Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,279
    Can anyone tell me when the GoogleGlitches started? The glitch where pages suddenly lose their page ranks for no apparent reason and links to them don't show even though they exist?

    And can anyone tell me when Google first implemented the "Fresh" tag?

    Yes, I have a reason for asking, but I need more info before commenting...

  2. #2
    Newbie
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    37
    If I remember right the glitch first started on a limited basis in Nov. The fresh tag I started to notice in mid Nov.

  3. #3
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,279
    Thanks, runrun -- that's close enough.

    I believe there could be a correlation between the "fresh" feature and the GoogleGlitch of web sites losing all page rank. I can't prove it -- I only have one series of incidents on which to base this theory, but I hope you'll read through this and give me your thoughts.

    First, please... don't come yelling "my site lost page rank and I never had the "fresh" tag" -- not unless you can verify that not one single page of your web site ever ever had the fresh tag for even a 24 hour period. If it hadn't been for an odd set of circumstances and my particular attention to one page on my site, I would have said my site never had the "fresh" tag.

    Second, if you haven't read Google Life Lessons (a short thread here at ABW), please do -- this message is going to be long enough, that will save me some writing. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]

    Here goes.

    On January 31th I had sale for the merchant mentioned in the above thread. I thought that queer (haven't had one since the last google index), but not until I was reviewing my log files did I realize that I was back to getting Google hits for same merchant. I thought that queer. I visited Google and, sure enough, the page in question had been re-spidered and the google-cached version was now the same as the current version on my web site. While the listing did not have a "fresh" tag, it did have the date "Jan. 30" displayed (just before the link for "cached" version).

    I was thrilled. And would have never noticed such activity for ANY other page on my web site. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]

    On February 1st, I was playing with keyworddensity.com (trying to determine the best densities for google -- SIDEBAR: No such luck). Originally I was testing my #1 placements, but I decided to check some with slightly lower places (2-5). The page mentioned above was a good candidate so I went to google to check exactly where certain search terms fell for that page. I couldn't find the page.

    Searching on my domain name, I found the page -- the "Jan 30" was gone and it was back to the cached version that initially came out with the latest index. "Drats, I'll lose those sales," I thought.

    I shrugged and went back to playing with keyword density tests. As part of those tests, I fired up IE (not my browser of choice) to check google page ranks.

    My entire site had the dreaded GreyBar -- NO page rank. Thinking the toolbar might be on the fritz, I zipped over to another of my sites, PR 7 displayed. I went back to my first site. Grey Bar. Off to another of my sites, PR 4. Back to the first. Grey Bar.

    I lost all my rankings on the site with the page discussed above ("fresh").

    I turned the computer off and watched a movie (War Games, lol). I mulled extensively. Movie finished, I turned the computer back on, fired up IE, and voila, my page rankings were back.

    So, could it be that all along the GoogleGlitch has been connected to FRESH? And Google is working on this problem? That would explain why my page was "fresh" for no more than 36 hours and returned to stale... GoogleGuys and GoogleGals doing some testing?

    hmmmm...

  4. #4
    ABW Ambassador qball0213's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,158
    Well I don't think that is it, my index page had the fresh tag up until they stopped using it and started using the date only. The fresh tag was keyword related, atleast that is what I heard, the whole time that they used it, if you searched for windows xp tips my site had the fresh tag and a date of the day before, ususally, but if you search for just windows tips, it would show my index page without the fresh or the date and the cached version would be form the last index, same page two entirely different cached versions. But, since they dropped the fresh tag, my page has showed a date on all search terms that I have tried, and has usually just been a day old.

  5. #5
    Newbie
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    33
    GoogleGlitch ?

    Why do you call what happened a GoogleGlitch?

    Just because google changes their algo's which in turn changes everyone's page rank is no reason to call it a glitch? Altavista did the same thing on the weekend.

    Some of my sites now rank higher... but many more rank lower... just update your pages to googles new algo's and you will be right back again... until the next time that is.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    135
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>just update your pages to googles new algo's and you will be right back again<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Wouldn't happen to have that algorithm on you, would you?


