News

Google Algorithm Update Penguin 2.0 May 2013

May 14th 2013: The web is a buzz about the next ‘Penguin’ update to possibly roll out within the next three weeks, by the end of May 2013.

To Cover:

  • Advertorials
  • Spam Queries
  • Sophisticated Link Analysis – Going Upstream
  • Improvement on Hacked Sites
  • Authority Boost
  • Panda Sympathy
  • Cluster of Results from Same Site
  • Improved Webmaster Communication

Below is the 7:24 Video

“We’re relatively close to deploying the next generation of Penguin,” said Matt Cutts. “Internally we call it ‘Penguin 2.0,’ and again, Penguin is a web spam change that’s dedicated to try to find black hat web spam, and try to target and address that. So this one is a little more comprehensive than Penguin 1.0, and we expect it to go a little bit deeper in have a little bit more of an impact than the original version of Penguin.”

Advertorials

“We’ve also been looking at advertorials,” says Cutts .”That is sort of native advertising – and those sorts of things that violate our quality guidelines. So, again, if someone pays for coverage, or pays for an ad or something like that, those ads should not flow PageRank. We’ve seen a few sites in the U.S. and around the world that take money and do link to websites, and pass PageRank, so we’ll be looking at some efforts to be a little bit stronger on our enforcement as advertorials that violate our quality guidelines.”

“There’s nothing wrong inherently with advertorials or native advertising, but they should not flow PageRank, and there should be clear and conspicuous disclosure, so that users realize that something is paid – not organic or editorial,”

Spam Queries

“We get a lot of great feedback from outside of Google, so, for example, there were some people complaining about searches like ‘payday loans’ on Google.co.uk. So we have two different changes that try to tackle those kinds of queries in a couple different ways. We can’t get into too much detail about exactly how they work, but I’m kind of excited that we’re going from having just general queries be a little more clean to going to some of these areas that have traditionally been a little more spammy, including for example, some more pornographic queries, and some of these changes might have a little bit more of an impact on those kinds of areas that are a little more contested by various spammers and that sort of thing.”

Link Analysis; Upstream

“We’re also looking at some ways to go upstream to deny the value to link spammers – some people who spam links in various ways. We’ve got some nice ideas on ways that that becomes less effective, and so we expect that that will roll out over the next few months as well.”

“In fact, we’re working on a completely different system that does more sophisticated link analysis,” he adds. “We’re still in the early days for that, but it’s pretty exciting. We’ve got some data now that we’re ready to start munching, and see how good it looks. We’ll see whether that bears fruit or not.”

Hacked Sites

“We also continue to work on hacked sites in a couple different ways,” says Cutts. “Number one: trying to detect them better. We hope in the next few months to roll out a next-generation site detection that is even more comprehensive, and also trying to communicate better to webmasters, because sometimes they see confusion between hacked sites and sites that serve up malware, and ideally, you’d have a one-stop shop where once someone realizes that they’ve been hacked, they can go to Webmaster Tools, and have some single spot where they could go and have a lot more info to sort of point them in the right way to hopefully clean up those hacked sites.”

Authority Boost

“We have also been working on a lot of ways to help regular webmasters,” says Cutts. “We’re doing a better job of detecting when someone is more of an authority on a specific space. You know, it could be medical. It could be travel. Whatever. And try to make sure that those rank a little more highly if you’re some sort of authority or a site, according to the algorithms, we think might be a little more appropriate for users.”

Panda Sympathy

“We’ve also been looking at Panda, and seeing if we can find some additional signals (and we think we’ve got some) to help refine things for the sites that are kind of in the border zone – in the gray area a little bit. And so if we can soften the effect a little bit for those sites that we believe have some additional signals of quality, then that will help sites that have previously been affected (to some degree) by Panda.”

Domain Clustering of SERPs from Same Site

“We’ve also heard a lot of feedback from people about – if I go down three pages deep, I’ll see a cluster of several results all from one domain, and we’ve actually made things better in terms of – you would be less likely to see that on the first page, but more likely to see that on the following pages. And we’re looking a change, which might deploy, which would basically say that once you’ve seen a cluster of results from one site, then you’d be less likely to see more results from that site as you go deeper into the next pages of Google search results.”

Improved Webmaster Communication

“We’re going to keep trying to figure out how we can give more information to webmasters…we’re also going to be looking for ways that we can provide more concrete details, [and] more example URLs that webmasters can use to figure out where to go to diagnose their site.”

