Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
If your site is worth visiting you will be fine, no matter how heavy the storm is ;)
You can't really believe that.
I'm seeing a huge increase in number of listings ...
Yeah, me too. For instance, using a site: search today, my 1,400+ page site is now showing 12,900 pages, up from 4,600 for most of the last year.
So when I see a serp that jumps from 5,000,000 to 22,000,000 I'm a little skeptical.
Page counts in G may not be all that accurate.
[edited by: ken_b at 8:56 pm (utc) on Sep. 7, 2005]
I wish to recall a GoogleGuy post (in connection with Bourbon) which might be relevant to this thread. I regard it as one of GoogleGuy´s evergreen
[webmasterworld.com...]
-----------------------------------------------
GoogleGuy
Senior Member
view member profile
joined-Oct 8, 2001
posts:2827
msg #:5 8:07 am on June 2, 2005 (utc 0)
One thing that I noticed in the first 300 posts or so was a discussion about whether backlinks or PageRanks were also being updated at the same time. In general, I wouldn't fixate too much on backlinks or PageRank during an update. The external backlinks/PR that we show have at least a couple factors that complicate analysis. First off, they are a snapshot in time, and the actual backlinks/PageRank used for ranking are from a different time interval. Another complicating factor is that we don't show every backlink on Google; we only show a subset of the backlinks we have internally. [One of the things we needed to do on our webmaster pages revamp was to go back and make sure it's clear that we only show a sampling of the backlinks we know about, not all backlinks.] The snapshotting + asynchronous nature + subsampling actions means that it's pretty hard to trace the reason for a ranking change back to a particular exported view of backlinks or PageRank. This is an area where I wouldn't read as much into the particular backlinks or PageRank that you see at any particular instant in time. Also, if a backlink or PageRank external update happened at the same time as ranking changes, I wouldn't read too much into how closely in time they happen together.
Just as a guide for people who don't eat and breathe WebmasterWorld, we typically show new backlink sample sets every 3-5 weeks or so. We have a bank of machines that computes PageRank continuously (and continually, I suppose; I wasn't an English major), but we only export new visible PageRanks every 3-4 months or so.
----------------------------------------------
[edited by: reseller at 9:26 pm (utc) on Sep. 7, 2005]
Directory updated. Fine, good, it was due.
PR not updated. (Please don't say it is unless you provide DC with the updated PR.)
Lots, though not earth-shattering, Serp changes everywhere. Tons of extremely low quality, high-crap-tactics pages added, which if Google behaves as it has this year is a sign of a significant update underway.
Even if the update doesn't amount to much eventually, good name.
>>This is appearing to be a very "bourbon" like update. I think we are seeing it rolled out in changes again. Bourbon was actually 4 mini updates (algo tweaks). I think we are seeing the same thing again.<<
No please..not another Bourbon. One of the kind was more than enough.
So we are going againg through those mini-updates; 0.5, 2.0, 2.5 and at last 3.5
I recall especially the last part of Bourbon was just about the time of the latest PubCon. That last part from 2.5 to 3.5 was the real webmasters-killer. Don´t hope Gilligan has such an ugly part too ;-)
For instance, using a site: search today, my 1,400+ page site is now showing 12,900 pages, up from 4,600 for most of the last year.So when I see a serp that jumps from 5,000,000 to 22,000,000 I'm a little skeptical.
Yep, I thought it was bad when Google showed 4x as many pages of a site using the site command. Now it's literally 10X the amount of actual pages.
(even if you count all pages that are blocked via both robots.txt and meta noindex,nofollow tags they are still showing over 6X as many pages then could exist in my wildest dreams)
Good repost of GG's notes about how cautious we should be interpreting the link: information.
I don't agree and think PR remains a major factor for all SE's becauses it's a great measure *unless it is manipulated* at a site.
I think Google has become somewhat weird and inconsistent about policing what they see as PR manipulation - and this has led to many site/ ranking casualties.
I think Google has become somewhat weird and inconsistent about policing
I'm just trying to figure out why my site is no where to be found in the SERP's after a 301 redirect to an 18 month old domain name... I feel like the site is in the sandbox but I just can't imagine why G would do this to sites... 138 BL's, DMOZ, Yahoo listed, 0 PR on toolbar, G Directory shows a PR of 6 yet here I am playing with Tonka trucks? Been waiting over 80 days (since 301 redirect) now or is that not enough time to tell if one is in the sandbox?
In many debates there are people who have argued this. Recently the term High Quality Inbound links has been prevelent as a responce to quiries from google.
High quality = close to home page = higher PR
but ... the more you get the more likely you are to be penalised for gaining to much to fast ...
Go figure