Sunday, October 11, 2015

Google Confirms The Real Time Penguin Algorithm Is Coming Soon

Google’s Gary Illyes said today at SMX East that next Penguin update will be in the “foreseeable” future, adding “I hope” by the end of the year, and it will be the real-time version of the algorithm.
Back in July, Gary Illyes told us that Penguin was months away, and we are almost there. Illyes was overly cautious and would not give us a timeline or date, but he did imply it will be happening soon.

Real-time Penguin

This version of the Penguin algorithm will be real-time, at least that is the goal, Gary said. That means that as soon as Google discovers that a link is removed or disavowed, the Penguin algorithm will process it in real time, and you would be able to recover from a Penguin penalty incredibly quickly. However, you could end up with a Penguin penalty just as quickly.
Google had already told us this back in June, but it is nice to know they are on track to make this happen soon.

Google: New Algorithm Changes “Aggressively Targeting Hacked Spam,” May Impact 5% Of Queries

Google says it’s rolling out a series of search algorithm changes that “aggressively” target the presence of hacked spam in its search results.
Ning Song, the engineer who wrote today’s blog post, says Google is turning up the dial in its algorithms to remove hacked sites from Google’s search results:
We are aggressively targeting hacked spam in order to protect users and webmasters.
The algorithmic changes will eventually impact roughly 5% of queries, depending on the language. As we roll out the new algorithms, users might notice that for certain queries, only the most relevant results are shown, reducing the number of results shown.
This is due to the large amount of hacked spam being removed, and should improve in the near future. We are continuing tuning our systems to weed out the bad content while retaining the organic, legitimate results.
Hacked sites are a long-running and common problem on the Web, which makes them a problem for Google, too. Earlier this year, the IT security company Sophos announcedthat it had notified Google of “hundreds of thousands” of high-ranking, cloaked PDF documents on hacked websites. In 2013, Google revealed that hacked sites were the second most common cause of manual actions. Around that same time, Googlelaunched a help center for hacked sites that’s still online today.
Google is encouraging webmasters, site owners and SEOs with questions or feedback to speak up in the Webmaster Help Forums.
Postscript by Barry Schwartz: Google’s Gary Illyes confirmed that this algorithm typically impacts only the realm of “spammy queries” and not generic normal queries.

Thursday, July 30, 2015

How To Quickly Unblock Google From CSS & JavaScript, What Google Looks At & Number Notified

Yesterday, Google sent mass notifications for blocked JavaScript and CSS. I recommend you read that story if you haven't yet.
Since then, there have been many questions about what to do. I recommended yesterday to unblock your CSS and JavaScript files, use the Fetch and Render tool to check those issues and check the email you received from Google for more details.
But Google is sharing more information now.

How To Quickly Unblock JavaScript & CSS Assets


Gary Illyes from Google posted on Stack Overflow the cheat, or quick way, of unblocking your JavaScript and CSS files from Google. Gary said the "simplest form of allow rule to allow crawling javascript and css resources" is to add this to your robots.txt file:

User-Agent: Googlebot
Allow: .js
Allow: .css

Gary said this will open it all up for GoogleBot.

Google Checks Your Home Page & Mobile View


Primarily when Google checks for blocked CSS and JavaScript assets, they don't go too deep into your site. They look mostly at just your home page and then the mobile/smartphone view of your web site.
John Mueller of Google said this in a comment on his own post on Google+ saying "'re primarily looking at the site's homepage & for the smartphone view of the page."

Google Doesn't Look At 3rd Party Embeds


John Mueller of Google also said there that you shouldn't get this notification from Google if it is a third party embed (ad code, social embeds, etc) that has blocked JS or CSS. You will see these warnings in Google Search Console, but you should not have received an email from Google for 3rd party issues.
John wrote in that Google+ post:

We're looking for local, embedded, blocked JS & CSS. So it would be for URLs that you can "allow" in your robots.txt, not something on other people's sites (though blocked content on other sites can cause problems too, eg, if you're using a JS framework that's hosted on a blocked URL).


How Many Webmasters Received This Notification?


I asked Gary Illyes from Google about how many people received this notification. I didn't think he would answer, but he did shed some light on it.
He said on Twitter that Google sent out 18.7% of what they sent out for the mobile usability issues. So you thought this JS and CSS notification was sent out to a ton of people? The mobile usability notification was sent out to almost 85% more webmasters.