We’ll keep you updated…

SEO Opportunities Begin Before Web Development

Mar 25, 2013 at 11:37am ET by

Launching a new site, or any major site update, for a large enterprise comes with some unique challenges. A short summary of some of the most common include those listed below.

SEO Challenges: New Site Launch Or Major Updates

    1. Too many decision makers. This is one of the more basic headaches. Product marketing, engineering, PR and the executive branch can all weigh-in in ways that can have you ripping your hair out.
    2. Many development priorities. This is often the most frustrating challenge, because it is the hardest one to combat. Other priorities may well be more important in the short term than what you are pushing for. Or, worse, it just makes it harder for you to get key players to buy into your idealistic view of the best way to build the new website.
    3. Ignorance of SEO. You still run into those that think that SEO is unimportant. Yes, they are still out there. I dug into this a bit in my article, Why Do Brands Overlook the SEO Opportunity for Non-Branded Keywords?
    4. Misinformation About SEO. This one is worse. The exec who thinks they know something, but the information is wrong, just might drive you mad. Just last week at SMX West, I was talking to one exec that told me they had just finished updating the meta keywords on 1800 to their pages. To them, this was SEO. The lost time is certainly one bad part of this, but worse still, to this exec, the SEO for the site was done. (I took it upon myself to set them straight.)
    5. Misconceptions. The belief that SEO is Hopeless.

The above misinformation deserves its own brief discussion. Many believe that Google changes the rules at its whim, and hence, no SEO effort is sustainable. They have not yet bought into the basic concept that modern SEO is not about tricking Google; it is, in fact, a form of branding activity that uses many tactics that support the overall brand in ways well beyond pure ranking in the SERPs.

(Read Full Story)

Additional Links

SEO News for November 20th

Was There A Google Panda Refresh? #22

19 Nov 12′ by www.seroundtable.com

In this post Barry Schwartz reports Google’s Panda refresh starting around Friday, November 16th rumours spreading among webmasters on various forums. All waiting for confirmation from Google.


Can’t Rank? Link Building Won’t Help You

19 Nov 12′ by www.searchenginejournal.com

According to the author of this post, analysis of the most notable Google algorithm updates shows us that link building (though still being an important aspect of SEO) should no longer be predominant in SEO projects.


How Can Google Stop the Black Hats?

19 Nov 12′ by searchenginewatch.com

In this article the author analyzes the options Google has to fight the smartest algorithm gamers and black hats and clean up SERPs (like manual policing, 301 redirect check or applying some changes to how they crawl the web).


Ways to increase organic backlinks

19 Nov 12′ by www.seop.com

The author of this article describes a few ways you can help your site increase organic backlinks: create link baits, guest blogging, invest on creating multimedia content, launch promos and contests.

by ahrefs

Enhanced by Zemanta

Google Disavow Link Tool Not a Replacement

This was made clear at the outset; that only those links that have no other way of being removed should then and only then be used by the Google Disavow Link Tool to get it done.

Below is a snippet from both SearchEngineLand and Google

Many SEOs cheered that Google’s new disavow links tool would make it easier to recover from a bad backlink profile. No more worrying about directories charging to remove links or trying to get out of bad link networks. But Google says it does want to see a good faith effort to go along with any disavow links request, or those disavow requests might not get honored.

Google: Try To Remove Links

Google had previously suggested that the disavow link tool wasn’t a replacement for making link removal requests. From the company’s blog post, the day the tool launched:

We recommend that you remove from the web as many spammy or low-quality links to your site as possible. This is the best approach because it addresses the problem at the root. By removing the bad links directly, you’re helping to prevent Google (and other search engines) from taking action again in the future….

If you’ve done as much as you can to remove the problematic links, and there are still some links you just can’t seem to get down, that’s a good time to visit our new Disavow links page….

Read Full Article

Additional Links

Google Algorithm Update and Google Disavow Link Tool Update

October 24th 2012 – There’s a good deal of news and talk about the latest Google Algorithm update and the new Google Disavow Link Tool, and whether this tool is truly effective and if there even was a Panda #21 update or not.

I’ll be attending a webinar called “Google Disavow Tool SEO Q&A Webinar” with Leslie Rohde tomorrow night and should gain additional insight on exactly what’s happening with Google and the latest updates, or non-updates.

