Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

Update Florida - Nov 2003 Google Update Part 4

         

Kackle

5:57 am on Nov 22, 2003 (gmt 0)



Continued from: [webmasterworld.com...]

Kackle - can you explain the "dictionary" for me? And how I might benefit from it - Im reading your posts hard but dont see where youre coming from.

Sure. But you have to act quickly. Google will fix this one just like they fixed the hyphen.

1. Google is depreciating pages/sites that are over-optimized for certain keywords or keyword combinations. It does this by looking up search terms in a dictionary of target keywords or keyword pairs that it has compiled. This dictionary is Top Secret, because if you knew what was in the dictionary, you could avoid these words in your optimization efforts.

2. If the search term or terms hit on a dictionary entry, the search results for that user's search are flagged. This means that before the results are delivered, the order of the links, or even the inclusion of links, are adjusted so as to penalize pages that have overoptimizated for those terms. Most likely the title, headlines, links and anchor text are examined. It's possible that external anchor text pointing to that page has also been pre-collected and is available for scanning, but this is much less likely. (Besides, external links are not something within your immediate control, so don't worry about it right now.)

3. You want to find out which keywords that are relevant to your site are in Google's dictionary. Compile as many relevant keywords you can think of that searchers might use to find your site. Now take these words singly and in pairs, according to how users might search. Run two searches for each combination and compare the results.

4. If the results are strikingly different for the pre-filter and the post-filter search on a particular term or combination of terms, it means that some variation of those terms has been flagged because something was found in Google's dictionary.

5. Do lots of searches and you can come up with a list of "sensitive" words that you'll want to avoid when you re-optimize your pages.

It's a nice weekend project.

johnnydequino

12:46 am on Nov 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Datacenters are bouncing around like crazy. Starting to see some old competitors pages pop up. Would be nice to see mine!

needhelp

12:49 am on Nov 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Something to chew on...there's a site in a fairly competitive search that has been and has held the #1 spot even through this update. This site contradicts alot of the theories presented so far - it's very optimized: h1 tags abused, heavy keyword density in text, title, anchor text, and url. Even spammy mouseouver text! It has weathered florida without a scratch (the rest of the sites that used to be there got destroyed). Also, if you do the -cvkjadkjf trick, the search results return to "normal", and yep...that site is still #1. They must be luvin life!

Dave35London

12:51 am on Nov 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Can you explain the -cvkjadkjf trick

tantalus

12:52 am on Nov 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



"De-optimization won't work. How is Google supposed to find your site if you only have the keyword once? It dosen't make sense. ---- "

Try this [google.com...] and look for 'o rah bra ras'.

All you need do is put the keyword in the title and use javascript document.write for all you content.

markis00

12:52 am on Nov 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I know a site much like that one too
sticky me and I'll tell you it

needhelp

12:53 am on Nov 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



search for: keyword -dfidfldjf (nonsense) - i found out about this from a post a few pages back.

rfgdxm1

12:54 am on Nov 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



>just a note to all concerned about the real estate site returned for jewelry SERPs - it has been there (almost always on the first page - around #4) for more than a year!

And, I explained way back in the thread why it is there. The page content changed from what it was some time back. This is a shining example of the power of inbound anchor text influencing SERPs.

markis00

12:55 am on Nov 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



someone said the datacentres are bouncing and old pages
are coming back
is this true?

Dave35London

12:56 am on Nov 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



er Nancy, that's not accurate

I've been optimizing for jewelry for nine months, I have number one position (still) for keyword jewelry worth 400 a day and I never saw that crap there before.

Search for jewelry -cvkjadkjf those are the pre-Florida results.

[edited by: Dave35London at 1:14 am (utc) on Nov. 24, 2003]

troels nybo nielsen

12:57 am on Nov 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



> Do you have a subtle legal point to make, rather than an obvious one?

My point is, as you say, obvious. Google are listing my sites for free. We have had this dicussion many times at WebmasterWorld. I can see that you are are a new member. (Welcome. I hope that I am not the first to sy that?) I do not know if you were a lurker before being a member, but if you have got the time I would suggest that you take a dive into the archives.

Sorry about your being hit hard by this update, but I can only repeat stevew's suggestion.

steveb

12:58 am on Nov 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



"Nice real estate listing at #6 in that jewelry SERP."

I can't imagine a sane person saying the results for jewelry are not dramatically better now, even with that real estate site (that used to be a jewlery site) being in the top ten. The old results show multiple subdomain spam.

Major improvment now.

lgn1

1:00 am on Nov 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Which datacenter is seeing the changes? I don't see anything .

Dave35London

1:01 am on Nov 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I work 4 hours a day on google/jewelry the results *are* degraded.

[edited by: Dave35London at 1:18 am (utc) on Nov. 24, 2003]

Dave35London

1:01 am on Nov 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



that subdomain spam was nowhere on the radar pre this update

merlin30

1:03 am on Nov 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



So steveb, did you try the -dfdf thing (to get old results)?
This 626 message thread spans 42 pages: 626