Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
The main two word terms has the first word which is the general theme and a second word which is the specific topic. In WMT my site has a full significance bar for the second word and a 60% fill for the general theme, first word. I would guess that sites that have done best from Panda have this the other way. ie a full bar for the theme and somewhat less for the specific topic word.
One thing you didn't touch on was designall we see is sites with zero design features and style ( as in pre 2000), and zero investment, doing well. Might as well go back to tables ... then you get those bullet points in the SERPS that take up so much real estate.
all we see is sites with zero design features and style ( as in pre 2000
Once content doesn't matter in a supposedly update against 'thin and shallow content' or content farms what else can you say?
I'd say that 'we' haven't figured out what signals Google is using to wham out Panda.
This is exactly what Google set out to accomplish ~ create a digital organism that is continually morphing, which makes it close to impossible for SEO types to quantify, identify, or even vaguely understand.
Thus, go back to square one, to the pre-Google days: Build entirely for your users, not the Googlebot........... and hope for the best.
I find it difficult to believe that Panda is subjective. It must use objective assessment and it makes sense (to me at least) that if Google is using objective measures then we must be able to see them or at least the most important ones.It's not but say that it favors certain qualities that small sites are less likely to have. Plus what Google sends you may make improvement almost impossible: bad keyword referral = more people leave.
It would be nice if folks who have evidence that shows that my observations can be ruled out because they are seeing other stuff to share that. Simply saying you are wrong doesn't add anything to the debate.Don't want to out any site but the one I have in mind is a 'new media site,' they essentially fail every single point on the advice given by the Google Gods on how to write. (Maybe the owner follows Google's advice on what to wear or how to floss his teeth with gFloss ;))
YES, it seems that Panda contributes to an agregated domain trust score. This can make it hard for any page to rank, once a site is 'pandalised'. NO, because the initial analysis is at page level and operates on keywords/ semantics - I know this because I can rank for generics but then disappear when a niche brand is added, likewise sometimes I cannot rank for the synonym which is illogical (how can I be top 5 results for one and nowhere to be seen for less popular synonym?)
1. Panda is about sites not pages.
2. Sites that have done well are larger than average in the niche.Disagree. Lots of smaller sites have slipped under panda's radar in my niche and lots of bigger sites have been hit (though, agreed not the giants). Seems to hit the middle ground.
3. Sites that have done well have many pages within the site that are directly linked to by other "quality" sites. Sites that have done less well have many links from fewer sites. They have multiple links from a site to the home page and older pages of the site but less deep links to pages on a specific topic and less new links to specific pages on a particular subject from pages on other quality sites that are on that subject.Disagree. There are plenty of sites in my niche that have done well off a very limited link portfolio.
4. Sites that have done well have more NEW quality content than sites that have done less well. The new content on the sites that have done well is picked up by other quality sites that link to it.Agree except the links part. I think that old content is an issue - ie too much of it will affect Panda trust score. Why? Well, think about it, isn't the fact that 90% of your content hasn't changed since 2007 a pretty good indication the site is unloved and isn't contemporary. Does google really want to 'promote' the same content is was 4 years ago (even if it is still good)? Using this as a factor would also encourage webmasters to tend to their sites a little better and trim down. I think it's clear now Google wants us to start editing the junk out (so they have to deal with less of it!).
5. One site that has done well I would estimate has much more traffic on the general theme of the niche than sites that are focused more on one aspect of the subject. I would also estimate that their bounce rate would be lower.I think it's easier for more focussed sites to rank under Panda. Time on site is probably a factor (as opposed to bounce) in Google's long click objective.
I know this because I can rank for generics but then disappear when a niche brand is added, likewise sometimes I cannot rank for the synonym which is illogical (how can I be top 5 results for one and nowhere to be seen for less popular synonym?)
I have been pushed way down for the most popular keywords too- you missed my point, which was how can I rank for "wine glass" but not "[Brand] wine glass" when the brand in question is very niche?
I have been pushed way down for the most popular keywords too
- you missed my point, which was how can I rank for "wine glass" but not "[Brand] wine glass" when the brand in question is very niche?