Thursday, July 23, 2015

Google Panda 4.2 Is Here; Slowly Rolling Out After Waiting Almost 10 Months

Google says a Panda refresh began this weekend, but will take months to fully roll out.

Google tells Search Engine Land that it pushed out a Google Panda refresh this weekend.

Many of you may not have noticed because this roll out is happening incredibly slowly. Google says the update can take months to fully roll out because it will slowly impact your site. The Panda algorithm is still a site-wide algorithm, but some of your web pages might not see a change immediately.

The last time we had an official Panda refresh was almost 10 months ago: Panda 4.1 happened on September 25, 2014. That was the 28th update, but I would coin this the 29th or 30th update, since we saw small fluctuations in October 2014.

As far as I know, very few webmasters noticed a Google update this weekend. That is how it should be since this Panda refresh is rolling out very slowly.
Google said this impacted about 2-3% of English language queries.

New Chance For Some; New Penalty For Others

The rollout means anyone who was penalized by Panda in the last update has a chance to emerge if they made the right changes. So if you were hit by Panda, you unfortunately won’t notice the full impact immediately but you should see changes in your organic rankings gradually over time.

This is not how many of the past Panda updates rolled out, where typically you’d see a significant increase or decline in your Google traffic more quickly.

For the record, here’s the list of confirmed Panda Updates, with some of the major changes called out with their AKA (also known as) names:
  1. Panda Update 1, AKA Panda 1.0, Feb. 24, 2011 (11.8% of queries; announced; English in US only)
  2. Panda Update 2, AKA Panda 2.0, April 11, 2011 (2% of queries; announced; rolled out in English internationally)
  3. Panda Update 3, May 10, 2011 (no change given; confirmed, not announced)
  4. Panda Update 4, June 16, 2011 (no change given; confirmed, not announced)
  5. Panda Update 5, July 23, 2011 (no change given; confirmed, not announced)
  6. Panda Update 6, Aug. 12, 2011 (6-9% of queries in many non-English languages; announced)
  7. Panda Update 7, Sept. 28, 2011 (no change given; confirmed, not announced)
  8. Panda Update 8 AKA Panda 3.0, Oct. 19, 2011 (about 2% of queries; belatedly confirmed)
  9. Panda Update 9, Nov. 18, 2011: (less than 1% of queries; announced)
  10. Panda Update 10, Jan. 18, 2012 (no change given; confirmed, not announced)
  11. Panda Update 11, Feb. 27, 2012 (no change given; announced)
  12. Panda Update 12, March 23, 2012 (about 1.6% of queries impacted; announced)
  13. Panda Update 13, April 19, 2012 (no change given; belatedly revealed)
  14. Panda Update 14, April 27, 2012: (no change given; confirmed; first update within days of another)
  15. Panda Update 15, June 9, 2012: (1% of queries; belatedly announced)
  16. Panda Update 16, June 25, 2012: (about 1% of queries; announced)
  17. Panda Update 17, July 24, 2012:(about 1% of queries; announced)
  18. Panda Update 18, Aug. 20, 2012: (about 1% of queries; belatedly announced)
  19. Panda Update 19, Sept. 18, 2012: (less than 0.7% of queries; announced)
  20. Panda Update 20 , Sept. 27, 2012 (2.4% English queries, impacted, belatedly announced
  21. Panda Update 21, Nov. 5, 2012 (1.1% of English-language queries in US; 0.4% worldwide; confirmed, not announced)
  22. Panda Update 22, Nov. 21, 2012 (0.8% of English queries were affected; confirmed, not announced)
  23. Panda Update 23, Dec. 21, 2012 (1.3% of English queries were affected; confirmed, announced)
  24. Panda Update 24, Jan. 22, 2013 (1.2% of English queries were affected; confirmed, announced)
  25. Panda Update 25, March 15, 2013 (confirmed as coming; not confirmed as having happened)
  26. Panda Update 26, July 18, 2013 (confirmed, announced)
  27. Panda Update 27 AKA Panda 4.0, May 20, 2014 (7.5% of English queries were affected; confirmed, announced)
  28. Panda Update 28 AKA Panda 4.1, Sept. 25, 2014 (3-5% of queries were affected; confirmed, announced)
  29. Panda Update 30 AKA Panda 4.2, July 18, 2015 (2-3% of queries were affected; confirmed, announced)

Saturday, July 4, 2015

Google Crawl Limit Per Page: 10 Megabytes

Google's John Mueller said in a Google Hangout this morning on Google+ at the 31:25 mark that Google will crawl up to about 10 megabytes per page.

