Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Some publishers have fixated on our prior Panda algorithm change, but Panda was just one of roughly 500 search improvements we expect to roll out to search this year. In fact, since we launched Panda, we've rolled out over a dozen additional tweaks to our ranking algorithms, and some sites have incorrectly assumed that changes in their rankings were related to Panda.
short version is that it's not data that's updated daily right now. More like when we re-run the algorithms to regen the data.
Do you guys think they ran it on April 11th and May 6th or just added new penalties?
Two of those additional sites recovered right around the time of Panda 2.1... I made no changes to the sites that recovered
My company had one site hit by Panda 1.0. This site was hit again by Panda 2.0 along with 5 other sites we own. Two of those additional sites recovered right around the time of Panda 2.1. The others saw no noticeable change.
I was totally unaffected by Panda 1 and 2 however 2.1 (V3) has hit my niche trade widget directory basically by about 50%.
I wish it told us something about an action others could take [...]
Was the Panda1 site in that recovered mix?
I think we are in danger calling any SERPs change "Panda Vn.nn"
I doubt if anyone will be reporting a comeback soon. My sense is Google wants unique , fresh and linked to content and affected sites will have to wait to win back trust.
I was one of the websites hit by the Panda update. I'm the founder of AsktheBuilder.com. What I'm confused about are the comments by Matt Cutts and other Google engineers who were quoted in stories after the update. In their interviews, I routinely saw them say something to the effect, " .... the update is going to reward sites with original content."
Well, I'm as original as you can get. So much so that sites like eHow.com routinely cite my articles in their *unoriginal* content. There are thousands of pages of content at eHow.com with my content on it. Yes, they recently got a haircut from the second adjustment of Panda, but they still show up on page one of Google results.
How can Google think for a moment that any content on eHow.com or any other site that scrapes or uses the Fair Use Doctrine is original when they come to sites like AsktheBuilder.com for their material?
It's worth noting how pages that plunged didn't loose all of their traffic - as far as i know. If I'm correct it's like an initial warning shot and a partial penalty and/or time delay for re evaluation . That's my guess.
@rlange I'm not clear about your post. It sounds like you're saying that some of the sites hit by Panda 2.0 recovered, but not the Panda 1.0 site, right?
What about Panda 2.0 ? Have any sites recovered from it?
Took him an age ( actually I don't know if he ever did) to fix his incorrect spelling ( pedistal ) on a page that was mentioned here ..and if that page was anything to go by it was full of inaccuracies as to the technique of installing said "pedistal" basin..and was so obviously just thrown together to get visitors to then inadvertently click on disguised ads ( there were about 12 ads of various sorts on the page , most of which could only be spotted as ads by watching the status bar at the bottom of the browser "on hover" ) ..I would imagine that the advertisers noticed a very high bounce rate from "mistaken" or "tricked" clicks..maybe Goggle got wise .
The rest of the site gave me the same impression..put together to get tricked clicks ..and far from expert in the subjects..but if you haven't built a few houses for yourself ( and worked as a laborer to pay your studies many decades ago ) you'd never know. ;-)
As I understand it, the traffic volume has nearly returned to pre-Panda levels, but it is not the same query terms distribution. In other words, it's not like a penalty was removed. Instead it's like a new quality score was generated and is now factored in, and the overall "complexion" of the traffic is changed.