Google Panda

1. 31

   Writer Foxposted 10 years ago

   Google's Matt Cutts, speaking at Search Marketing Expo yesterday, said that Panda refreshes will still take place monthly but will be applied over a ten-day period.  He also said that the refreshes are now "relatively small compared to the normal index flux."
   
   There hasn't been a refresh in about six weeks because, according to Cutts, Google is working on a new signal to help bring a few sites "out of the grey zone and do a little better."
   
   So, any traffic dips you've seen in the past six weeks are not from Panda, but still could be a result of the main Google search algorithm (which makes changes about 500 times per year.)

   replyreport
   1. 88

      Will Apseposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      And?

      replyreport
      1. 31

         Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         What it means, Will, is that if you lost traffic over the past six weeks, it wasn't due to Panda.

         replyreport
         1. 88

            Will Apseposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            And?
            
            Edit: just to shorten the process. Why don't you tell us who has had a major traffic shift in the last few weeks and who you blame.

            replyreport
   2. 83

      Marcy Goodfleischposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Let's all hope HP is one of the sites Cutts would like to parole from the gray zone.  Feeling very gray lately . . .

      replyreport
2. 82

   Mark Ewbieposted 10 years ago

   Google are working on a new signal because Matt Cutts can't tell his ass from his elbow.
   
   That's why they have messed about with this for TWO YEARS now.
   
   TWO YEARS of what?
   
   Improving? Changing? Tweaking?
   
   I love the way he consistently rolls out 'minor whatevers' and presents them as some sort of solution to anything.  I Google stuff and it is garbage.  Their adverts are garbage.  They steal content and misuse our information.
   
   Well done Matt.  What's next?  Another 'improvement'?

   replyreport
3. 59

   paradigmsearchposted 10 years ago

   I thought Panda was real-time now! I'm getting perturbed... Could someone post the link to the article?

   replyreport
   1. 82

      Mark Ewbieposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Panda could not possibly do a real-time check of the entire HubPages site each time someone does a query.  So that is a LIE.
      
      It may do some vague measurement of absolute pointless crap - but they will still have to run a deep-dive process every so often.
      
      Google cannot measure quality.  They have a vague stab at it and add a large amount of manual favortism and penalty.
      
      Remember. This company misuses our personal information and unfairly promotes its own sites.  Would you trust a single word from them?
      
      I would not. They are a business on the edge of failure as the world moves on and away to the next thing - whatever that is.  They have a search engine.
      
      Well whoop-de-do.

      replyreport
      1. 88

         Will Apseposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         Every time you say something like this a fairy dies.

         replyreport
   2. 31

      Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      The conference is still going on today.  There's a video of the talk, but the sound is really low quality.  Looks like someone made it with a cell phone.  The video is over an hour long and the Panda discussion starts at about 8 minutes in:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_jyMt5CPmE
      
      There are also a few thousand live-blogging tweets if you want to check Twitter.

      replyreport
4. STAFF

   Paul Edmondsonposted 10 years ago

   it takes google about three days to crawl HubPages.  It was around May 9th that the last panda took a hit on HP.  We know quality is getting better.  I really love how many people have been improving their Hubs and making new hubs that are fantastic.

   replyreport
   1. 31

      Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      My Hubber score took a hit because I published 2 new Hubs.  Makes me feel like HP doesn't like new Hubs being published.

      replyreport
      1. 96

         EricDockettposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         Your Hubber score may have taken a hit because (presumably) average Hubscore is a factor in Hubber score.  With only 23 Hubs, if you publish 2 which start out with low scores it will impact your Hubber score.  If you had 200 Hubs you probably would not have noticed.
         
         I just say this because some newbies have made this correlation before and erroneously concluded that they shouldn't publish Hubs as often  just so their Hubber score stays a few ticks higher. Hubberscore isn't the goal here.   Doesn't matter if its 100 or 90 or 80 as long as you're doing everything else right.
         
         Also, I can't imagine HubPages wouldn't want to see new Hubs published as often as possible . . . as long as they are good.  :-)

         replyreport
         1. 31

            Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            I appreciate your input here.  That makes a lot of sense.

            replyreport
      2. STAFF

         Paul Edmondsonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         Of course we love new hubs!  Fawntia is working on HubScore changes.  This should happen a lot less.

         replyreport
         1. 31

            Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Please tell Fawntia that when she raises her own Hubber score, that I would like her to raise mine, too.  Thank you.

            replyreport
   2. 31

      Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      "It takes google about three days to crawl HubPages."
      
      Could be because Google has to crawl 2,406,552 forum posts.  These forum pages do not pass through quality ratings and bring down the overall quality of the entire site.

      replyreport
      1. 78

         Greekgeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         I'm sure that Google is intelligent enough to know the difference between user forums (which have a lot of boneheaded chatter, but provide value to visitors) and the main content of a site. Most major content sites have member forums.

         replyreport
         1. 31

            Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            No.  Google leaves it up to the webmaster to determine what pages Google should crawl with this caveat:
            
            "Every page of your site should offer significant value to your audience."

            replyreport
      2. STAFF

         Paul Edmondsonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         That's not quite right.  A significant portion of forum threads and QnA are no indexed.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            paradigmsearchposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            What!?! Going through my Q&A source code as we speak...

            replyreport
            1. 59

               paradigmsearchposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               Follow-up:
               
               Well, well... Apparently I'd already deleted the ones that might have had the noindex tag. No new ones found. Great minds think alike.

               replyreport
         2. 31

            Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            site:http://hubpages.com/forum
            Google shows 20,600 pages of forum posts in its index.
            
            site:http://hubpages.com
            Google shows 911,000 pages indexed on the entire site.  Less than 1/2 are Hubs.

            replyreport
            1. STAFF

               Paul Edmondsonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               Don't put too much stock in site: search accuracy. 
               
               A very small fraction of the total pages from forums are indexed.  It's been that way for about 1 yr now.
               
               Before we no indexed hubs we ran tests in forums and QnA....

               replyreport
               1. 31

                  Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  Are subdomains with no Hubs being indexed?

                  replyreport
            2. 85

               aa liteposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               I think Paul is right that the site:search often returns inaccurate info.  I don't know if this has something to do with it, but it probably does.  If you've ever used Steal Keyword Analyser, you will know that the program uses something called "true #of sites" for a particular topic as a competition measure.
               
               This is because the guy who wrote the software (Alex Safie?) discovered that when Google says there are 10000000 results for a search, that is actually not quite true.  If you go deeply enough into the SERPs, like page 100+ it will show you the "google isn't showing any more results because they are very similar to the ones already shown". 
               
               When I did that on my subdomain, sure Google included the idled hubs in the number of results.  The idled hubs were hidden and when I tried to see them G told me they couldn't be shown because of robot.txt file.
               
               So I think when it says x results for hubpages, at least some idled hubs are included in the number.  The number can also be very different on different days.
               
               Unfortunately I can't remember where I read the stealth guy's explanation which was much better than my confused rendering.  He also tells you how to search so you get the "real number".

               replyreport
5. 57

   jericho911posted 10 years ago

   And ebay and youtube

   replyreport
6. 70

   cornwall_UKposted 10 years ago

   Talking of losing traffic ...... try typing into google: Attraction in [your town name]
   
   A HUGE black banner now appears, offering searchers attractions in your town that people might be looking for, with super-beguiling images.
   
   If they start doing that for all subjects,  there'll be no space left for writers as all results will go directly and only to websites of "real businesses".
   
   OH NOES!
   
   

   replyreport