Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
It seems nearly all the data centers are showing some form of bigdaddy results now. I am not sure if there is a 100% bigdaddy/not bigdaddy distinction anymore.
The only two DCs I see that are showing different results are 216.239.59.104 and 66.249.87.104 and those results seem to be from late December, early January, at least in the sectors I monitor.
[edited by: tedster at 5:31 am (utc) on Mar. 25, 2006]
Create a useful, information-rich site, and write pages that clearly and accurately describe your content.
Make sure that your TITLE and ALT tags are descriptive and accurate.
Check for broken links and correct HTML.
Seems pretty clear but others may need to read between the lines.
Maybe we should have a contest to find the least information rich site with the least original content and the most duplicate content lifted from other sites and that ranks top 10. Can't be more than a few thousand.
Does this mean I'm getting a payraise?
Well...only if you make sure you get other targeted traffic so the next time Google flexes...your boss doesn't lose money.
If you look at the pattern across dc's, this mess is a long way from fixed (unless Google thinks the BD index SHOULD contain hundreds of thousands of pages deleted in the past 6 months). If Google was a ship it would be taking on water and drifting aimlessly without power.
Edit*
Additional Info
I am going to assume this is only isolated to a couple of DC's as I am running kw tracker and i am actually doing well on that DC (which i have been doing all month long)
[edited by: 300m at 8:35 pm (utc) on Mar. 29, 2006]
The date of the article is an issue because USA Today, CNN, Fox..., blah, blah, all write about this KW at least once a week, for an example, right now Google News has 1080 fresh news articles for this KW, and that DC is showing one from Dec 2002, thats my point.
It is old, very old content to be on page one of a KW with 100,000,000 results.
yeah, the more I look at DC: [216.239.53.99...] I can just tell it will not stick, it certainly will not rollout to the other DC's.
I have seen this before, G has not added all the filters and/or brought in other factors, i.e. back links.
That DC is a carbon copy (with a few minor exceptions) of the live Google from three years ago.
The date of the article is an issue because USA Today, CNN, Fox..., blah, blah, all write about this KW at least once a week, for an example, right now Google News has 1080 fresh news articles for this KW, and that DC is showing one from Dec 2002, thats my point.
It is old, very old content to be on page one of a KW with 100,000,000 results.
------------------------------------------------------------
It may be old however it may be very very relevant and cited very well by Authority sites.
unfortunately you need to look past yourself and your feelings when loooking at things with Google if that makes sense...
I know this KW better than anyone, I remember the day this article came out over 3 years ago, it is nothing special. It is not SEO-ed, in fact it is a PR0. It has zero back links.
I does not belong in the top 10.