53 Search Changes Last Month

11 years ago

This one is interesting.

Keyword stuffing classifier improvement. [project codename "Spam"] We have classifiers designed to detect when a website is keyword stuffing. This change made the keyword stuffing classifier better.

Notice they have listed separately from Penguin.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6185642].message }}

paulgl 11 years ago

Well, the vast majority don't affect most people
in the United States, I would presume.

They do have 2 things I have been touting for the
past year:

Pay attention to what text is at the top of the page,
and build an authority site.

Of course there are some things that will make people mad.
They will now score search terms. I can only assume this
means scoring terms that attract spammers. They
will also put as good a "title" in SERPS as they can.
But hey, we knew they were doing that anyway.

The other one is that they are increasing the base
index by 15%. Pity the people who are so off base
saying they are on a de-indexing spree. I think
it's more of an indexing spree. Indexing better
content, sacking the crap.

Paul
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6185801].message }}
- dp40oz 11 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by paulgl
  
  They will now score search terms.
  
  Can you elaborate on this. What exactly does that mean?
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  The Keyword Research Tool You've Been Waiting For!
  Keyword Research - Competitor Analysis - Rank Tracking - Keyword Difficulty - White Label Reporting
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6185861].message }}

yukon

Banned 11 years ago

[source]

Categorize paginated documents. [launch codename "Xirtam3", project codename "CategorizePaginatedDocuments"] Sometimes, search results can be dominated by documents from a paginated series. This change helps surface more diverse results in such cases.

Awesome, they admitted what I've been saying about Silos.

Silo content spans multiple pages in a single category & makes it easier to rank multiple pages per keyword on a single domain.

[source]

Paginated content includes things like an article that spans several URLs/pages, or an e-commerce product category that spans multiple pages.

Paginated links are an obvious footprint (rel="next",rel="prev") which is what their targeting.

The trick is still in the relevant themed internal links.

Who says Google won't share their secrets, lol.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6185851].message }}

retsek

11 years ago

Originally Posted by yukon

[source]

Awesome, they admitted what I've been saying about Silos.

Silo content spans multiple pages in a single category & makes it easier to rank multiple pages per keyword on a single domain.

In the same breath, they also took steps to minimize multiple SERP listings... something which my own Silos are good at.

More domain diversity. [launch codename "Horde", project codename "Domain Crowding"] Sometimes search returns too many results from the same domain. This change helps surface content from a more diverse set of domains.

They've probably set a limit on the number of results one domain can now get on page 1... probably 2, or 3 the most.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6185952].message }}

yukon

Banned 11 years ago

Originally Posted by retsek

In the same breath, they also took steps to minimize multiple SERP listings... something which my own Silos are good at.

They've probably set a limit on the number of results one domain can now get on page 1... probably 2, or 3 the most.

The typical multiple SERP listing has been 2-3 for a few years, which I'm happy with.

I'm keeping an eye on it for a few sites (not only my own sites) so far I don't see any changes in how their handling multiple SERP listings per keyword.

Large sites are usually a good indicator of what's possible in the SERPs.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6185991].message }}

yukon

Banned 11 years ago

All you keyword density guys better watch out for this one.

I keep saying forget everything you know about keyword density...

[source]

Keyword stuffing classifier improvement. [project codename "Spam"] We have classifiers designed to detect when a website is keyword stuffing. This change made the keyword stuffing classifier better.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6185879].message }}

retsek

11 years ago

They also have several items on sitelinks and mega-sitelinks.
Anybody seen any examples with both in a combo as they described? Would like to see how it looks.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6186002].message }}

Linda1111

Banned 11 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6187904].message }}

sbucciarel Banned 11 years ago

Originally Posted by mosthost

You really shouldn't stuff your posts with fake IMG tags that include redirects to your hosting affiliate plans. It's bad form.

Bad Linda!

Linda is a bot that has already been banned but her cookies live on because you quoted a cookie stuffer, so now you're stuffing her cookies for her. :p
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6188621].message }}

ankit8logic

11 years ago

Thanks for sharing this information.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6188327].message }}

Rike Mathew

Banned 11 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6188377].message }}

Steadyon

11 years ago

Originally Posted by yukon

[source]

Awesome, they admitted what I've been saying about Silos.

Silo content spans multiple pages in a single category & makes it easier to rank multiple pages per keyword on a single domain.

[source]

Paginated links are an obvious footprint (rel="next",rel="prev") which is what their targeting.

The trick is still in the relevant themed internal links.

Who says Google won't share their secrets, lol.

Yukon,

You are a firm advocate for silo type structues and are very well educated on this.

So what do you think of this?:

I've read that google clamps down on pages that are too similar to each other etc..(I don't mean duplicate content, I mean closely related). YEs, this is done to try and pull in visitors etc. So there must be a sweet spot between google thinking you are trying to game the system versus sharing good content.