I have learned from experience that it is important to be cognizant of the validity of any breaking SEO news. Although, it is sometimes a good thing to take immediate action on the new knowledge to help perform better in Google, it seems better to be patient and see how things go (for a couple weeks) before taking any massive action. Performing smaller tests and seeing how these tests work out, is a safer approach until we’re sure we’re doing what is in the best interest of not only our websites and users, but also Google’s search results.

Barry Schwartz has written a recent article entitled: “Rumor: Google Panda Update #21 On October 17th? Nope.“, in which he says:

Last Wednesday or late Tuesday night, October 16th or October 17th, Google may have pushed out a Panda refresh. If so, this would be Panda update number 21.

Update: Google implied that there was no update around this time frame.

You can follow another discussion on the topic of Google Panda and Google Disavow Link Tool over at Webmaster World.

In the meantime, get your complimentary custom SEO Analysis Report Today containing 50 plus pages of spot-on SEO insight for your home page and top keyword phrase!

New Google Disavow Link Tool to Combat Spam Links

October 17 2012

The Google Disavow Link Tool is here!

Google announces a new tool to disavow links today, and the article from the Official Google Webmaster Central Blog goes on to say…

“If you’ve done as much as you can to remove the problematic links, and there are still some links you just can’t seem to get down, that’s a good time to visit our new Disavow links page. When you arrive, you’ll first select your site.”

It goes on to show you how to proceed accomplishing this task by saying, the below:

“The format is straightforward. All you need is a plain text file with one URL per line. An excerpt of a valid file might look like the following:

# Contacted owner of spamdomain1.com on 7/1/2012 to

# ask for link removal but got no response
domain:spamdomain1.com
# Owner of spamdomain2.com removed most links, but missed these
http://www.spamdomain2.com/contentA.html
http://www.spamdomain2.com/contentB.html
http://www.spamdomain2.com/contentC.html

In this example, lines that begin with a pound sign (#) are considered comments and Google ignores them. The “domain:” keyword indicates that you’d like to disavow links from all pages on a particular site (in this case, “spamdomain1.com”). You can also request to disavow links on specific pages (in this case, three individual pages on spamdomain2.com). We currently support one disavowal file per site and the file is shared among site owners in Webmaster Tools. If you want to update the file, you’ll need to download the existing file, modify it, and upload the new one. The file size limit is 2MB.”

There were some good questions listed at the bottom the page, here are just a few of the ones I thought youd like to know the answers to immediately.

Q: If I disavow links, what exactly does that do? Does Google definitely ignore them?
A: This tool allows you to indicate to Google which links you would like to disavow, and Google will typically ignore those links. Much like with rel=”canonical”, this is a strong suggestion rather than a directive—Google reserves the right to trust our own judgment for corner cases, for example—but we will typically use that indication from you when we assess links.

Q: How soon after I upload a file will the links be ignored?
A: We need to recrawl and reindex the URLs you disavowed before your disavowals go into effect, which can take multiple weeks.

Q: Can this tool be used if I’m worried about “negative SEO”?
A: The primary purpose of this tool is to help clean up if you’ve hired a bad SEO or made mistakes in your own link-building. If you know of bad link-building done on your behalf (e.g., paid posts or paid links that pass PageRank), we recommend that you contact the sites that link to you and try to get links taken off the public web first. You’re also helping to protect your site’s image, since people will no longer find spammy links and jump to conclusions about your website or business. If, despite your best efforts, you’re unable to get a few backlinks taken down, that’s a good time to use the Disavow Links tool.

In general, Google works hard to prevent other webmasters from being able to harm your ranking. However, if you’re worried that some backlinks might be affecting your site’s reputation, you can use the Disavow Links tool to indicate to Google that those links should be ignored. Again, we build our algorithms with an eye to preventing negative SEO, so the vast majority of webmasters don’t need to worry about negative SEO at all.

It will be interesting to see how this tool combats the recent wave of negative SEO, hopefully it will stop spammers from taking the time and expense in creating a bunch of junk links that they should now know have no value on either the negative or positive aspect of a web page/site.

Read Entire Article on Google Disavow Link Tool

Additional Links

Exact Match Domains (EMD) Affected by Google Algorithm Change

Have you ever been searching for something, you used a real good keyword phrase search and you see a very low quality Exact Match Domain site ranking in the #1 spot?