    Cedric:

    You've got a point about the glitch. I wonder what other data there are to support your contention.

  7. #7
    ABW Ambassador qball0213's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,158
    Well this little snipet was published in searchengineforums from a post at searchenginewatch, which I guess you have to pay to see..

    “I checked on this with Google, and the reason why came back. The site was "in the penalty box" for spamming violations. As a result, it was being punished by having the link: command disabled for its domain.”
    I realize that this issue hardly needs anymore conformation, and I wish I could post the rest of the article, but its copy write issues.
    It turns out that sites you link to can get you in more trouble than sites that link to you. I expect a lot of this stuff will trickle into the forum over the next couple of days.
    I hope he (Sullivan) won’t mind me posting this last little bit, very good advice.
    ” My last warning would be not to go overboard. The more you play around with your links, the more likely you're going to end up looking like you are doing something artificial and possibly be downgraded.
    Instead, stay out of trouble by doing what make sense. Link internally to your own pages, in a way that describes them well for your users, and you'll probably be pleasing the search engines, as well. Link out to other good sites that will benefit your users, and this will naturally result in you pleasing link analysis systems.”

    As for a new algorithm, you may as well enlighten us Debtcafe, because you are the only person who seems to know what it is.

    [ 02-05-2002: Message edited by: qball0213 ]

  8. #8
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,279
    DebtCafe: I call it The GoogleGlitch because I don't believe that a "new algo" would cause Expedia.com (and a wealth of other sites) to go from a pagerank of X+ to a pagerank of GreyBar.

    And keep in mind, prior to what I described above, I've never lost my PR. So my PR went away under the circumstances above (for less than 24 hours) and you think that's a new algo? You may be right. I'm not convinced.

  9. #9
    Guest
    Cedric:

    What I found ( with my site anyway)is that if a page does not rank at pr3 or higher, it does not count as an incomming link. Also any of my pages that have more that 2 or 3 affiliate links dropped like a rock in pr in the last update. Check out your pages and see if they fit this pattern. Too many outbound links seems to be the killer on my sites. Also pages that have lots of internal links and only one or 2 outbound links actually went up in pr this go around.

  10. #10
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,279
    Again, I haven't been hit by this for an index -- I've kept all my rankings (to my knowledge) save but for that one bit mentioned above.

    And I have waaay more than 2-3 (like 25) affiliate links on tons of pages with rankings of 3-6. In fact, the vast bulk of two of my sites are outbound links and on one of them I don't think I have a pageranking less than 4 (lots of 6s and 7s). As for page rankings of less than 3... um, haven't got any on the site that I bother with checking indepth (not that I've found anyway).

    I'm sticking with "glitch". [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]

  11. #11
    Full Member
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    230
    Last time I was lurking over at another particular forum there was a lot of talk about linking to "bad neighborhoods". Apparently if you have links on your site to other sites which google considers to be link farms (like sites containing Z*us for example), google will penalize you.

    I'm being real careful about who I exchange reciprocal links with at the moment.

  12. #12
    ABW Ambassador
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,650
    I've been taking out some of my link exchanges with sites that use Z**s. It makes me sad to break a link trade made in good faith, but if that's what's causing my problems I have no choice.

  13. Newsletter Signup

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Google Calls us "Thin Affiliates" and Penalizes Us as "Offensive"
    By Nosmada in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 111
    Last Post: August 9th, 2005, 10:32 AM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: July 29th, 2005, 01:51 PM
  3. Replies: 9
    Last Post: July 5th, 2005, 11:51 AM
  4. Datafeeds & Google: bad "news" - Are you a "thin affiliate" ?
    By heisje in forum Programming / Datafeeds / Tools
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: June 29th, 2005, 08:52 AM
  5. Does Google place as much importance on "+4" as it does "H1" tags?
    By Andy in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: August 6th, 2002, 10:18 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •