Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
Yesterday, September 15, Google once again scrambled their data centers so now my site that got lost in June and was lost for 32 months but came back in the beginning of August, just vanished from the Google earth again. Pages have gone supplemental and old cached pages is now in favor in Google.
I do NOT understand WTH is going on with Google. Sites that has replaced mine ar site with stolen content, blog-like sites with stolen content, sites that for some reason have some of the keywords on their site but doesn't have anything to do with the subject.
if you were looking for a cat in NJ then there are sites with NJ repeated in the body hundreds of times, nothing about cats at all. One I saw has "scat" and NJ but WTH?
[edited by: tedster at 6:33 pm (utc) on Sep. 16, 2006]
for many terms I was on the first page high results, now im low I can even be found.
Now the crazy thing. I search for my own site name (also domain name) and im result #7!, directory sites and sites that link me are ranked higher, so something must be wrong big time.
Unfortunately it's my main source of income :(
All I can think it is, is duplicate meta tag content. Many of the words were similar in the keywords and description tags. I have removed these and have my fingers crossed hoping for the return next month.
Big Disaster. Any other words of advice? cheers
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm..
Moreover there is a pagerank update for some sites. I am 100% sure because one of my sites I launched 6 months ago has dropped from PR5 to PR4 on the following datacenters :
66.102.7.99
66.102.7.104
216.239.59.99
216.239.59.104
66.102.11.99
66.102.11.104
216.239.57.99
216.239.57.104
66.102.9.99
66.102.9.104
216.239.53.99
216.239.53.104
This is not a rollback because the site has never been pr4 since it launched.
[edited by: Frederic1 at 8:41 pm (utc) on Sep. 16, 2006]
The cache date for one of my sites is September 12, 2006 - just a few days ago. The description that appears on the SERP is old and looks like it might be from the DMOZ description. The page title is not what is currently in use either.
And just to make me feel worse, it was only a few days ago that results were looking very, very good. It's all gone to the dogs and I'm crying.
Last night traffic went from about a thousand visitors from Google per hour to about 10. My pages are still indexed, they have just lost their ranking. This web site has not changed substantially for months except that we have gotten choosier about the new content that we allowed (it's a user-created info site) and we have recently added RSS feeds and links for our users to easily add their articles to social bookmarking sites. This has greatly increased our backlinks, which makes us wonder if this caused some sort of penalty. (We had been gaining about 100 natural, unsolicited backlinks per day for years.)
We're also wondering if the fact that we've gotten pickier about the content we allow has gotten some of the SEO's mad at us and one of them did something to get us de-ranked? I don't even know if that's possible, but I do know that our competitors who allow all kinds of user created content (pharma, mortgage, gambling) have not been hurt.
In fact.. google appears to only be showing about 15 pages deep of sites for several keywords right now.. I wonder if it is not done with it's internal updating, or has had a hiccup in the process?
Sites that have taken those positions seems to have a lot of foreign language links that are not relative content.. perhaps it is wieghing the older sites with the search rank...
I am soooo tired of trying to chas the google dragon, I am so tired in trying to do what other people are doing, I am soo tired of changing my sites, getting there, and then having it all change again.
Google says make your sites users friendly, if that was all it took my sites would be in flash.. and google would never see them.. aw well, maybe the update is not complete, and perhaps google should come up with a way of only making completed databses appear public so we could have fewer ulcers..
my 2 cents..
The issue I'm still struggling with is whether it makes sense to adopt this tactic. In particular, I wonder how much risk there of "overdoing it" -- if a site that only has organic links wakes up one day and starts rapidly accumulating unnatural inbound links, will a dramatic increase in inbound links trigger filters or penalties which either damage the site, or make the exercise a waste of money?
Assume the site is not willing to take any risks with outbound links, so there would be no change in the historic pattern of only having useful, relevant outbound links that are interest their users.
Any insights would be appreciated -- especially if they are backed up by actual experience.
one questions: for those that experienced significant drops on google, do you implement heavy link exchange? how does the dropped sites work on the link popularity side? appreciate for any responses...
Google shows whole site indexed in google but huge drop in rankings for all related keywords.
It shows up for domain name only.
and if i search for www.domain.com it shows up #7.
Whats going on with BIG G?
Another data refresh/update or a penality to my site?
I didn't did anything tricky to rank higher.
IS THIS THING TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT?
one questions: for those that experienced significant drops on google, do you implement heavy link exchange? how does the dropped sites work on the link popularity side? appreciate for any responses...
I operate a large user created content site which for years accumulated about 100 natural links per day. About a month ago we implemented a few features which aided our users in adding links, such as RSS feeds for individual user content and easy to use links which allowed users to "tag" their content on some of the popular social bookmarking sites. The results was that we started getting about 300 links per day.
At this point this is the only thing that I can think of which could have triggered a penalty for us, though I really do feel that these new links are still "natural".
I'd like to know how many of the sites which were hit hard use the nofollow attribute in any of their links. We just started using them a few months ago on about 10% of our pages. I haven't been able to get a straight answer from anyone from Google about if using nofollow for outbound links can hurt a sites rankings, which make me think it can under certain circumstances. If your site was hit, please post whether or not you use nofollow. Thanks...
[edited by: tedster at 12:48 am (utc) on Sep. 22, 2006]
[edit reason] no edit here - admin error! [/edit]