Forum Moderators: open
zeus
wait 1-2 day more
Hope this isnt over yet :(
Zeus, im not yet in www. but i presumed that if i got listed in www2 or www3 i would go into www.google.com, or am i mistaken?
That`s correct.
Not just because I am not even being found but for the mere fact that the results from any of my searches actually suck on 2 and 3. They are not even relevant results.
I'm more worried about not showing up with my keywords, or is this something I hadn't noticed before during updates
Once again, that's normal behavior. Like you, today my site completely dropped out of Google, oh, for say about a minute, and then reappeared.
So while you mainly read about slight results fluctuations in these forums, there can also be complete drop-outs (you probably had them at your school) and grey tool bars for short periods.
There is also some speculation/observation that page rank is not factored until the end of the process. If that's the case, then I think people will be seeing good sites fall in the early stages before rising back up when page rank becomes involved. Further, it would also explain why "spammy" sites are near the top, as the pagerank punishments dished out by Google won't be taking effect yet.
Anyone else think the same?
zeus
And, it should surprise you such a page would do well with the key difference in the Google algo from other SEs being Google has that PageRank element? Lot of high PR pages linking to one other page on the Net means "this page is important". The Google algo was designed with the notion that pages by other sites democratically determine what other pages are important by linking to them.
If Google has begun doing a final adjustment of positioning based on PR, then this will be a new phenomenon. I haven't seen this sort of behavior before. At this point, in my view, the idea of a shakeout based on PR is just speculation. My own experience has been that what you see when the update begins is pretty much the way it shakes out by update's end.
i really didn't know to be honest - that was just something i'd seen mentioned a few times around these parts.
i guess we'll just have to wait until it all finishes.
I've seen *some* shakeout at the end that only seems explainable by PR. However, you are right it usually isn't something that totally rearranges things in the end. More a "fine tuning".
He has pagerank 2 and is the number 2 site. He's beating out pagerank 6 sites which are well optimised.
Of course his penalty could have been removed, but somehow, to coincide with all this confusion?.... I think Google still has not factored in Pagerank. Maybe they won't....ever :)
It is very strange that I have seen other sites get the fresh set of back links, and ours are not (same as last month). I know we have quite a few new inbound links. I know this is a silly question, but it is possible these are the link results for us from a month ago? Has never happened like this before. I am also curious, does anyone eles' directory links from yahoo show up in your backlinks?
I think what I need to do is go on a long hike during the dance from now on..lol..You get acustomed to certain dance behavior and when process changes, it puts you on edge.
However, this time around is looking real bad. I am talking from a results standpoint. Go to www2 and type in a keyphrase of 2 or 3 words. Then look at the results. They aren't even close to being appropriate to past results. Something huge is happening this update.
I believe the <title> got smacked way down in importance. And something I am missing on all of my sites gain a whole lot of importance. These observations based on prior standing that what you see on www2 at the beginning usually is the way it ends.
I know this is a silly question, but it is possible these are the link results for us from a month ago
Not silly at all. Actually I think you are right. We added a lot of links in the last update but they are all gone again. We also had some of our site cross linked and removed those cross-links. Now they are back again. I also expected to have an important new link this month but it's not there. It seems that the back links might be old.
However, if it is not factored in at *all* yet, I am scratching head a bit why at this moment in the dance I have shot up from #5 to #1 on one of my main keywords? This makes sense if it is based on PR. My home page has a higher PR than the pages that were above me, and is respectably optimized by traditional SEO considerations of keyword in page title, decent keyword density for it on the page, etc. Nothing at all shady in the traditional SEO sense. If my page is about "widgets", having "widgets" in the page title, this keyword prominently appearing high in the text of the page, and with decent keyword density just makes sense. Like I'd name the home page of my site about widgets "purple bunnies", and not use "widgets" anywhere on the page?
However, my main site domain name WRT this keyword is in the form of keyword.TLD, and also this keyword is in the page title, and well represented on the page. As is the norm based on traditional SEO for SEs in general. It may be that this is enough now with Google to grab the #1 spot without PR being a consideration. Yes, I can now stomp pages on the same topic based just on PR. In the latest update, Google now is recognizing my Yahoo! directory link for the first time, in addition to my ODP/Google link. This keyword in question is not at all very competitive (for those who really want to analyze it, a peek at my profile here should quickly reveal this), and perhaps I am at the point that just traditional criteria used by SEs is why Google now has me as #1, and PR is just icing on the cake.
My previous analysis was that the only reason these other sites were beating mine is because of text in anchor links. In terms of inbound links, my site is doing well. The mere fact my site is the only one that has *both* ODP and Yahoo! directory links, along with inbound links from most all the sites worth mentioning on the topic is relevant. My problem has been that *everyone* else linking to me in anchor text uses, instead of keyword1 which I am now #1 on, keyword2 which is an acronym mostly used by those with scientific knowledge enough to know it. The sites that used to be higher than me were heavily linked to using keyword2. Based on this, I'm wondering if Google now is giving a far lower weight to anchor text, and just considering the fact these other sites decided to link to me, and letting my site's own homepage determine the keywords that are important? Could this perhaps be a new change to neutralize the "Googlebomb", where links based on irrelevant keyword were considered important?
I am getting more confused :(
"Im Archiv - Ähnliche Seiten"
not terribly relevant for Brits...
Also we had a PR7 front page with 172 inbound external links. This month after we changed the querystring and link structure (4 params to 2 max) we have > 1300 links mostly internal. No PR change seems apparent yet - but not really sure whether to expect it.
google.co.uk has just gone German too
zeus
Cache is also replaced with III
Gurus, please help. GoogleGuy, can you help?
I believe the <title> got smacked way down in importance. And something I am missing on all of my sites gain a whole lot of importance. These observations based on prior standing that what you see on www2 at the beginning usually is the way it ends."
This has been my experience too. I gather from the range of opinion that it may be somewhat "sector specific" as some people seem to report little change in their area.
In my case, myself and some very heavyweight sites dropped like stones from the top 10 on the major 3 word keyphrase. Other than 1 good penalized site that returned to the top 10 after a month's banishment, the usurpers are all of less relevance. They include a link farm and several mom and pop sites (and I am talking about like Betty and Bill's B&B (hypothetical) knocking off Holiday Inn on a search for "<hotels sometown>".
So whatever is happening is major and - at least in my area - NOT an improvement in search quality.
[edited by: ciml at 3:23 pm (utc) on Sep. 27, 2002]
[edit reason] Generalised [/edit]
[edited by: skibum at 2:34 pm (utc) on Sep. 27, 2002]
After today, the results will start to look like the 2002 algo.
Just a guess.
edited: I see they now appear as links to www.yahoo.com and not yahoo.com. There goes my conspiracy theory.