So if you have pages larger than 10 megabytes, make sure the content on the page is crawled within the 10 megabytes part.

Note, this number of how much Google crawls on a megabyte level with Google seems to continue to rise and rise over time.
John said:

There is obviously a limit to the size of the page that we can download. I think that is around 10 megabytes. So if you have your content within those 10 megabytes, then we will be able to recognize that and show that in search.

Here is the video:


Forum discussion at Google+.

Google: Panda Refresh Not Likely Happening On July 4th Weekend

A month ago today, we reported that Gary Illyes from said a Panda refresh is coming within 2-4 weeks or so. Well, it has been over 4 weeks now and still no refresh, but that is not uncommon, launch dates with Google often get delayed, yes - even with the Panda updates.

Yesterday, in a German Google Hangout, John (Johannes) Mueller from Google said in German that the refresh is coming soon. Oliver Engelbrecht from seo-portal.de transcribed it, "I think the next update, I don't know if it's coming this week or next week, but in any case it should be released soon."

But I was nervous even with the transcription by a German speaking individual, that something got lost.

So I asked John Mueller in the English hangout this morning on Google+ about what he said at the 24:15 mark.

He basically said, yes, it is still coming "fairly soon," but he wouldn't expect it to go live on the July 4th weekend. Today, July 3rd, is an official holiday, so Googlers are off in Mountain View. But he did say expect it to happen "in a few weeks." If I had to guess, maybe next Thursday night.

Here is the video at the start time:


Here is the transcript as I typed it:

We have this question from Barry *sigh*

On Thursday, in the German hangout, I am told you said the Panda refresh is coming this week or next. Or did you still mean it can come even later than next week?...
So a few weeks ago we said that this refresh will be happening in a few weeks and so it is kind of coming up. I doubt it is going to happen this week because it is a holiday and it is Friday and people are busy doing other things.
But I imagine in the next couple of weeks this is something that might be happening. So that kind of sets expectations. We try not to provide an exact date for when these things roll out because things can always change. But I expect this to happen fairly soon.

Next week, John is on vacation and I am pretty sure Gary Illyes is traveling - so I am a bit nervous the communication line around the Panda refresh will be delayed. But I will do my best to keep you updated.

Forum discussion at Google+ and Google Webmaster Help.

Tuesday, June 30, 2015

Google's Spammy Structured Markup Manual Action Lead To Ranking Decline?

Back in February 2014, Google began sending a manual action notice for spammy structured markup. Back then I assumed that if you received such a manual action, it meant you lost your rich snippets from showing up in the Google search results until the manual action was revoked.

I did not think it may have meant your rankings would see a negative impact in the Google search results.

Tony Edward wrote a guest article at Search Engine Land about the topic and it seems that some people are thinking that this manual action also may result in your rankings in Google feeling a hit.

I am not sure. It can be, I asked Google about this but currently didn't hear back.

Here is a picture of the manual action, which hasn't changed in context in over a year:

click for full size
I suspect it depends on how bad the spam is, how often it happens and more.

Have you received one of these manual actions and noticed not just a removal of rich snippets but also a ranking decline?

Forum discussion at Local Search Forums.

Friday, May 29, 2015

iOS Support Finally Comes To Google App Indexing

Finally, now iOS apps can benefit from Google's App Indexing protocol. Google announced this yesterday on the heels of Google I/O.

App Indexing is a way for app developers to feed Google the content within their native Android and now iOS apps. This way Google can index the content, rank it in the mobile results and trigger a command to open the app on your mobile device specifically to the page of content within the app.

This has been supported for Android apps for years and now it has come to iOS, at least for a select number of apps. More apps will be supported in the near future and you can get ready by adding the App Indexing mark up to your iOS and Android apps.

