Google Quality Algorithm Update
-
I'm curious what correlations or impacting variables SEO professionals have found that have increased or decreased ranking with the most recent algorithm change. It appears that many innocent sites have fallen victim, especially larger sites. It also appears that Google is maintaining that specific sites were not targeted... Meaning there must be proven characteristics.
-
So is the solution for stem queries to attack offsite with increased relevant, promoted content? Or is it also 'fattening' relevant content on page?
-
This is the general advice that I continue to see that doesn't have any definition whatsoever... 1. What is keyword stuffing as defined by this algorithm change and compared to actual search results that have been promoted or demoted? 2. How can Google possibly define quality without investigating and rooting out specific domains... Which they insist they are not doing? 3. Define useful and not useful in a quantitative manner that Google can measure? 4. Navigation issues impacted sites before the change? Are you saying navigation issues (404s?) have MORE of an impact since?
-
Douglas,
Actually, I was reading up a few articles on the same topic and I came across these. They may help you better understand what the update was like.
How innocent websites were targeted:
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/the-farmer-update-harmed-codependent-site-owners/28248/
Search Engine Land's view:
http://searchengineland.com/google-trying-to-minimize-collateral-damage-from-farmer-update-66495
It seems that websites with large amount of user content which were not very tightly moderated fell prey to this update. As with all algorithms, this update has its share of problems.
One is still to understand why ehow wasnt penalized whereas websites like business.com were.
One thing is for sure:
Do not stuff keywords into your content for SEO
dont put up low quality content
post only original content sueful to real users
#solve all faceted navigation issues (which is largely a problem of large ecommerce websites)
-
We've seen a significant decrease in google.com traffic for stem query terms like [botox] and [invisalign]. We have an active community with tens of thousands of cosmetic treatment reviews, photos and Q&A, so we're not a shallow scraper site.
I don't think we've been specifically punished. Instead, it looks like Google simply reset the difficulty of competing for commercial stem query terms back to what it was in 2008. I looked at google traffic by keyword between the end of February 2009 and the last few days, and it seemed clear that our overall traffic has increased significantly but most of that traffic has been for long tail searches. Traffic for stem query terms are generally flat or down.
In January and early February, we were ranking on page 1 for many of those commercial stem query terms for the first time, but it looks like those days are over.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Updated Title Tag preference
Hi, This was a topic a couple years ago https://moz.com/community/q/title-tag-use-comma-pipe-or-colon I was wondering if there was any update on this as the consensus on this thread seemed to say using a pipe as a separator is best, but in Moz's title tag recommendations it has hyphen and pipe Primary Keyword - Secondary Keyword | Brand Name Does anyone know if using a pipe | between the primary keyword and secondary has adverse effects? Also, does removing the brand name for the sake of length hurt you in any way? Thanks for the help!
Technical SEO | | AliMac260 -
Google Indexing of Site Map
We recently launched a new site - on June 4th we submitted our site map to google and almost instantly had all 25,000 URL's crawled (yay!). On June 18th, we made some updates to the title & description tags for the majority of pages on our site and added new content to our home page so we submitted a new sitemap. So far the results have been underwhelming and google has indexed a very low number of the updated pages. As a result, only a handful of the new titles and descriptions are showing up on the SERP pages. Any ideas as to why this might be? What are the tricks to having google re-index all of the URLs in a sitemap?
Technical SEO | | Emily_A0 -
Google how deal with licensed content when this placed on vendor & client's website too. Will Google penalize the client's site for this ?
One of my client bought licensed content from top vendor of Health Industry. This same content is on the vendor's website & my client's site also but on my site there is a link back to vendor is placed which clearly tells to anyone that this is a licensed content & we bought from this vendor. My client bought paid top quality content for best source of industry but at this same this is placed on vendor's website also. Will Google penalize my client's website for this ? Niche is HEALTH
Technical SEO | | sourabhrana1 -
Web Page Dropped Out of Google?
One of our web pages seems to have completely dropped out of Google after featuring on page 1 for a number of years. It can't be a site wide issue as all other web pages are performing as normal. The page is http://www.contractormoney.com/income-protection/ and the key phrase it was performing well for was 'contractor income protection'. Any ideas??
Technical SEO | | Pete40 -
Google Fetch and Render - does this fix penalties?
Ran the fetch and render and came up with two "issues". My specific question is how likely would a link to quantcast (which blocks acces via roberts.txt) really hurt us if fetch and render shows it preventing rendering - which it is not. Thoughts and comments are much appreciated.
Technical SEO | | robertdonnell0 -
Closed Address Google Local
While there are some older conversations pertaining to Google Local/Plus, I am not sure if issue is a bit different. The company I work for at one time had two locations. Both are brick & mortar, physical locations. The factory closed several years ago. To my surprise, the old location is coming up in a few Google searches as a Google Plus page (actually just located it toward the end of last week.) It is currently unclaimed. There are a handful of citations out on the web as well. To remove the factory listing (the one we don't want, which I am pretty sure is confusing Google), what is the best approach? Remove/update citations for the old listing? And then claim it and suspend it using our Google Places account? It took a while to claim the listing we actually want and I just want to be sure we handle removing the old one correctly. Any insight or advice is appreciated!
Technical SEO | | SEOSponge0 -
Duplicate Homepage In Google
Hi Just found through my SEO dashboard, Google has two versions of the same homepage, the root page, plus the index.html page, causing duplicate content from both the pages. what is the best option to ensure google only have 1 version of the homepage listed?
Technical SEO | | rfksolutionsltd0 -
Problems with google cache
Hi Can you please advise if the following website is corrupted in the eyes of Google, it has been written in umbraco and I have taken over it from another developer and I am confused to why it is behaving the way it is. cache:www.tangoholidaysolutions.com When I run this all I see is the header, the start of the main content and then the footer. If I view text view all the content is visible. The 2nd issue I have with this site is as follows: Main Page: http://www.tangoholidaysolutions.com/holiday-lettings-spain/ This page is made up of widgets i.e. locations, featured villas, content However the widgets are their own webpages in their own right http://www.tangoholidaysolutions.com/holiday-lettings-spain/location-picker/ My concern is that this part pages will affect the performance of the seo on the site. In an ideal world I would have the CMS setup so these widgets are not classed as pages, but I am working on this. Thanks Andy
Technical SEO | | iprosoftware0