*************************Unstoppable innovation machine***********
You were hit by Panda if your raankings dropped in the US on 24th Feb or other English speaking countries on 11th April. I've started to work out what some of the problems are and I've started getting some of my sites back. If your site is dropped suddenly down to nothing, it means you're probably doing at least two things Google doesn't like, so even when you fix one you don't come back. Cross linking combined with duplicate content was my problem, but now there's also the content farm algo to deal with.
I added this tag in the header:
<link rel="canonical" href="http://www.anydomain.com">
reason I added is that I keep seeing this in my log file
not exactly sure what "x=1893.7290.1252.1980." the end can be any number
I am using Arrow Script Xtreme and smart thumbs ... smart thumbs is up to date it
There have been many updates and additions since the first Panda rollout. They say they're up to v2.2 now and people that weren't affected by the initial Panda may find they were hit by a later version. One source who claims to know a google employee (not Cutts) says there have been exactly 17 revisions to date. Even if the number is false, there is near-consensus among SEO guys it's in the ballpark.Originally Posted by redwhiteandblue
If you've been affected by Panda, addressing issues such as dupe or spun content, too large a ratio of low-quality versus high-quality subpages (relatively speaking), too many backlinks you might have sollicited or bought yourself, not enough relevant content above-the-fold, the complete lack of a USP, etc, WILL bring your rankings back... up to a point.
To my knowledge, no full recoveries have been reported yet.
You know, ever since the Caffeine update, Google started rolling out update after update, one more experimental than the next and sometimes even doing random (and very large-scale) statistical A/B-testing. Caffeine introduced a huge improvement to their processing ability. It allows them to "think bigger" and test algos on huge samples in no time. To play around with ranking signals that, up until Caffeine, were simply impossible to account for.
Least they could do is let us know when they're "testing" something. Oh and it'd be dandy if they could elaborate on their understanding of "high quality" too.
Google used to be cute and sparkly, everybody wanted to do her. But now she's a frivolous Delilah -- always fickle, always vague.
To avoid confusion and counter a growing animosity among those that fill their SERPS. No-one's asking for hard data, an SE company has every interest in keeping their signals from being gamed. But too much secrecy beyond that will hurt them as well.Originally Posted by DX
E.g. we were recently told Panda isn't part of their live algo. It's a routine, periodically run against the whole of their database. They might run one version and observe the interaction between the live algo and Panda's handywork. Then they'll go back, work on it for weeks, add a bunch of new stuff as well, and run a revision. Why not mention that earlier?
Some people don't have months to wait and no-one knows what's going on. Everyone agrees you can't "build for Google" or exist by their grace. But lots of good sites just can't handle the margin drop at the moment. Do they invest? Do they wait -- or call it quits? Google, imo, would be smart to relieve some of the uncertainty where they can. Like giving a heads-up on the wee fact their SERPS might reflect anything but your actual "worth" for months.
Their Ads department would be thrilled to hear Search is causing less pointless headaches.
Meh. Utopia, I know. End of rant.
60%-70% looks familiar. Got a couple of those myself. And yes, it seems this last Panda revision is bringing some affected sites back to where they were (and beyond), albeit mostly with a different ranking (keyword) profile it seems, not sure yet.Originally Posted by redwhiteandblue
Work Smarter At Working Smarter
Imo a webmaster is anyone running a site and an SEO is anyone trying to maximize their SE potential -- while abiding by their guidelines mind you (people tend to reserve the term for those trying to game them).Originally Posted by DX
If you mean Google has no interest in catering to a webmaster's quest for profit, I agree. No-one has a right to their traffic, or even to be valued at "worth" -or at all- in their rankings. It's their service.
But some would say their market share comes with a responsibility to try and avoid unneeded market upheaval -- I'm just saying it would be nice