Here are the steps to get App Indexing for iOS:
  1. Add deep linking support to your iOS app.
  2. Make sure it’s possible to return to Search results with one click.
  3. Provide deep link annotations on your site.
  4. Let us know you’re interested. Keep in mind that expressing interest does not automatically guarantee getting app deep links in iOS search results.
With this, Google also announced support for deep linking via Google's short URL service. You can use one short Google URL and depending on the device clicking on the URL, it may open the content on the web, iOS app or Android app. It all works with the same app indexing protocol.


With App Indexing, Google may show your app as an option to install on mobile searches, which benefits from the new mobile friendly ranking factors.

Here are some pictures:
click for full size
click for full size
This is great news for iOS developers.

Forum discussion at Google+.

Wednesday, May 27, 2015

Google Local Search Results Update; Massive Ranking Changes

The local SEOs are buzzing big time right now. It seems like over the past few days, Google has done a major algorithmic change that has shifted how the local results rank in both Google Maps and the local packs in web search.

It is believed that the Google Maps Googlebomb fix led to this and I actually said then "expect the traffic change some for many local businesses in the near future."

It seems to be related, although Mozcast features shows the shift on the 15th. I cannot find any serious discussion around changes in local results as early as the 15th, only shortly after the Google apology after the 22nd.


The Local Search Forums has tons of local SEO experts documenting the change. You have Mike Blumenthal calling the location results screwy and the forums are simply lighting up around this.

I find it hard to believe it is not around the change Google made for the Google Maps bomb.

It seems like something went wrong with location detection and ranking of local results. It is almost believed to be a bug with Google's location detection systems. But it is awkwardly around the same time of the Googlebomb fix.

I'll try to find out more from the source, Google.

Forum discussion at Local Search Forums.

Friday, May 22, 2015

Google Diagnosing Algorithmic Penalties In Real Time

We know Google representative can fairly quickly tell if a site is hit by an algorithmic penalty - such as by Penguin or Panda. But when they do it in real time, it is pretty cool.

In a Google+ hangout this week, Google's John Mueller did it at least twice, once at the 16:24 mark and the other at the 17:44 mark.

The question came from Don who asked John, "would you be so kind as to tell me whether or not I still have a historic Penguin on my back, on this web site?"
John responded, "you don't have anything."

Then he told another webmaster after asking about their site a minute or two later, "I don’t see anything holding back your new site," even adding "it looks like traffic is going up as well."

Here is the video:


Here is the transcript:

(Q) Would you be so kind as to tell me whether or not I still have a historic Penguin on my back, on this web site?
(A) Ah, you don’t have anything where I would say you’d need to focus on links here.
So that’s something where if you’ve been focusing on links for Penguin or other web spam issues, that’s not something where at the moment I’d say you have to worry about that.

Then at 17:44:

I don’t see anything holding back your new site. So I think that’s kind of evolving as it organically would be evolving... It looks like traffic is going up as well.

We want an automated action viewer, Google.

Forum discussion at Google+.

Tuesday, May 19, 2015

Google SEO On-Page Ranking Factor List 2015 Version

Roger Montti, aka martinibuster, posted a thread at WebmasterWorld about a revised list of on-page SEO factors that he thinks are more important now in 2015, also with a list of those factors that are no longer important or as important.

The factors he put on the list as being more important in 2015 are:

  • User experience metrics (all of them)
  • Shorter title tags
  • Original content
  • Engaging content that provides an answer, teaches, informs, is useful, delights
  • Original images
  • Quality site design
  • Descriptive meta description

The factors that he would go as far as to call deprecated, as in, no longer used by Google are:

  • Keywords
  • Focus on longtail phrases
  • Focus on ranking for specific keyword phrases
  • Lean code

The long tail does seem to be dead, it is more about the whole site experience and broader keywords than going after the big blue pineapple chair anymore.

Others added that responsive (mobile) friendly design and schema should be added to the list. I'd agree with that. But there is a lot more discussion around what should and should not be on these lists.

This is a thread you should spend some time in.

Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.

Google Decided On Content Removal For Right To Be Forgotten

The Wall Street Journal reported on how Google decides on what to remove based on the EU's Right To Be Forgotten (RTBF) mandate.

It requires Google to remove content from their search results when the content is harmful and no longer relevant - it actually gets way more complex than that.
The WSJ documents that Google has meetings every Wednesday to make decisions on what to remove and what not to remove based on the RTBF requests and submissions. And the decision is pretty much in Google's hand.

