Google seems to be dancing

NO I have'nt. Matter of fact I have more backlinks listed now w/google than ever. More pages in URL too. No change in PR...

I dont see how pulling top ranked SERP sites is a service to the search result requesting public. It's more like going to a car rental place you usually lease a Cadi from and finding out that the lot has mostly Ramblers. Would'nt make my ride better...

Any hopefully another notch higher...
Time go beach..... Aloha.....

 

Another example pulled from WMW... onpage is trumping anchor text? I'm going back to 1999 with 300 phrases in my meta-description and 25% KWD.

 

I'm looking at the sites that replaced me in the listings. The best pattern I can tell is that the more different unique sites that link to you, the more stable your SERPs are. If a lot of links come from a few sites, then you got hit harder.

I tend to put my best content (such as articles) on a few different sites, so lots of my links came from the same set of domains. I think that accounts for a lot of my drop. If these hold (or even if they don't) - I'm going to spread out my article submissions a lot more than I have been.

Search google for "tree faces". I was #2 for the phrase (dropped to 12, 10 position drops is a common theme for me today). Top 3 results are 3 identical pages. This is definitely in progress, google never lets things like that sit for too long.

 

My site which fell out of the SERPS for 80% (so far) of its keywords is exactly that.

It's big competitors are about.com, howstuffworks.com, and wikipedia.

 

It's amazing how many sites howstuffworks does compete with.

 

Talking to people on other forums, it looks like there is a fairly decent theory about the devaluing of links from sites who maintain directory style link page (Directory like, lots of unrelated sites). Apparently many of these sites have been banned / dropped a lot, and the rest of us are experiencing the fallout effects from these links being devalued.

Obviously not for certain, but this seems to be consistent with what I am seeing for the most part, and would explain why many sites who don't heavily trade links, or optimize are rising to the top. My and others' observations of their link partners being banner further supports this theory.

Whatever it actually is, I would venture to say that it most definitely has some tie to linking practices.

 

My site has actually seen some increase in one keyword and all the rest is stable. So doesn't seem that I'm affected (knock on wood).

 

One thing I do notice, even though my site dropped like a lead balloon, according to my live stats, googlebot is crawlin the site like a crazy madman today! It's continually eating up my dynamic XML sitemaps. Every two minutes for the past 5-6 hours straight, it grabs all of them again and again.

 

How stuff works has pages on everything these days. They have movie review pages (how batman returns works -- Eh?) and even lightsaber pages. It used to be a cool informative site; now it just has pages upon pages of junkified information.

 

True, and it's the same with Wikipedia.

 

Now that's something I haven't thought of.
Has G just discounted everything that looks like a link from a directory ?
All my sites that have tanked are ones which I submitted to directories.
At the moment, I don't have enough sites that actually feature in Google SERPs to make a decision on this - but the only site I have that hasn't dropped also hasn't been submitted to directories yet (for some reason I haven't got around to it).
Is this idea as crazy as it sounds ? or is there something to it ?
Has google just taken it's dmoz filter on step further ?

 

was just checking my referrers and found this. my site is no where on the rader there. This has been happening a lot as others have pointed out.

http://www.google.ca/search?q=nintendo+revolution&hl=en&lr=&start=30&sa=N

 

Despite the fact that my site has only 1% of the rankings that it has last week, Google is going crazy on my site as well.

I really doth hope it puts back what it hath taken away

 

I mean the googlebot is going crazy on my site.

 

I have a hunch that this algo change is all about the relevancy of incoming links. Any thoughts on this theory?

 

I am seeing the exact opposite of this.

All of my sites submit to all of the free directories, so they all have a baseline of the same directory links.

The one site of mine which was negatively affected by this update is the site with the largest number of natural one-way inbound links (in addition to the directory links, which it also has).

Sorry.

 

do the links come from many different domains or just a few?

 

On a positive note, the current SERPS are so bad that they really can't stick. I wouldn't call them spammy as much as I would call them "irrelevant".

This is similar to what I noted during the Bourbon debacle, which took 30 days to clean up.

On a more personal and less positive note, I estimate that I will lose $9k in revenue during the next 30 days, if that is how long it takes Google to repair their lastest screw-up.

It does seem to me that with the billions of dollars they are making, Google should be able to afford a test environment. Using the entire Internet as their test environment shows very little concern for their customers.

 

Many different.

 

As a clarification of this, what I mean is that if you have a link to your site about jet engines from a site about puppies that contained no mention of jet engines, then that link would be severely devalued.

From what I have seen, this is the best explaination and it would naturally affect people who use Link Vault and DP's Co-op more then most other sites because those links usually aren't relevant (although DP let's users include descriptions for some links).