Well, you will start seeing the news about a new Google algorithm ‘upgrade’ coming to battle that issue.

The question becomes, Will Google Overdue It Again?

See the stories below for more information on this new algorithm update.

Another week, another Google update.

Many website owners are still reeling from the latest Google update, released earlier this week. Announced on Twitter as a “small upcoming Google algo change” by head spam-fighter Matt Cutts, the change affects exact-match domains (EMDs) and has bumped low-quality EMDs from the top of the search results.

The EMD update came alongside yet another Panda update, and a Penguin refresh is looming. Overall, 2.4% of English-language queries were affected. Have the changes affected your sites? Did your competition plummet, or did your own sites move to page 2? [Link to Full Article]

From SearchEngineLand:

Likely over the coming days, you will see shifts in the search results where many sites that may rank well based on being an exact match domain may no longer rank as high in Google’s search results.

Exact match domains mean domains that match exactly for the search query. For example, if I sold blue widgets and owned the domain name www.bluewidgets.com, that would be an exact match domain.

Keep in mind that this doesn’t mean sites with keywords they hope to rank for in their domain names are now doomed. Rather, the change aims to target low quality sites that might be riding on on the basis of exact matching. [Link to Full Article]

As I said at the start, how far will Google take this remains to be seen. So we have to wait, or start looking at some testing now, either way, with Google and any new update that has to do with their organic SERPs, saying with 100% certainty how bad or how good this will be is just a guess.

I have a handful of EMDs in different industries that are ranking well and will let you know if and when they are affected and how so.

Additional Links

Existing Rank Transitional Rank and Final Rank a New Google Patent Filed

Seems like the news today is on a new Google filed patent.Google Gets Nasty

This is a post from Ross Carrel of http://promotedprofits.com.

Google’s got a new trick, and the jokes on you!

It’s official.

The U.S. patent office confirms it.

Google is pushing the boundaries of transparency off a cliff.

If the attack on links wasn’t the death of SEO, then it was most certainly the first sign of a withering pulse.

Here’s the inside story on why SEO may never be the same again.  (chances are it’s already underway)

The latest news surrounding Google is the approval of a Google filed patent.

The short version is that it protects the concept of a three tiered rank.  Not unlike the three card shuffle.

The end result is about the same.  If you choose to step up and play, rest assured Google is hiding something under the table.  Just when you think you’ve grabbed the Ace number one ranking, they pull a nasty trick to leave you scratching your head in confusion.

Let’s start from the beginning.

So as any normal concerned webmaster you check your ranking.

It is for most, never as high as they’d like it to be.

At some point in the uncertain past you could make a change, and your ranking adjusted within a moderately short period of time.

This makes optimization somewhat of a simple cat and mouse game.   Make a change, watch the results, repeat until every last ranking factor was clear as mud.

Feedback – it’s the ultimate business tool.  Until now it worked wonders with SEO.

And when it comes to SEO and site changes I’ve also always been quick to say, go slow.  

Well now you might as well start a new site before making any changes.

Here’s the lowdown:

The patent outlines three stages of rank.

#1.  Existing rank

#2. Transitional rank

#3.  Final rank.

It’s in the middle where they start playing games, and the guts of the patent.

The purpose of a tiered ranking is to introduce their own feedback loop.  They’ve finally figured out a way to use our own tricks against us.

Here’s how it works:

When you adjust your site, it will enter a transitional period.

During this transition, rankings may go up, down, sideways, or disappear.  Essentially anything they want that’s completely unrelated to the final ranking.

While you’re flumoxed at the sudden drop of your site, you freak out and make more adjustments to the old ranking factor standards.

Upon re-evaluation the new system recognizes some percentage of new ranking factor related adjustments and flags you for “over-optimizing.”

Game over, you lose.

Alternately, during the transition you may go up feeling like a cool cat and you leave your site alone.  Until suddenly out of nowhere, Google flips it’s cards and your final rank is tanked.

Make more changes at that point, and it’s a roll of the dice whether you’re still actually in “transition” or final stages of rank.

Sadly, this is fiendishly clever at pummeling SEO efforts.

Unfortunately, it opens an enormous can of worms about validating the results.

What to do?

Well from what I know about programming and such, there’s going to be some average, or percentage of changes that will trigger the over optimization signal.