The court gave little guidance on how requests should be decided, beyond saying that search results should be scrubbed if they include links to information that is inadequate, irrelevant, excessive or outdated. 

That largely left Google on its own to figure out where to draw the line. The case, which established what is informally known as the “right to be forgotten,” has prompted more than 250,000 requests covering more than 920,000 links, as of Tuesday. Google has agreed to remove 35% of the links submitted and declined to remove 50%, with 15% still under review.

It is a very manual process, requiring Googlers to discuss each on a case by case basis.

Here is a chart from the WSJ on the removals:

click for full size

I wonder how one gets to work on Google's RTBF decision making team?

Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.

Another Mass Reduction In Google Rich Snippets?

Over the past couple weeks, I have been seeing more and more webmasters complaining about their rich snippets disappearing from the Google search results page.

There is a thread at WebmasterWorld but dozens of complaints from individual webmasters in the Google Webmaster Help forums, I only linked to two but there are many.

In short, webmasters who had rich snippets displaying, mostly for reviews rich snippets, no longer see their stars.

For example, Home Depot shows rich snippets here:


But a year ago, it looked like this:

Amazon vs Walmart Rich Snippet

So Home Depot didn't have, Walmart did, now they don't. And before that, Walmart did not and Amazon did:

Amazon vs Walmart Rich Snippet

Back in October 2013, Google performed a 15% reduction in rich snippets and it would not surprise me if they did this every now and then. Maybe a few weeks ago they reran their rich snippet reduction algorithm (or rich snippet quality algorithm or whatever they call it) and it resulted in many sites losing their rich snippets again?

Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld and Google Webmaster Help.

Wednesday, May 13, 2015

Technical Hangout: Google, SEOs & Angular Experts Talk About SEO & JavaScript

For all you really technical SEOs out there, the 14th episode of Angular Air on Google+ was incredibly insightful.

We have Google's John Mueller answering some very technical questions about Google's ability to crawl and render JavaScript, AJAX and Angular. We also have expert SEOs and developers Adam Audette, Jody J. O'Donnell and Max Prin going through questions, answers and observations.

Here is the video:


This is an hour, it goes over most of what we know already, but for those who deal with crawling issues with JavaScript, facetted navigation, pagination, etc etc - it is worth listening to while you are working.

John Mueller from Google

More Details On What Google Defines As A Doorway Page

When Google updated their doorway page algorithm and guidelines it confused webmasters. The definition was not as clear, and honestly, most SEOs still are fuzzy on what a doorway page is.

This is so much so that most SEOs had no clue the new doorway page algorithm actually launched.

This morning I spotted a thread at Google Webmaster Help where one webmaster was being smart and wanted to 'out' the Hilton hotel for having landing pages for each hotel on the main hilton web site as well as a secondary URL in the format of hiltoncityname.com.

Top Contributor ETS responded to that, which Google's Eric Kuan from the search quality team marked as the best answer, as follows:

Those aren't doorways, no. There's nothing deceptive or manipulative that I can see. An example of doorways is when you have a website with 200 pages on it, all of which have the same basic text but with place names switched out on each page ("Find a taxi in London"/"Find a taxi in New York City"). The pages are designed to rank separately, catch keyword searches, but funnel all the traffic to one destination.

Whether this way of doing things is a good idea is another matter - since you effectively have two different indexed pages/sites (both are indexed) competing with one another. It would generally make more sense to have one of the URLs 301 redirecting to the other - and making one strong site instead of two.

So maybe use this as your doorway page definition even though it isn't described too well in the help docs.

Forum discussion Google Webmaster Help.

Google: Panda & Penguin Are In Real Time But Still Require Manual Data Updates

We've been covering all the confusion around Penguin and Panda about it being real time or manual. I explained based on covering John Mueller's explanation of what is real time and what is not over here.

But Google's Mariya Moeva explained it very concisely in a Google+ post, this is not new, because I covered it before, but the way Mariya explained it is short and concise:

Essentially, both (Panda and Penguin) are built-in in the realtime infrastructure, but the data has to be updated separately. I think this two-part process is what's leading to the confusion.

I don't speak Russian, but the reason this was prompted is because at the 46:42 minute part of the video, someone asked about this:

Q: Google's John Mueller is basically saying parts are real time and parts are not but with Penguin (and also currently with Panda), for you to recover, Google does need to run something manually and you need to wait for a refresh

A: Yes, absolutely, it is happening all the time

So I asked Mariya to explain and she responded:

I don't think we said anything extra revolutionary or surprising though (:. Essentially, both are built-in in the realtime infrastructure, but the data has to be updated separately. I think this two-part process is what's leading to the confusion. 

