Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
I have noticed that the numbers of indexed URLs from the sitemaps of my main site have been steadily reduced in the last two days. The reduction rate is about 5% per day. This drop takes place in all sub-directories and also shows on the results of a site command search. However, it seems that the fully indexed pages are not affected. Does anyone experience this?
I m not getting what big G is trying to do..... )
[edited by: Maneet at 12:27 pm (utc) on Mar. 11, 2008]
site:www.example.com Results returned 359,000
site:www.example.com/ (no *) Results returned 528,000
only on these DC’s
last month these were
site:www.example.com 409,000 pages (was showing 512,000 in January)
site:www.example.com/ (no*) 289,000 pages (was showing 196,000 in January)
[edited by: Vimes at 1:46 pm (utc) on Mar. 11, 2008]
I m not getting what to do with rankings, I m facing this flux since Jan 08 and till now its like on and off Initially my site was down for 3 weeks then its back to its position for all the targeted keywords then after a week it was again down for a week and during this for few days its not showing the right page for its keyword, it was all home page only no service page for service keywords no maintenance page for maintenance keyword.
Another problem was which is not usual that when m searching for the keyword with out double codes it is at #207 and with "keyword" it is at #250, although it should be below hundered when I m searching it with "Keyword".
So if there are 3 possible user intentions for a high volume search term, then instead of returning a completely "natural" ranking (which historically would have only been the big commercial meaning, in many cases) we are now seeing at least one of the other types of search results forced into the top ten. Maybe they are using the Universal Search mechanism for inserting results from a different vertical - treating semantically ambiguous terms something like separate verticals?
Google has been wrestling with this challenge for a while. I can certainly see how user satisfaction might be impacted in this wat. There was a point where the experimented with a set of other interpretations between horizontal rules. Don't see that so much any more.
I suspect this was the area where Google accidentally tipped their hand with the position #6 bug. The bug is gone, but the experiment continues.
Battling to get pages indexed, out of 105 we have 49 indexed and 86% sit in the supplemental results (if those matter anymore).
Maybe mine is becoming unrelated to this thread...or maybe not...I'm so confused by it all. I've noticed that Google takes no notice of our real number of IBL's lately either. Does this sound familiar to anyone?
[edited by: tedster at 5:22 pm (utc) on Mar. 13, 2008]
The site has been around for four years, and has been first-page on Google for almost that long. I've seen some pages on the site go from #5 to #15 for a short period, and then come back again. But I've never seen the entire site disappear. I'm not even in the top 500 for terms that were ranking #1 to #5.
If it's a -950 penalty, what might have caused it?
dickbaker - Up at the top of the Google Search forum home page, there's a pinned Hot Topics thread. In that thread, there's a link to some key points regarding the -950 penalty, which includes some links to ongoing discussions about it. You need to review that discussion and see how it might apply to your site....
The -950 and Minus 30 Penalties [webmasterworld.com] - ongoing mysteries
Sure enough today its back to outside 500 again.
Is this a sneak preview of future SERPS ? I hope so. I've noticed this teaser effect happening on a few occasions.
Any similar experiences?
[edited by: tedster at 8:57 pm (utc) on Mar. 14, 2008]
[edit reason] moved from another location [/edit]
After i’ve carefully read Google’s quality guidelines i have taken the following corrective actions:
1. I’ve removed page redirects (Refresh:0; url=”download-link”) from my download pages.
2. I’ve added rel=”nofollow” to all my external and internal links that could be considered Google’s quality guidelines violating links.
3. I’ve removed repeated bolded keywords that could be considered keyword spamming.
I’ve just filed a reinclusion request.
I don’t know how to be sure that the cause for my website sudden drop is a google penalty or there are other causes.
How would I find out?
[edited by: tedster at 3:51 pm (utc) on Mar. 17, 2008]
[edit reason] moved from another location [/edit]
Single word term. The exact same page shows at #34 AND #42. The entire content of the page (other than tons of FrontPage html) in the cache is:
<title>New Page 1</title>
<p>This page uses frames, but your browser doesn't support them.</p>
Close browser, reopen and re-search and now it is only at #34
I am seeing any number of sites in the top 50 that appear to be chosen completely at random.
The site in question shows zero links in G, Y or MS, though it does show a PR of 4? Cache date of 3/13/08. It has 13 pages indexed in G. The domain was registered in 2002. No DMOZ listing.
I have seen more and more of these poorly designed, completely non-optimized and virtually useless brochure sites popping up in the top 20 on this particular term recently. I have scratched my head over these for hours, and I can only conclude that there is some random element that keeps stirring some of these sites to the top every few days.
That seems shorter than ever. It's possible Google has changed its algo to shorten the sandbox.
I think in previous years my sites were in the sandbox for at least six months. Which, frankly, was totally ridiculous.
"We can't trust a site which isn't up for six months. Less than that, it's impossible to have any value."
This new site is only about 25 pages, but it's already top 10 for a competitive phrase (the one I targeted).
The Yahoo sandbox lasted one day.