Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
I think this hits the nail on the head totally! I really think it all has to do with thin content.
How do you quantify thin content? You know it when you see it... You are basically looking for something that is mostly that is really just your web site's template with a small amount of content. I.e. the content accounts for less than 30% of the total code.
That is the only thing I see on all my sites that were hit. If more than 10% of my site was those "thin" pages, Panda ate it!
So, still, no one is seeing any significant improvements?
@dickbaker, as I understand it, you've broken your pages into two groups -- 1) hit hardest by Panda and 2) hit hard by Panda. You said #2, which is doing relatively better post-Panda, has more scraped (can't think of a better word for what you've got) content but the word count is greater because you augmented scraped content with additional unique content.
Although Dan01 is correct that those pages will have more diverse keywords because they are longer and will naturally get more long-tail traffic, it could also be that Group 2, because it's longer, is more attractive to Google on these metrics (which many speculate are important in a post-Panda world):
- Ads on page divided by words on page
- Affiliate links on page divided by words on page
Food for thought anyway. Thanks for sharing your analysis.
Here, everybody is obsessed about thin content (guilty concious?) and duplicate content within their own sites. In the WebMaster Tools thread, everybody with original content sites is obsessed with filing DMCA complaints about the that content being stolen and ranking above the original.
I am back to where I was on Feb 25th(after panda), so I gained back additional 10% I lost due to noindex, removal etc.
I am back to where I was on Feb 25th(after panda)
it's like someone telling you that your baby is ugly. But maybe Google does think your baby is ugly - it's just an editorial opinion after all.
I think it's worth thinking more about content issues. For example, "shallow content" was a phrase that they used frequently in the interview. Questions like "Would you be comfortable giving this site your credit card? Would you be comfortable giving medicine prescribed by this site to your kids?"
The advice she gave to let Google know that you are the original owner of the content was that you should ask the site that copies your content to link to the original article on your site. That way Google would know what the original is that is supposed to rank higher.
However, I would consider a DMCA notice for a site that starts to outrank me with my own content.
Ironically, this was a "farm" update, but "farms" are outranking me with MY content that was written years ago. Now I am stuck doing damage repair. I'd say that's a big FAIL.
Announce a "farm" update and then let farms rank higher...
What are the chances that Panda has basically applied a permanent penalty...
[edited by: tedster at 8:33 pm (utc) on Mar 25, 2011]
Google announced a "shallow content" update. They very carefully avoided the phrase "content farm"
a satire of a content farm article, minus the ads: [thecontentfarm.tumblr.com...]
That's hilarious. And ironically, that article will be good link bait, irrespective of how "shallow" it may seem to the algorithm.
[edited by: crobb305 at 7:24 pm (utc) on Mar 25, 2011]