Again, this has led to a lot of confusion, I covered all of that over here but it is important enough to cover again.

Without the updated data, even though these algorithms are built into the real time infrastructure, you won't see any changes to your rankings around those specific algorithms.

Forum discussion at Google+.

Tuesday, April 28, 2015

Google: The Mobile Friendly Algorithm Does Not Affect Your AdWords Quality Score

Kate O'Donovan from the Google AdWords team in Dublin confirmed that the mobile friendly algorithm that began rolling out last week has not impact on your AdWords quality score.

Kate actually posted the announcement about the organic mobile friendly algorithm in the Google AdWords Help forum and ended the announcement by clearly stating this algorithmic change has no impact on your AdWords ads.

Kate wrote:

Remember this update will not affect your AdWords performance or your individual Quality Scores.

Just so you have it from the horses mouth...

I should add, Google has been spotted testing the mobile friendly label on AdWords ads.

Forum discussion at Google AdWords Help.

Google: Not All Tag Pages Should Be Blocked From Google's Index

In the SEO world, there is a lot of strong feelings about what should be indexed and what should not be indexed by Google. SEO is now about removing content, removing links, removing potentially useful stuff from your site. I find it incredibly comical at times that this is where the industry has gone - mostly Google is at fault for this with Panda and Penguin.

That being said, someone asked Google's John Mueller about tag clouds, and should the tag results on your site be blocked from Google indexing it? This was asked on a Google+ hangout at the 49:57 mark in the video:

Question:Would you suggest to block tag-pages in the robots.txt? I use a lot of tags to group my tutorial pages for my readers. Is that duplicate content and so on bad for my site?

Answer: This really kind of depends on your web site - the kind of site that you have.

I think there are some kind of tag pages that are essentially going to search results pages, which probably don’t make sense to get indexed.

There are other kinds of tag pages that are almost like category pages where you have a useful collection of individual pieces of content that match this category. And that might be something you do want to have indexed.

So that’s not something where I’d say there is a default answer that works well for everyone. You have to work that out for your web site yourself. Look at some of those sample pages and be as objective as you can in saying, well, is this really something I want to have indexed or is this something I don’t really need to have indexed.


Here is the video embed:


Heck, I am constantly linking to tag pages on this site because I find it more useful for me to tag my content then place them in categories. I personally use my tag pages all the time but it may not be as useful to others, as it is useful to me. Either way, I personally find mine useful. :)

Forum discussion at Google+.

Wednesday, April 15, 2015

Google: It Sucks We Provide Contradictory Information On Penguin & Panda Updates

A month ago, Google told us they would provide clarity over Panda updates since we were not sure if Google's contradictory statements around Panda running in real time versus not running since October.

Well, it is now over six months since a Panda update and just a couple weeks ago, Google's John Mueller told us both Panda and Penguin are pushed manually which specifically contradicts the statements around them being real time.

Danny Sullivan and I have been working on getting clarity on this from Google but then they simply said no, we have nothing more to add on the matter after months of trying. So last night Danny wrote Google Panda & Penguin Lack Real-Time Updates, Despite Google’s Past Statements, you should go read that.

In a Google+ thread, Rae Hoffman has been giving it to Google over the confusion and contradictory information they've been giving.

So John Mueller of Google responds that he knows it sucks but it wasn't by design and they will likely have more cases of this but again, they will try to limit it. Here is what he wrote:

Rae Hoffman I agree, that sucks. Please call us out when you see that happening. I don't think we can eliminate all of these cases, sometimes the basis of a comment changes internally, but it's certainly not by design.

Yes, it really does suck. It makes it look like Google has no clue what they are doing. It makes it hard for SEOs and webmasters to communicate to their clients. It makes it hard to build a better web all around.

Danny wrote the ultimate solution for this is likely an automated action viewer in Google Webmaster Tools but I can't see that happening that soon.

Forum discussion at Google+.

Friday, April 10, 2015

Google Panda Hasn't Updated In About 6 Months

Can you believe, the last official Google Panda refresh/update was Panda 4.1 on September 25, 2014? We've seen updates to it since, but those updates stopped around October 24, 2015, which is 5 months and 2 weeks or so ago.

