why unique contents are Supplemental Result at google

Supplemental Result, google

[johnlim9988]

Hi,

We wrote some articles by ourselves and never copy any others. No duplicate contentns at these pages.

But still some of the pages write by ourselves are Supplemental Result at google.

If search some unique content by add "" to search, cannot find such contents at google.

We cannot understand this. Can somebody help?

[tedster]

Low PR is the most common reason for being tagged Supplemental today.

[Nostalgic Dave]

I had some important pages linked from my main page that I wanted to pull out of the supplemental index, so after reading about internal Page Rank I decided to reduce the total number of links on my main page by about 50%. Theoreticaly this allows more of this PR juice to flow to the important pages, because it isn't spread so thin. Bingo, after a few days the most important page came out of the supplemental index and I am hoping that some of the others follow. The thing that is sad however is that I have been forced to change my page away from what I felt was a better USER experience in order to satisfy Google... write your pages for the user and not Google? Ahh yes, only if you want mediocre or poor Google referrals!

[johnlim9988]

But we have a team to write unique articles, it is impossible to have links to all unique articles.

now we have a seperate page which list all the unique artilces. (over 100 arleady).

what should we do? Create second directory page to the unique articles?
Or add links to suplimental pages at homepage? Once the pages are not suplimental then change the links to other pages at homepage?

Thanks

[lfgoal]

"Low PR is the most common reason for being tagged Supplemental today."

Ted, can you elaborate? I've never heard that.

[Robert Charlton]

I decided to reduce the total number of links on my main page by about 50%.

In my experience, many of the sites that run into supplemental problems do so either because of unwise PageRank distribution, or because of too many pages to support the PageRank they have.

So, it was probably a smart move to remove the number of links on your main page. That said, you may still not be distributing your PR wisely, or you may still have too many pages.

what should we do? Create second directory page to the unique articles?

;)

A secondary directory page... or pages.

You also need to prioritize. I recommend studying the DMOZ home page and noting how they prioritize various pages and categories for both users and PageRank distribution. Not all categories get equal treatment.

Then, build your inbound links over time. Too many links from the home page not only isn't good for Google... it often gives the user too many choices as well.

[Robert Charlton]

PS to the above, as lfgoal was posting while I posted.

I agree with tedster about the low PR being a major factor. Read Matt Cutts' blog... I believe he talked about it. If you have a very, very large site with not as many inbounds as you'd like, you can sometimes see it on the inner pages.

[minnapple]

I back up Ted's comment about low PR being the cause of being in the SUP index.

However, PR cannot be measure by the PR tool bar alone.

The PR need to break out of SUP is measured by total link weight, not by the results of one or a few high PR sites linking to a site.

[tedster]

Ted, can you elaborate?

In August 2006, Matt Cutts made this comment:

...having supplemental results these days is not such a bad thing. In your case, I think it just reflects a lack of PageRank/links...it just a matter of we have to select a smaller number of documents for the web index. If more people were linking to your site, for example, I’d expect more of your pages to be in the main web index.

[mattcutts.com...]

At the time it sounded odd to me, because I'd been focused on duplicate urls as a principal cause of Supplemental results. But then I realized that a duplicate url is also quite likely to have low PR, so that's one particular case of a much broader phenomenon. Time goes on, and low PR is now almost always what I see in my client's supplemental results.

[steveb]

Matt's comment is useless since "not such a bad thing" obviously is goofballism when some supplemental pages don't rank for anything at all, even long strips of text where no other results are even returned.

"Low PR" is a silly term too. What does that mean? PR4 pages go supplemental. Is PR4 "low"? Why do most PR4's not go supplemental?

So these general statements are not helpful or revealing.

[lfgoal]

"If you have a very, very large site with not as many inbounds as you'd like"

I don't have any supplementals as I'm aware. However, I'm curious. In the event that some pages went supplemental, would a possible counteraction include more internal linking to those pages?

[BigDave]

I don't see what's the big concern about supplemental results. If your pages are supplemental and not getting traffic, there is a good chance that there are other problems as well. I have supplemental pages that get more traffic than pages that aren't in the supplemental index.

Of course it is better to be in the main index, but I don't sweat it if they aren't. Keep building your site and more and more pages will move into the main index. Great content will eventually gain the necessary links to bring it up. And if your internal navigation is good, it will pull up several other pages as well.

[reprint]

Just to add to the low PR comment, that was suggested to me recently as a reason my pages were in the supplemental index so I worked on my links inbound (some more) and internal, fixed a canonicalization issue and the pages all came out of supplementary index very quickly.