guessed right as the title was duplicated) and sometimes the descriptions, which is not taken from meta tags but from portions of the page. Stiil: outlining (hem! bolding) where the problem is.

10:16 pm on Sept 14, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member

joined:Apr 28, 2006
posts:1043
votes: 1


I tried this.
the result returned more pages then what the regular site command shows, wierd.
10:22 pm on Sept 14, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:June 20, 2002
posts:4652
votes: 0


It does seem to show more than the -www ways. It also changes every few times I refresh the page now.
2:33 am on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 3, 2005
posts:1585
votes: 0


site:example.com ** keyword

In this case keyword is bolded as expected but also some words around it are bolded, duplicate snippets maybe?

ps

keyword **

Exibites similar behavour

[edited by: daveVk at 2:52 am (utc) on Sep. 15, 2006]

4:03 am on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 1, 2003
posts:1201
votes: 0


For me it shows pages as supplemental that are no longer supplemental (ranking page 1).
5:12 am on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 3, 2005
posts:1585
votes: 0


widget **
** widget
red ** widget

Gives phrases starting with widget, ending with widget, starting with red and ending with widget. Number of stars not important?. Must has some notion of a phrase.

5:17 am on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 5, 2002
posts:872
votes: 2


Right Kirby. A new page that I created on 28th last month is shown as a supplemental with Aug-30 as crawl date. That page ranks top-10 for a 2 word phrase and isn't supplemental in SERPs. I guess this hack is best taken as a time pass.
6:13 am on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:June 20, 2002
posts:4652
votes: 0


That seems to be a good use for it. It isn't that a page "isn't supplemental" but rather that there is a hidden supplemental for regularly crawled page. This is never good, although it may not harm you noticeably either. You should examine such pages for possible issues, like duplicate descriptions, etc.
6:45 am on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 5, 2002
posts:872
votes: 2


You should examine such pages for possible issues, like duplicate descriptions, etc

Steve, can a page which is a hidden supplemental for some issues, rank for any competitive keyword and not show as a supplemental on regular SERPs?

8:47 am on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:June 20, 2002
posts:4652
votes: 0


Sure.
9:25 am on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:May 27, 2005
posts:614
votes: 0


This is not good news ... some of the sups are from Sept 4, it looks like an entire major section of my site has gone supplimental
10:22 am on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 17, 2005
posts:41
votes: 0


Didn't actually get the meaning of results this query is producing
site:example.com ** keyword
Listing pages from the site having the keyword in the page content or in the url.
I get different result sets for the queries :
* keyword
** keyword
and keyword ** and so on.
These wild card characters along with the search keyword produce results with a no. of other words being higlighted on the result pages.
10:48 am on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:June 19, 2002
posts:1945
votes: 0


site:www.domain.com *** x results

click page 2 or include omitted reults and the number of results switch again

11:26 am on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 3, 2005
posts:1585
votes: 0


** Widget seems to mean phrase ending with widget.
Widget ** phrase starting with widget.
Other combinations like red ** widget and ** widget ** do as expected. What I find interesting is what constitutes a phrase boundary, seems to be some symantic analysis or possibly repeated sequences? Yes there is some difference between * and **, * without keyword returns no results. Used without site: non sup results are returned.
1:31 pm on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member

joined:July 26, 2006
posts:1619
votes: 0


Just playing with possible operators I did this

site:www.mydomain.com +++

results came up some supp .. some not. Any ideas of what the plus operator pulls

I also noticed with the *** the results come back bolded. Anyone else seeing that?

2:30 pm on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 5, 2004
posts:45
votes: 0


Yup, and if you search site:mydomain.com "*** it bolds the description too :)
2:56 pm on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Jan 9, 2005
posts:1092
votes: 0


[google.com...]

show 10,500,000 results ;-)

4:56 pm on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:July 8, 2005
posts:15
votes: 0


For me, it's showing almost my entire site with a cache date of May 13.

Most of my pages have been updated since then but all retain the same URLs.

Ridiculous that they would have these.

5:23 pm on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

5+ Year Member

joined:Sept 13, 2006
posts:144
votes: 0


How can I see the rest of them... say result 1,001 to 1,050?
6:33 pm on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

5+ Year Member

joined:Sept 13, 2006
posts:144
votes: 0


By the way we did 301 redirect non-www to www and...
searching inurl:www.example.com shows "1-91 of about 94 results" and only the last 3 are supplemental results (94 - 91 = 3 ). All the rest (thousands) are probably supplementals but I don't know how to confirm this.
6:48 pm on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 5, 2002
posts:872
votes: 2


Has anyone seen any site that doesn't show sups with that hack?
7:01 pm on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:May 26, 2000
posts:37301
votes: 0


I can't find such a thing. There are Supplemental versions of most urls thatare also showing in the main search results, but they all have earlier cache dates.

This supports what many have been saying all along -- there is no inherent reason to be concerned about a Supplemental Result, per se. But studying Supplemental results can be a very good tool to highlight various problems that DO exist. Sometimes they just pop out at you.

7:19 pm on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

5+ Year Member

joined:Sept 13, 2006
posts:144
votes: 0


There may be no inherent reason to be concerned about supplemental results per se, but there is a cause for concern when a particular search once returned results from example.com and no longer does ... unless you add additional words (that no real searcher would add) that flips the "return them supplemental results" switch.
8:49 pm on Sept 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:June 20, 2002
posts:4652
votes: 0


"there is no inherent reason to be concerned about a Supplemental Result, per se."

No it means the exact opposite. Having these hidden supplementals should concern everyone a lot. In most cases such a listing is a sign of a problem or potential problem. Even if some problem has not asserted itself yetm like if you have not been hurt by duplicate descriptions, you should take care to fix problems.

A supplemental is always a problem, usually a major problem. Even if you are ranked #1 for some term and there is a hidden supplemental, you should be very concerned. It is never, ever a good thing.

This 51 message thread spans 2 pages: 51