What factors trigger an EEAT audit by quality rators?

[btheo]

Hi all.. Long time listener, first time caller :)

I'm working with a previously highly successful site that went dormant for 10 years, and is now relaunching. All original high quality content (science & tech news) and the site still has hundreds of (currently inactive) backlinks from top-tier domains. When the site launches, those links will become live again, albeit to new content, on a new home page.

The site is highly branded, and the writing is fun; qualities that I believe we'd be well rewarded for by a human-given quality rating.

Once I crawl the new site, I assume google will notice it is suddenly alive again. And that all the content is new. This would seem to me like an obvious situation for an E-E-A-T quality rating review (By google employees or 3rd party). But I am speculating on the conditions and timeline for that to be triggered. Is there anything I can do to trigger it? Does anyone have anything to add here?

Thanks for reading!

[christianz]

E-E-A-T quality rating review (By google employees or 3rd party)

Tell me you are joking. Is EAT review a thing? lololololol

What would be the strategy of a webmaster then? To convince some Google contractor in Bangladesh that your site is super legit?

[not2easy]

Hi btheo and welcome to WebmasterWorld [webmasterworld.com]

Quality raters don't typically audit sites so there isn't anything you can do to trigger an audit. In GSC you can analyze things like core web vitals, speed and links.

While it is not mandatory to submit a sitemap it can help to determine the layout, hierarchy and important content. An old site dormant for years will need special attention to it mobile usability because that matters more today than desktop usability to Google.

They will not be very happy if backlinks land on a page that is not what people clicking might expect to see, and could consider it a soft 404. Please don't redirect backlinks to alternate content, Google does not like links that don't go where they were intended to go.

[btheo]

My mistake, thanks for the correction and your responses.
While I think I failed to explain my question, your answers are correct.

To clarify my mistaken train of thought, google DOES have 16k humans doing search ratings, albeit only for algorithm testing purposes. I believed that there could be edge case conditions (which mine is) which could get flagged for human review. But I realize now, thats ridiculous. The samples chosen are unlikely to be outlier-driven, and even still would only be used to verify the data, not affect the rating. There is no potential process to exploit.

"Our Search Quality Rating Process measures the quality of Search results on an ongoing basis. We work with ~16,000 external Search Quality Raters who provide ratings based on our guidelines and represent real users and their likely information needs, using their best judgment to represent their locale."

https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/guidelines.raterhub.com/en//searchqualityevaluatorguidelines.pdf

[edited by: not2easy at 5:30 pm (utc) on Sep 6, 2023]
[edit reason] Unlinked for readability [/edit]

[phranque]

Google doesn't throw people at the problem per se.
they throw people at the algorithmic solution to the problem.

[martinibuster]

A site coming back after a ten years (a significant amount of time) offline, with (or without) all new content, will be treated like a brand new site by Google.

What that means is that Google's algorithm will have to do a quality review of the entire site and figure out what place it fits into in the overall web. That can take a few months.

Also, make sure that old links go to pages that are substantially similar to the pages that were replaced.

The site may see an initial pop in the rankings. But it will eventually settle back. Maybe the old links will speed the process up.

Good luck!

Roger Montti