Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
BUT the titles are all wrong instead of stopping at the </title> tag the results are showing some of the text from the page in the title of the result.
Anyone else seeing this on their newly added supplementals?
site:www.example.com "widget" returns odd sup. results say including red widget.
site:www.example.com "red widget" shows no sups.
Some of these odd sups erronously has "red widget" text appended to end of title display.
Title tag coded correctly now, perhaps html errors in past such as missing </title>?
And also for my site search google shows 9645 pages, but the fact is I dont have anything more than 900 plus pages on my site, can any one explain why and how can i fix it? My site has a pr of 6. Thanks.
Geez, it like I’ve always said. Google just creates way too much work and worry for webmasters. Somebody ought to explain to those geniuses at Google that spam is more related to quantity than anything. Spam isn’t a few pages within a domain using similar type navigation or excerpts. But in dealing with many Phd’s absolutely none can admit they can make a mistake.
And also for my site search google shows 9645 pages, but the fact is I dont have anything more than 900 plus pages on my site
Any suggestions on what is causing Google to do this and what we can do to get it to stop?
Its gotta be a bug that they will fix, surely?
{clicks heals together and says the magic words} Adam Lasnik, are you out there? This is too weird for words!
------------
<head>
<title>My Page Title</title>
</head>
<body>
Page Content
InternalLink1 InternalLink2 InternalLink3
</body>
------------
In the SERPs for a "site:www.mysite.com" search it brings up "My Page Title InternalLink1 InternalLink2 InternalLink3" as the title of the page when it should be just "My Page Title".
I haven't found anything at all to connect the dots as to why it's happened with some pages but not others. It's most certainly a bug even if it's by design. There's simply no reason to list page titles in that manner.
Looks like my cms site's heavily penalised for having identical meta descriptions. I'd gotten lazy with these: seemed they were from the past, and my pages were being indexed fine w google taking snippets to put in descriptions - so when adding content, rarely bothered with descriptions, which meant that used default for the site.
Now, even pages with considerable content are in supplememtals; to human eye would be clearly different to other pages on site, but no longer to google, after great step(s) backwards. While, of course, SERPS include pages with nothing novel bar the search terms.
Google now seems limited to using meta description for the site.
Supplementals for my site include way too many "pages", many of which should not be indexed by any search engine: some from during creation of forum threads, even with "pages" as enter new posts.
Why should google bother keeping supplementals anyway? If judged not good, surely could remove to free up space for supposedly ok content.
Pages that now have no links would then disappear from index (like many of my supplementals, which return "page not found" errors should google care to someday check).
Pages with links may make it into index should google deem them worthy in future.
[Are there notions in Google that they're cataloguing the web, even keeping parts for posterity as web pages and sites disappear?
Seems more like someone who just keeps every scrap of everything, maybe in the attic; to what extent accidentally here, who will say.]
To me, the supplemental hell problem recalls my sometimes clumsiness with cms - do the wrong thing (even minor change), make it live, and can have problems site-wide.
But in this case, the goof-ups have gone global.
I'm afraid I only really noticed w my sites lately; yet reading posts inc Matt Cutts should have been fixed some time ago.
This wasn't true in all cases, but it was true in enough cases that I strongly suspect that it's one of the factors exposed by this interesting supplemental index bug.
Another one is the already-well-known non-unique meta description factor.
Looks like tomorrow's going to be a busy day at the 'plex...
Jim
(And I thought it was bad when they overwrote my carefully crafted titles with the titles the morons at DMOZ thought up!)
What sane reason would there be for reverting to an older version of the site for results?
Hardware failure and poor backups? I don't believe it!
Oooh, thats interesting - I'm still seeing corrupt titles at the very end of the site: results, for pages which are now 404ed (the pages that exist have reverted to correct titles from non-current versions)
Actually, at least one of those results has a 301 on it.
Bad, bad, bad :(
But I guess they are working on it?
Anybody can explain this similarity concept of google? Since all my pages are as unique as other pages, just different articles.