Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.104.22.168
Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Yahoo's Slurp spider is still indexing my site constantly, so much so that I put the crawl delay in robots.txt to slow it down (after the drop in visits, thinking it was bogging down my server).
The domain in question currently has 400,000+ pages indexed in Yahoo, so it's not a banning issue as far as I can tell. Once thing I did notice that when using Yahoo's site explorer when you click on the "Cached" link under each listing, the cached page is displayed. BUT when you click the "Current Page" link at the top of the cached listing in goes to my home page instead of the current version of the cached page. Could this be part of the problem, some kind of weird redirect issue? I could not duplicate the problem with other sites in Yahoo.
This traffic drop occurred sometime around 5pm Eastern Time on June 13th (Wednesday). It was almost like a switch was pressed. The sit gets several thousand visits per day, and now it's a couple hundred or so.
I even switched over to me backup server on a completely separate web host (thinking server issue), and traffic has not increased. This pretty much isolates the problem to Yahoo's end.
I'm at wit's end.... any ideas, anyone.
My site (two and three keyword established for over -ten, yes ten years) has slipped off first page.
I guess they feel they have to shake things up to please the bosses now that things are not going well at Y!
The results are not better, IMO. And I see some other very established sites taking a hit too.....
My sites are absolute world top leaders in the industries and niches I'm working on (in fact rewarded by Y! as top 10 positions since year 1999 at least, with no major shifts since then), and no algo change can hit them so severely. It's against Yahoo own interest to cancel them like this from their index.
It's almost like if "www.whitehouse.gov" was not in the top 50 results for the search "white house"...
It's interesting to hear others are having the same problem. By that I mean if other established sites are having the same problem perhaps Yahoo will take notice and reverse these disastrous changes.
...perhaps Yahoo will take notice and reverse these disastrous changes.
Your definition of authority and what others consider authoritative are subjective. It's a moving target. Besides, Yahoo has never consistently shown true authority sites at the top of the SERPs. However Yahoo has become a lot better at it lately over the last few months.
It's indeed interesting that others are complaining about similar losses in rankings. Could this be an anti-SEO tweak, and if it is, what could Yahoo be targeting?
The week before your loss of traffic was a Yahoo update. Your loss of rankings could very well be related to that as well. But if it's not, you who have lost rankings could try to figure out what you have in common between you to determine if it's an anti-SEO tweak.
My site was solid in Y! for as long as I can remember. I should really take some time to analyse a site that I now see at the top and others (which are starting to dominate in G as well). Trouble is the "leader" in our field has also been badly affected, they never put a foot wrong in G! or Y! and they too have been blasted.
possibly a blunder by Y!
I am at a loss..
I am in Travel by the way.
Anyone esle noticing changes in Travel or other sectors?
No no this is not a technical issue or a change in algo that affects only the SEOed sites.
My sites have no SEO whatsoever.
The concept of "authority" is very clear to me and we are indeed authority on our market as we are the world leader on many terms.
Y! has always (since year 1999) rewarded us with the obvious 1st position for very, very competitive KWs (many of them). Without one single day of missed visibility.
We are talking about 700,000 clicks lost per year (80% of the traffic from Y!), because of this move. Can't be permanent, or the algo change is really, really worse than before.
As I said, believe me: it's like if the site whiethouse.gov was not showing for the search "white house".
This is a severe problem. Guaranteed.
though still has listings, so not banned
Not so - in the last two years we lost all our traffic overnight to three sites that had had listings since before 2000 yet all still retained their 20k,40k & 80k pages as 'listed'
However, over a perdio of weeks slowly but surely they all disappeared until only homepage left!
Yahoo's policy for removing sites makes no sense. They also never reinstate (please prove me wrong someone!)
you'd see all your (usual) xx,#*$! pages....
Problem is: they are not ranking anymore.
Also: we requested a re-review of our sites and again, they are commenting (with exclusively canned answers) that our sites are violating the guidelines.
Ok, how come, if they have been sending us million of clicks in the last 7 years and always rewarded us with the top-3 positions for very competitive keywords?
They are *now* violating (new) guidelines, perhaps.
And what is worse: they are not violating any of the Y! guidelines. Really.
In exchange, the top 10 sites for those competitive keywords are now showing really random sites: no one is a real offerer of the products you are searching about. We know our competition and our competitors: none of the top 10 players are listed there (and: of course they are, and we are, on Google).
This is a really a big change in the algo... or a big penalization (and I see from this post that we are not alone)...
Is anyone else who has suffered from Yahoo penalization also still having their spider crawl the site?
Would it be worthwhile to email Yahoo to see what they say, perhaps in regard to duplicate www/non-www pages listed? I have a 301 redirect from non-www to www but still both versions are listed....
Not mine, mine are all with www (I also have a 301 of course and mine are not listed without).
Regaring the spidering activity, in 6hrs40min they have spidered the 30% of the pages of our biggest website (thousands of pages spidered).
Therefore, I guess they are really re-spidering all...
I've never seen such huge Slurp activity on our pages...
How many of those indexed pages are actually cached?
Do you have at least 1 unique website listing for each page?, excluding the various navigation or admin pages.
Do you have a titanic number of incoming links, that are not sitewides?
Basically, methinks Yahoo is being rather stricter on directory pages , product pages than it used to be
1. Crawls pages that have not been on our site for at least 2 years.
2. Constant attempts to sniff some bogus URIs.
3. Ranking pages of products that have been out of Stock for over 2 years and thus are not linked to anymore from within the site for that long, which leads to "Click and Leave syndrome" for many Yahoo Visitors. I have tried putting the Item in INSTOCK Status, as soon as Crawled and mentioned an a few other pages with links pointing to it, the page rankings drops to the OBLIVION.
4. Truncating URIs and SERP, which leads to constant unnecessary bandwidth usage by other Robots, since there is a whole bunch of Scrapers using Yahoo API to get to the content.
5. A specific search term that is mentioned on our site brings up close to 100 sites, ALL MFAs, 3 in top 20 lead to the sites that try to install a Trojan. I have contacted Yahoo, no response.
We rank for many terms on Yahoo and outrank many of our competitors at this time, but the amount of time it takes to maintain the low level of frustration and the Brand Level presence is much higher than its worth at this time.
and Yes I have an Authority Site and the Y knows it.
This trend started about a year and half ago from what I deduce, but have increased in frequency.
Some sites that list businesses in return for a link back, and ever websites that simply list other businesses and dont ask for anything back seem to get hit. Internal linking in combination with this previous property seems to cause the effect.
I have been reincluded to Yahoo.com before, but not with a directory site or a site with a directory of any kind on it.
It took three response / changes to be reinclded, the first two times they sent some BS auto mail about how I still was violating their guidelines in some way.