Forum Moderators: open
The panic is settling down, the whine of worry is receding to a steady hum in the back of my head, and several recovery plans are forming...
I lost my index page entirely, due to lazy keyword stuffing. My fault! Unfortunately, mine is a very small business: no listing = no food (let alone xmas).
I was planning on overhauling the website anyway, and I've given myself until 1/1/04 before I accept an opening with another business and abandon my own. The question now is: overhaul the index page and resubmit to Google immediately, overhaul the entire website and resubmit the whole thing in a few weeks, overhaul the website (starting with the index page of course) and wait for Googlebot. Time is most definitely a factor.
...are any of these plans likely to restore my index page to the directory before I have to throw in the towel in January?
There are also longer range options of starting over with a new website and closing the old.
Mahalo Nui Loa! (Thank you very much!)
if this doesn't show something being way out of whack, i don't know what does!
steveb, hmmm...didn't know that...hmmm....
[edited by: dazzlindonna at 3:23 am (utc) on Nov. 20, 2003]
Maybe they're supplying directory results while a 'true' major update is being done in the background.
Maybe this shoots the theory in the last 1500 POSTS about a 'penalty' in the head.
Maybe I don't have a clue, and am just rambling on.
Anyone else have a 'maybe' to share?
If you read my last post, I think it's pretty clear they're trying to integrate their directory results with their usual SERPs.
I'm also seeing PR fluctuating for directory listings, not only for the toolbar.
[edited by: James_Dale at 3:44 am (utc) on Nov. 20, 2003]
1. Phrase with hyphens returns ridiculous results
2. Phrase in quotes returns ridiculous results
I have found some ridiculous kw combinations where one of my sites now ranks #1. With phrase that I'm targeting not found in SERPs. Used to be #50.
Moreover, if I search quoted phrase, two sites where that phrase is anchor text, which links to me, appear higher than my site.
In the post you responded to of mine, I specifically mentioned the search term had to be for something non-commercial.
Try textile history. Is that esoteric enough?
#2 - a book for sale
#3 - same book, same company
#4 - Notice of a forum that took place in 2002
#5 - more books for sale
#6 - closer, there is some relevant content on this commercial site
#7 - "This information has been removed at the museum's request"
#8 - Ahhh, relevance
#9 - whoops, there's that book for sale again
#10 - a bibliography
That is 80% garbage on a search for information. Compare that search with a search for "a history of textiles" (no quotes). The second brings up some relevant sites with real information - you know, like Universities and such.
WBF
I mean my site ranked top 5 for my KW for two years and is now gone... After reading what you were saying I looked in the Google Directory.... sure enough... I ain't there... what does it mean? How do you get into the directory? Hmm... I've never really thought about it until this very moment....
directory.google.com is showing an old version of my category from before the recent update, without our site.
It may or may not be a coincidence that google.co.uk has an old competitor site in the top 10 that's not been the SERPS for months but IS in the old version of the directory.
directory-ex is showing the new directory which has our site in it but not the old competitor site.
Unfortunately .co.uk results are only on one datacenter but if i search for this competitor site on www-ex.google.com it's in position 51 and on www.google.com it's not in the top 200
This is surely the wrong way round, on ww they're in google directory and not in the top 200 and on ex they're not in the directory but they are in #51 in the serps.
not proof of anything but a bit odd. Are they going to be using the new directory across all datacenters or the old one?
The directory's been dancing for weeks. Hit refresh a few times, you should see yourself.
I think I mentioned something about this a couple of thousand posts ago...
Interesting since I had my site's cat changed (yes DMOZ Editors do in fact review sites and place them in appropriate cats) about a month ago.
WBF
Also, see [webmasterworld.com ]
In that case, consider whether it is a profitable decision to throw lots of money at improving commercial search relevancy when this will tend to decrease clicking on Adwords?
G's shot to fame is the integrity and unbiasedness of their results. I see no reasons what so ever, as to why they would have changed their neutral results. Your theory holds no water at all.
One reason as to why commercial serps have changed a lot, would be an agressive spam filter in place, as heavy spam activity is prevelant where $ are to be made.
Hmm... ok... thank you. Still a little confused because my site does have a DMOZ listing.....
I put in a search of my most commonly used link text and my site name and I come up nowhere [out of 1000 results]. If I put in my site name alone then it shows up number one. Does anyone have any thoughts to what's going on?.
#2 - a book for sale
#3 - same book, same company
#4 - Notice of a forum that took place in 2002
#5 - more books for sale
#6 - closer, there is some relevant content on this commercial site
#7 - "This information has been removed at the museum's request"
#8 - Ahhh, relevance
#9 - whoops, there's that book for sale again
#10 - a bibliography
That is 80% garbage on a search for information. Compare that search with a search for "a history of textiles" (no quotes). The second brings up some relevant sites with real information - you know, like Universities and such.
