Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi

Message Too Old, No Replies

Are you in the new sandbox or gone for good?

And can you tell what the expectations of recovery are.

         

Whitey

7:47 am on Sep 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



There's a lot of information on sandboxed sites returning to the index, which tends to cover a multitude of previous "suspensions" and "filters".

These potentially have you in a prolonged suspense, review and release period. Then, if you haven't fixed things, maybe you are recaptured and given another good sandboxing for being a repeat "offender" and so on, until you're "gone" for ever increasing longer periods.

But since those earlier reports of "sandboxing" , Big Daddy has come and gone, and maybe new things can be added to the reason for a drop to the "box".

Many "repaired" sites are feeling the effects of delayed recovery, and several are reporting "dampened results", consistant with sandboxing symptoms . That is, if they ever return!

What what are you experiencing, and what are the prospects for recovery?

Maybe our good friends at the Plex can give us some insight into whether new features have been added to the sandbox routine, and what the effects and expectancies are.

Quadrille

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

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



"sandbox" was never about spam sites or broken sites - it's always about new sites.

Rules pretty well still apply; if you create a new site, expect 8-14 months of waitning for an appropriate stable listing in Google.

Speed up the wait by gradually building and extending and adding; not only content, but quality links (eg from quality directories).

Slow things down by adding a bunch of non-conforming redirects (ie other than 301s); or adding millions of machine generated pages, or clone pages.

Or rebuilding, renaming and otherwise becoming "a new site" all over again, which, surprisingly, may put you back to hour zero. All over again.

Additionally, and high risk activities in a new site become 'maximum risk'; joining link exchanges, for example, is SEO suicide for a new site. Joining spam directories makes Google laugh so much, you'll probably get delisted.

Etc., etc., All perfectly logical stuff, no tricks or mirrors required.

[edited by: Quadrille at 4:13 pm (utc) on Sep. 29, 2006]

Murdoch

8:26 pm on Sep 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Took Google only 14 days to index my new site (as of 9/22). Well, just the homepage for now but aside from some limited viral link strategy I didn't do anything special. I wonder what causes it from the getgo?

Quadrille

9:01 pm on Sep 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Sites can get indexed pretty quickly; the 'sandbox' is when their position in serps is unreliable; some sites get nicely indexed, sometimes too nicely, then disappear completely for a while, or zoom up and down. Once the 'unpredictability stops, you are 'out' of the sandbox.

It's all part of of Google working out the relativity of a new site, which is probably why sites that change a lot, or are complex, or break the rules tend to get it very badly.

Most of my sites are plain vanilla html, I never exchange links, but I do progressively add content - and so far all have had smooth beginnings (touch wood!). Except, weirdly, a couple of subdomains that just didn't quite settle down.

andrewshim

10:01 pm on Sep 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Sites can get indexed pretty quickly; the 'sandbox' is when their position in serps is unreliable; some sites get nicely indexed, sometimes too nicely, then disappear completely for a while, or zoom up and down. Once the 'unpredictability stops, you are 'out' of the sandbox.

Could this be the reason why I'm seeing a big reduction in pages returned in searches?
For example, two weeks ago, my main key phrase used to return 140 million ago with my homepage ranking #10. Now the same search returns 70+ million only with me ranking #7...

Also in another more competitive category, a two word key phrase used to give 260 million pages. Now it returns only approx 190 million.

Quadrille

10:25 pm on Sep 29, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Depends on the age of your site.

Do not forget, that Google has many datacenters, some experimental, so comparing a small number of searches is often unreliable.

Plus, of course, the srps change all the time - it may be a plain old fashioned change in your position!

If you maintain a spreadsheet of your key searches by date, a picture of what is happening soon builds up; and if you use Google's online spreadsheat, it isn't a big chore.

cabbie

12:00 am on Sep 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



I think you guys have it all wrong.
The so called sandbox is imo a filter of the commonality of backlinks to a site.
It can affect new sites and old sites.
It works like this.
Google is looking to present a variety of choices in its results.
For competitive terms this means they don't wish to display sites that share common or related backlinks, whether they be sites you own or don't own.
So if you have a site that has a listing in dmoz and a few blogsot links and maybe a few trades here and there, chances are that someone already has a site just like that in the serps.And guess what? For competitive terms they have too many choices to choose from to bother including another one like they already have.
This explains why some established sites drop off.They have been outdone by someone with the same related backlinks, only they are considered a little stronger now.
I also suspect google is treating links from huge sites like blogspot.com as links from the one site.
So if you have numerous backlinks from numerous blogspot.com's they will count as from the one site and therefore your competitor who also has blogspot links only with stronger pr will outsccore you and possibly take your spot in the serps.Chew on that!
It makes it very hard in my industry as we are alll incestuous in our linking .Which is another reason why expired domains do so well in our field.
they bring in a whole new linking pattern.

[edited by: tedster at 12:48 am (utc) on Sep. 30, 2006]

night707

8:01 am on Sep 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Once in the sandbox with a long established rich content site has made us given up on the idea of publishing. Google is too unreliable in terms of sending traffic. For some search terms we offer the by far largest amount of pictures and videos but G does not send any visitors whilst other sites with very little to offer even receive 2 - 3 listings on page No.1

That`s why our expectations are down at Zero and all ambitions have been shoved into the dustbin. Perhaps another search engine or directory will take over the market with better results.

Whitey

1:03 am on Oct 4, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



fyi - there is another thread which has some good inputs over here:

[webmasterworld.com...]