Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
Is this a penalty or a bug? Have any other sites been similarly affected?
First, as predicted, i doubt we will see "major updates" anymore.
Remember, the whole BD thang fixed the whole reason for major "updates" in the first place - lack of storage (or computing power or whatever)
So what people are seeing now is the current "updates/data refreshes" which started off refreshing every 3 weeks.
then every week.
now as mattg3 has said, every day or so.
This is why certain sectors see no movement and others see great movement.
You just have to let go of the old mentality of "major algo updates"...
They(updates) were a fluke due to the above reasons.
It's also why MC (or Google engineers) can say with a straight face,
"then's been no major update"
They simply "tweaked" something.
For sites with scoring factors that fall under that "tweak", you see alot of movement.
For sites that don't, you see nothing.
For some of my sites, I see dramatic upward movement...akin to updates of old.
Other sites, nothing.
(Remember, this also happened when they WERE updates...just on a larger scale)
Now that Google has the storage/computing/whatever to do these changes on a weekly basis rather than every 6-9 months, it's simply not going to effect nearly every site/sector as in the past.
But something was surely "tweaked"...
Scary stuff
I'm seeing movement too, a few garbage sites dropped and a couple of good links (competitors) back in...let's hope this is the start of GXER...Google Xmas Eve Rectification:-)
I'm seeing healthy site:search on 209.85.135.104 with a 'UK only' search. 'The Web' searches are still showing all the supplementals on a site:search. However, across all the dc's, on 'UK only' or 'web' I keep suddenly finding my pages.
I need to start recording searches and positions to know for sure if there is a steady recovery. What I am really looking for is for the healthy site:search to move to 'the web' searches. I think that will be the sign that things are really improving.
Not sure if this means anything or not, but if I keep typing, it eases the pain via distraction............
I'm seeing healthy site:search on 209.85.135.104 with a 'UK only' search
Do you see supplementals at the end couse for my site I don't see them anymore?
I'm seeing healthy site:search on 209.85.135.104 with a 'UK only' search
Yeah ...u r right..i m very excited about the new results..my site is just rocketing like anything...fingure crossed...and hope it will bring up good traffic after X'mas
cool,
lashkari
1. Pages like (not actual), www.mysite.com/health.php/asthma.php. The two .php files are my actual files, but I don't have my files set up that way. All my pages are www.mysite.com/pagename.php. What does that mean?
2. Files that had a redirect over a year ago, have popped up back in G as supplementals.
3. Interior pages that are no longer linked to due to the seasonal nature of them.
4. All pages that are supplemental have old cache dates.
After these supplementals, I have my regular pages (non-supplemental), index and all other interior pages follow. Cache dates are 19/20 of Dec.
We've been white hat and in the top three for many keywords which are now kaput. Around since late 90's
On the data centers I've checked, we are not rebounding.
But something was surely "tweaked"...
One thing that I think might have been tweaked - or tightened, or whatever you want to call it... the critera that sends something into the 'omitted results' filter. I have a site that lists a number of events in my state; it's dynamically generated, and the only difference in the page titles is the city in which the event occurs. For the first time, those got all lumped into omitted results, EXCEPT for the cities that are three or more words long. It used to be that a one-word difference was enough to keep them out of the omitted results. So I have to rewrite my script that generates the titles a bit, and instead of the city, use the titles of the events.
For better ordered site: operator (at the moment), you may wish to try:
[64.233.189.104...]
I'm not so sure, but I see the results don't include supplementals.
As an aside, on [64.233.189.104...] I get the usual supplementals at the top, but no robots.txt, so there is a bit of movement there.
For better ordered site: operator (at the moment), you may wish to try:[64.233.189.104<...]
It doesn't look good to me and I don't hope that's the upcomming results. My site has only 22 pages in it -- all the supplementals has dropped out.
For better ordered site: operator (at the moment), you may wish to try:[64.233.189.104<...]
Depends on which site you're looking at. It's great for some and pathetic for others. There are supplementals.I have noticed something interesting regarding one page that is very popular across all search engines. It shows up twice if I doe a site:domain.com search and has a supplemental. Never seen a page show up twice. I did notice that each instance has a different cache. I edited it twice within a month period after it had been unchanged for over 10 years.
I might be standing corrected on Tuesday morning.
But for now, I have started to believe more and more that we are in the middle of a X-Mas Bad Data Push ;-)
But for now, I have started to believe more and more that we are in the middle of a X-Mas Bad Data Push ;-)
Don't worry. I have faith in our friends at the plex. They usually fix a bad data push within a day or two. Question is; are they going to tell us about it this time as Adam did in June 2006?
Did Adam tell us before, during, or after the fact?
Not sure whether it was "during" or "after". Only the folks at the plex know exactly the schedule of a bad data push ;-)
But as usual the guys at googleplex are just taking advantage of chrismas for running all this, I think (and hope, for me and for them) that what we are seing is temporary.
Why Reseller are you pushing this, what do you see that tells you this? Newbies here with problems are going to think you actually know what you are talking about. Lets see a bit of the logic that has brought you to this conclusion, that you are so convinced is true, you are putting it forward as fact to be refuted or not later.
Back to Watching,
WW_Watcher
They have to sort this issue sorted soon since I've already been receiving e-mails from AdSense advertisers who target our sites therefore not only are their enquiries reducing, my AdSense earnings are and the knock-on effect to that is Google's receipts.None of the other so-called new top results have AdSense therefore they are committing financial suicide at the moment in my sector!
"Bad Data Push" IMHO = Unfounded Baseless Speculation
Speculation, but not unfounded. Reseller has based his theory on the site: queries showing strange results, which have been the result of a bad data push in the past. I'm hoping his theory is correct ;-)
The site command has been quite questionable for sometime now, and has been the subject of many posts and discussions here in WW and other forums in recent months.
Back to Watching
WW_Watcher
All I have to say, is that something for sure IS going on, too many webmasters have been "hit" around the same time, and I really see nothing in common with most of them, not to say there isn't, it's just that I, myself, do not see it.
Wish someone over there would tell us what's up, but, I think not!
I think I am just going to sit it out and see what happens. No sense keeping on working, if we don't even know what it is.
Speculation, but not unfounded. Reseller has based his theory on the site: queries showing strange results, which have been the result of a bad data push in the past.