I asked John Mueller of Google in a Google+ handout at the 47:50 mark in the video:

There hasn’t been a Panda update in a while, since October or so, right?

In John fashion, he answers:

That’s possible, yea.

Watch the video to see how he answers it:

We know Google has to push these updates, at least now, but hasn't in about 6 months.

A half a year is a long time to wait for a Panda refresh, don't you think?

Forum discussion at Google+.

Saturday, April 4, 2015

Google: Make A Change To Your Web Page? We'll Find It.

A thread at Google Webmaster Help forums has a webmaster concerned that Google isn't allowing him to manually use the submit to index in the fetch in render tool in Google Webmaster Tools for all the URLs on his site. As you know, there is a limit to how often you can use that feature per day/per month.

In response to the webmasters concern, Google's John Mueller said on the thread:

You don't need to submit pages when they're changed -- we recrawl the web automatically to pick those changes up (you could also use sitemaps & feeds if you wanted to point out individual changed pages).

Yep, that is what GoogleBot does, it is all about seeking out and consuming new and changed content and web pages. So if you really want to expedite it for a large number of pages, use Sitemaps.

Forum discussion at Google Webmaster Help.

Google News URLs Can't Have Years As Unique Identifiers Except When...

Google News optimization fascinates me because it is a different algorithm and there are weird rules. I knew Google News had a rule about having 3-digit unique number in the URL if you do not use Google News Sitemaps but did you know that if you used 1999 or 2000 in the URL that you are out of luck?
Stacie Chan said this in her presentation Google+ hangout at the 3:51 mark. Here is the slide she shared:

Google News URL examples

She said:

The exception is if you've got four digits and it leads off with 199 or 200, as you can see, those typically reflect a year. 

However, now that we've got into the 2010 and beyond years, 201 actually works for your article URLs.
All this is said always with an exception. If you decide that your CMS doesn't spit out these random three digits, that's fine as well. You can always submit a Google News Sitemap. You submit that through your webmaster account. And then you don't have to abide by Google News's three-digit rule.

Here is the video:


Forum discussion at Google+.

Does Google's Pigeon Local Algorithm Impact Organic Rankings? Doubtful.

A thread at Local Search Forum asks a question most SEOs will ask themselves over time... Does your local ranking in Google's local algorithm at all impact the overall core Google search algorithm?

The truth is, it does impact your visibility and rankings in web search because Google's local results are often embedded in the web search results as a local pack.

But purely on the algorithmic side, does Google's local algorithm, which is now known as the Pigeon update directly impact your organic rankings? Not really in my opinion.

The truth is, the Pigeon update now includes many of Google's core web algorithm factors. Google said back then that there is "deeper into their web search capabilities, including the hundreds of ranking signals they use in web search along with search features such as Knowledge Graph, spelling correction, synonyms and more."

So if anything, the web search algorithm impacts more of the local results than the other way around.

One local SEO said:

In my experience local rankings are influenced by organic ones (pigeon update) and not vice versa. They are two very different algorithms. In a competitive market you usually have to have something ranking on the first page organically to show up in the local pack.

What do you think?

Forum discussion at Local Search Forum.

Wednesday, March 18, 2015

Google Doorway Pages Algorithm & Guidelines Updated

Google announced they have updated their ranking algorithm to detect a larger and better set of doorway pages and thus wipe them out of the search results, as to improve search quality within Google's search results.

Brian White from Google's search quality team said:

Over time, we've seen sites try to maximize their "search footprint" without adding clear, unique value. These doorway campaigns manifest themselves as pages on a site, as a number of domains, or a combination thereof. To improve the quality of search results for our users, we'll soon launch a ranking adjustment to better address these types of pages. Sites with large and well-established doorway campaigns might see a broad impact from this change.


Truth is, I have not heard many complaints about doorway pages ranking well in Google. But I guess they were for Google to improve their algorithm for that.
With that, Google quietly updated their doorway pages guidelines page. Now it read:

Doorways are sites or pages created to rank highly for specific search queries. They are bad for users because they can lead to multiple similar pages in user search results, where each result ends up taking the user to essentially the same destination. They can also lead users to intermediate pages that are not as useful as the final destination.

