Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 22.214.171.124
[edited by: goodroi at 3:57 pm (utc) on Jul 15, 2011]
[edit reason] Fixed employment status [/edit]
Eric Enge: Right. There is another element I want to get your reaction to which I refer to as the ďsamenessĒ factor. You may have a great user experience. You may have a solid set of articles that cover hundreds of different topics, and they may all be in fact original. However, itís the same hundred topics that are covered by a hundred other sites and the basic points are the same, even though itís original, there is nothing new.
Vanessa Fox: Right. I think thatís where added value comes into play. Itís important to look and see what other sites are ranking for. What are you offering that is better than other sites? If you donít have anything new or valuable to say then take a look at your current content game plan.
Eric Enge: So, saying the same thing in different words is not the goal. I like to illustrate this by having people imagine the searcher who goes to the search results, clicks on the first result and reads through it. They donít get what they want so they go back to the search engine, they click on a second result and itís a different article, but it makes the same points with different words.
They still didnít find what they want so they go back to the search engine, they click on the third result and that doesnít say anything new either. For the search engine it is as bad as overt duplicate content.
Vanessa Fox: Thatís absolutely right.
Eric Enge: It may not be a duplicate content filter per se, which is a different conversation than this one, but the impact is the same. Itís almost like an expansion of query deserves diversity, right.
The search engines have always said they want to show unique results, diverse results, valuable results.
Vanessa Fox: Right. These concepts have all been around for a long time, but we are seeing them perhaps played out with different sets of signals, but they are not anything new. The search engines have always said they want to show unique results, diverse results, valuable results, all these things.
perhaps less pages and more topic per page
What are you offering that is better than other sites? If you donít have anything new or valuable to say then take a look at your current content game plan.
I'm not sure what Vanessa means by reviewing the content game plan. Definitely a review is in order as she recommends, and I don't mean to put words into her mouth but that review should include but also go beyond content. This is a very important part of entering a niche to begin with.
Vanessa Fox: "Panda isnít simply an algorithm update. Itís a platform for new ways to understand the web and understand user experience."
Letís say the content and the user experience are good for that page. Then you run into the issue of quality ratio of the whole site. The question then becomes if someone lands on your site and they like that page, but they want to engage with your site further and click around your site, does the experience become degraded or does it continue to be a good experience?
I have been saying this in all my comments and advice post-Panda - you can't just "write good content" to get some visitors from Google, the game has changed fundamentally.True it has, at least so far. In fact many inferior pages are ranking because the other site is considered "good."
[edited by: walkman at 4:52 am (utc) on Jul 16, 2011]
tangor, does Google+ have enough data this minute to create an algo or base rankings on it?
1) Google wants to rank great content
1) Google wants to rank great content
It does seem to me that what I found to be true when I worked in Google search and *did* speak for Google remains true: that Google is looking to rank the very best results for searchers and is constantly evolving its algorithms to better do that.