For example suppose the keyword phrase is "beach holidays" and you had the following pages:

beach holidays
beach holidays for kids
cheapest beach holidays
cheapest beach holidays in Florida
quiet beach holidays
remote beach holidays

Is there any benefit to using (rel="next",rel="prev") when organising any of these pages?

Or is this mainly for when pages are very closely related?

Finally how can you write content for the pages mentioned above, without google thinking you are trying to spam them or keyword stuff.

In other words, when is one article too closely related to another to cause the suffering of negative consequences?

Cheers,

Sam

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6188467].message }}

yukon

Banned 11 years ago

Originally Posted by Steadyon

Yukon,

You are a firm advocate for silo type structues and are very well educated on this.

So what do you think of this?:

I've read that google clamps down on pages that are too similar to each other etc..(I don't mean duplicate content, I mean closely related). YEs, this is done to try and pull in visitors etc. So there must be a sweet spot between google thinking you are trying to game the system versus sharing good content.

For example suppose the keyword phrase is "beach holidays" and you had the following pages:

beach holidays
beach holidays for kids
cheapest beach holidays
cheapest beach holidays in Florida
quiet beach holidays
remote beach holidays

Is there any benefit to using (rel="next",rel="prev") when organising any of these pages?

Or is this mainly for when pages are very closely related?

Finally how can you write content for the pages mentioned above, without google thinking you are trying to spam them or keyword stuff.

In other words, when is one article too closely related to another to cause the suffering of negative consequences?

Cheers,

Sam

You defiantly don't want to use the (rel="next",rel="prev") tags on your page, you can have the same user experience without those tags, just use regular keyword anchor-text as the Nav. links.

What's funny is Google is the one that encouraged people to use the (rel="next",rel="prev") tags back in 2011, now in 2012 they don't like the same tags.

Even If Google never mentioned the (rel="next",rel="prev") tags, the typical pagination setup is horrible as far as SEO.

1|2|3|4|5|6...

As far as content, I would find a writer that doesn't have a clue about SEO (seriously), let the writer write as natural as possible, give them the subject, not the keyword.

Example, I need an article that is approx. 500-700 words long, the subject is "What are the best places to find low cost vacation deals?". Be precise about what you want from the writer, just don't get them stuck on a single keyword.

When a writer has the freedom to be creative, you'll end up with quality content.

A good writer will break the content up into small chunks of information with Heading tags <h2>, etc...

You need to theme your page titles <title>, not keyword stuff, there's a difference.

beach holidays = beach holidays
beach holidays for kids = best beach vacation destinations for kids
cheapest beach holidays = cheap holiday beach destinations for 2012
cheapest beach holidays in Florida = 10 low cost florida beaches
quiet beach holidays = florida's quiet beach getaway
remote beach holidays = remote beach vacations

Use the original keywords as keyword anchor-text when linking to the relevant pages.

Example anchor-text:

beach holidays
beach holidays for kids
cheapest beach holidays
cheapest beach holidays in Florida
quiet beach holidays
remote beach holidays

Anchor-text & page titles don't have to be the exact same, they do need to be keyword themed.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6189891].message }}

dp40oz

11 years ago

Originally Posted by yukon

You defiantly don't want to use the (rel="next",rel="prev") tags on your page, you can have the same user experience without those tags, just use regular keyword anchor-text as the Nav. links.

What's funny is Google is the one that encouraged people to use the (rel="next",rel="prev") tags back in 2011, now in 2012 they don't like the same tags.

Even If Google never mentioned the (rel="next",rel="prev") tags, the typical pagination setup is horrible as far as SEO.

As far as content, I would find a writer that doesn't have a clue about SEO (seriously), let the writer write as natural as possible, give them the subject, not the keyword.

Example, I need an article that is approx. 500-700 words long, the subject is "What are the best places to find low cost vacation deals?". Be precise about what you want from the writer, just don't get them stuck on a single keyword.

When a writer has the freedom to be creative, you'll end up with quality content.

A good writer will break the content up into small chunks of information with Heading tags <h2>, etc...

You need to theme your page titles <title>, not keyword stuff, there's a difference.

beach holidays = beach holidays
beach holidays for kids = best beach vacation destinations for kids
cheapest beach holidays = cheap holiday beach destinations for 2012
cheapest beach holidays in Florida = 10 low cost florida beaches
quiet beach holidays = florida's quiet beach getaway
remote beach holidays = remote beach vacations

Use the original keywords as keyword anchor-text when linking to the relevant pages.

Example anchor-text:

Anchor-text & page titles don't have to be the exact same, they do need to be keyword themed.

Great info. Yukon you are the master onpage SEO.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

The Keyword Research Tool You've Been Waiting For!
Keyword Research - Competitor Analysis - Rank Tracking - Keyword Difficulty - White Label Reporting

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6191039].message }}