Here are some examples of doorways:

  • Having multiple domain names or pages targeted at specific regions or cities that funnel users to one page
  • Pages generated to funnel visitors into the actual usable or relevant portion of your site(s)
  • Substantially similar pages that are closer to search results than a clearly defined, browseable hierarchy

The previous day it read:

Doorway pages are typically large sets of poor-quality pages where each page is optimized for a specific keyword or phrase. In many cases, doorway pages are written to rank for a particular phrase and then funnel users to a single destination. Whether deployed across many domains or established within one domain, doorway pages tend to frustrate users.

Therefore, Google frowns on practices that are designed to manipulate search engines and deceive users by directing them to sites other than the one they selected, and that provide content solely for the benefit of search engines. Google may take action on doorway sites and other sites making use of these deceptive practices, including removing these sites from Google’s index. 
Some examples of doorways include: 

  • Having multiple domain names targeted at specific regions or cities that funnel users to one page
  • Templated pages made solely for affiliate linking
  • Multiple pages on your site with similar content designed to rank for specific queries like city or state names

  • It seems Google's definition has shrunk a bit around this.

    So how do you know if your pages are at risk? Google said ask yourself these questions:

    • Is the purpose to optimize for search engines and funnel visitors into the actual usable or relevant portion of your site, or are they an integral part of your site’s user experience?
    • Are the pages intended to rank on generic terms yet the content presented on the page is very specific?
    • Do the pages duplicate useful aggregations of items (locations, products, etc.) that already exist on the site for the purpose of capturing more search traffic?
    • Are these pages made solely for drawing affiliate traffic and sending users along without creating unique value in content or functionality?
    • Do these pages exist as an “island?” Are they difficult or impossible to navigate to from other parts of your site? Are links to such pages from other pages within the site or network of sites created just for search engines?
    As of now, I have yet to see mass scale complaints about sites that have doorway pages no longer ranking too well. This includes my monitoring of more "black hat" forums and social discussions. I'll keep an eye out.



    Wednesday, March 4, 2015

    Google Fact Rank: Google Ranking Web Pages On Facts, Not Links

    The SEO community is buzzing heavily around a paper (PDF) published by Google named Knowledge-Based Trust: Estimating the Trustworthiness of Web Sources.

    The paper describes how Google can rank the most factually accurate web pages higher in the search results. Here is the abstract:

    The quality of web sources has been traditionally evaluated using exogenous signals such as the hyperlink structure of the graph. We propose a new approach that relies on endogenous signals, namely, the correctness of factual information provided by the source. A source that has few false facts is considered to be trustworthy. The facts are automatically extracted from each source by information extraction methods commonly used to construct knowledge bases. We propose a way to distinguish errors made in the extraction process from factual errors in the web source per se, by using joint inference in a novel multi-layer probabilistic model. We call the trustworthiness score we computed Knowledge-Based Trust (KBT). On synthetic data, we show that our method can reliably compute the true trustworthiness levels of the sources. We then apply it to a database of 2.8B facts extracted from the web, and thereby estimate the trustworthiness of 119M webpages. Manual evaluation of a subset of the results confirms the effectiveness of the method.

    So instead of using links to determine the best possible web page to rank for a query, Google may want to rank the page with the fewest false facts the highest. Google calls this Knowledge-Based Trust (KBT).

    Of course, no one would currently say that this is how Google's algorithm works. Google's Matt Cutts said in the past, just because Google has a patent, it doesn't mean the algorithm works that way.

    But with links getting sucked dry and with Google's emphasis on the knowledge graph and knowledge vault, I wouldn't be surprised if we see Google lean more to factual information.

    Which makes me wonder, who determines what the facts are around SEO and what content should rank highest there. :)
    EGOL in Cre8asite forums said:

    They are assuming that their Knowledge Graph is correct. I don't like that because it is exactly how misconceptions are perpetuated. New discoveries and improvements will have a difficult time entering the knowledge base.

    rish3 echoed it in WebmasterWorld:

    If Google can't reliably identify trustworthy links, why would we think they can reliably identify trustworthy content in some other way?

    Then what if SEOs come up with a way to make up facts and spam Google's fact knowledge engine to trick them into facts that are actually false?
    Good times we live in.

    Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld & Cre8asite.
    Facebook Likes, Increase FB Likes Free