----
Hmm...
#2: That book is titled "Textile History". Seems to match the search term.
#3: Still relevant. Since the page text is much different not a duplicate.
#4: That was called "The Textile History Forum." A relevant match. How can Google know it already happened?
#5) Books on textile history. Relevant.
#6) "EXPLORE INDIAN TEXTILES HISTORY" Very relevant
#7) That was about "American Textile History Museum." Matches the search query
#8) Yep, I agree it is relevant
#9) Getting a tad spammy, but relevant.
#10) A bibliography on Textile History
Google is an *index*, not a directory. It returns sites that match the query. If you want just stuff from universities, try the Google Directory. It ain't like all the sites returned were about penguin breeding.
Sadly, at Google the directory is an all kinds of low priority. It took them months to update it using a current ODP RDF dump. :(
Google obviously believes this to be an error and they will not be updating until those sites return to ODP.
They would not want the curse of altavista and its fate to visit them as well.
rfgdxm1 - you know exactly which sites they are and you could get this fixed tomorrow.
It's all up to you. We all know that kc will not be fixing it.
When there are no results in the directory, it shows items from the regular SERPs.
I bet the majority of people here that are happy with the update either manage information sites or sites in very uncompetitive areas.
Google doesn't segregate information sites and commercial sites, and information sites often compete head to head with commercial sites for placement on Google's SERPs. My own travel-related content site is a case in point: I'm in a highly competitive category, and my content pages compete with vast numbers of hotel affiliate sites for many important keyphrases.
You'll find similar examples in other categories. Search on digital cameras, for example, and you'll find listings for camera-review sites, a HowStuffWorks article, manufacturers' Web sites, and a few dealers in the first couple of pages of search results. Some pages are purely informational, some are purely commercial, and others lie in between. The good news is that there's good information to be had (both commercial and non-commercial) in the first few pages of search results, which are refreshingly free of boilerplate affiliate and e-commerce pages.
Search on Windows software, and you'll find a similar mix: the big download sites like C¦Net's Downloads.com and Tucows are in the top spots, with resource pages and other download sites in most of the next 20 search results. That may be annoying to the dealer who's got a boilerplate catalog page about Windows XP or the affiliate who's trying to sell Norton AntiVirus with copy that he lifted from Symantec, but is it bad for the user? I don't think so. I'm a user, and I'm pretty happy with the results.
Mind you, the situation isn't perfect. Search on "[big French city] travel," and a majority of the top 10 results are cookie-cutter booking sites. Still, there's nothing new about that; I think 8 of the 10 results were affiliate pages when I last checked a few months ago. And I don't think an Amazon catalog page really deserves to be in the top 10 for an information search. (Most people who search the Web for travel information aren't looking to buy a guidebook; they're looking for information on the Web.)
Not according to the criteria of the original poster. That 2002 conference is in there, and also 2 book sellers.
Try a bunch of random searches on non-commercial topics that pop into your mind. Assassinations of US Presidents, favorite music artists, etc. Do these SERPs really look THAT bad?
Google is an *index*, not a directory. It returns sites that match the query. If you want just stuff from universities, try the Google Directory. It ain't like all the sites returned were about penguin breeding.
rfgdxm1 - Seems you want your cake and eat it too. Do they look that bad? Yep! But, it's just an index.
Want brochure sites instead of meaningful content? Well I know where you can find them. Want irrelevant content? Do past events count? Want to buy a book? I can direct you to several on-line sellers.
Don't try to convince me that the results I shared in my post are up to Google's standards of providing meaningful content.
Look at the top ten in AllTheWeb or Teoma. Tell me that those are not more relevant across the board. Yes that past forum shows up once out of those 20 results, but the other 19 are highly relevant and informative.
Give it a rest my man, Google results are far inferior right now to what they were just last week. That is why I have HAD to turn to ATW and Teoma for the article I am writing. I have to believe that I am not alone in that, since in this case I am doing a search much like that of many other non-SEO types.
WBF
How can Googlebot know this event has passed? How do they know you don't want a book on the topic? If I search "widgets", all Google can know is I have some interest in widgets. I'd have to add -book to eliminate book sellers. When the search term is broad, expect broad results.
Not according to the criteria of the original poster. That 2002 conference is in there, and also 2 book sellers.The conference is fine, we both know that. The three results for the same book is poor. The museum with information down is poor. The cache is of the same (lack of) content. The bibliography thing is kinda weird too. While there is lots of spider food regarding textile history, it is not a good result for the user.
Its very funny - but I still wondering what were all the three update threads all about. Some one can post in brief what all has happened - I can't see any change here.
Its very funny - but I still wondering what were all the three update threads all about. Some one can post in brief what all has happened - I can't see any change here.Google not play nice.
thanks.