More specifically, if you do too many obviously high ranking factor adjustments at once you’ll get burned.

Big keyword changes seem like the most obvious starting point.

For now, I’d be very careful about hyper optimizing, and do it over a much longer and slower timeline.  Social improvements are safe, adding more content is safe, and fixing errors are going to be safe bets.  Even diluting anchor links is most likely a safe bet in moderation.

I do have a strong suspicion this has already been implemented and will become more so apparent in future updates.

Over the last few months I’ve noticed strange and random movement and made a point to limit changes.  Ultimately I climbed back, but that in between time sure had a strange randomness to it.

So consider yourself warned…this is most likely already live. [END] (Visit This Story)

———————————-

How Google Search Works

Once a 125 page document the Google Search Quality Raters Instructions Handbook is now 161 pages with the addition of a new ‘page quality’ guidelines section along with adding to an existing section entitled, “URL Rating Tasks with User Locations”. You can find this 2011 version online through the links below and also the 2012 Google Search Quality Raters Instructions Handbook may be found online.

This handbook is provided to “those human raters (via contractors like Lionbridge and Leapforce)” a Matt McGee Quote, [Search Engine Land's Executive News Editor] so that Google Engineers can accomplish the 516 improvements in their Search algorithm over the past year, changes to their search results using Search Quality Raters – this is a basic example of how a search signal/search factor is launched after the process has gathered enough data and is deemed worthy.

This “A Peek Inside” article was taken from Google’s site referencing Stephen Levy’s February 22, 2012 article on Wired.

“At any moment, dozens of these changes are going through a well-oiled testing process…Every time engineers want to test a tweak, they run the new algorithm on a tiny percentage of random users, letting the rest of the site’s searchers serve as a massive control group.”

Matt Cutts talks in this video about how crawling was done then and is done now, and more importantly how Google indexes and ranks web pages in their search results.

With such an increasingly technological world, with Search rapidly ‘improving’ and changing, to gain and dominate first place positions on Google one has to continue to implement and also stay on top the latest news and updates from Google on the journey to mastery by beating the clock.

Thanks to Matt McGee Google shows us how this “Page Quality” is explained to its raters:

You have probably noticed that webpages vary in quality. There are high quality pages: pages that are well written, trustworthy, organized, entertaining, enjoyable, beautiful, compelling, etc. You have probably also found pages that seem poorly written, unreliable, poorly organized, unhelpful, shallow, or even deceptive or malicious. We would like to capture these observations in Page Quality rating.

Market Pressure to Innovate – “[Google] has every reason to do whatever it takes to preserve its algorithm’s long-standing reputation for excellence. If consumers start to regard it as anything less than good, it won’t be good for anybody—except other search engines.” Harry McCracken, TIME, 3/3/2011

Be forewarned you can find yourself heading down the SEO rabbit hole at any time.

General Guidelines Version 3.27 June 22, 2012

Table of Contents Only

1.0 Welcome to the Search Quality Rating Program! …… 5
1.1 URL Rating Overview …………………………………………. 5
1.2 Important Rating Definitions and Ideas ………………. 5
1.3 The Purpose of Search Quality Rating …………………. 6
1.4 Raters Must Represent the User …………………………. 6
1.5 Internet Safety Information ……………………………….. 7
1.6 Releasing Tasks ……………………………………………….. 7
2.0 Understanding the Query ………………………………… 8
2.1 Understanding User Intent ……………………………… 8
2.2 Task Language and Task Location …………………… 8
2.3 Queries with Multiple Meanings ……………………… 9
2.4 Classification of User Intent: Action, Information, and Navigation – “Do-Know-Go” … 9
3.0 The Language of the Landing Page ………………… 13
4.0 The Rating Scale ………………………………………….. 14
4.1 Vital …………………………………………………………….. 14
4.2 Useful ………………………………………………………….. 20
4.3 Relevant ………………………………………………………. 22
4.4 Slightly Relevant ………………………………………….. 23
4.5 Off-Topic or Useless ……………………………………… 26
4.6 Unratable …………………………………………………….. 29
5.0 Rating: From User Intent to Assigning a Rating .. 32
5.1 User Intent and Page Utility ……………………………. 32
5.2 Location is Important …………………………………….. 33
5.3 Language is Important (This section is for Non-English Task Languages) .. 34
5.4 Multiple Interpretations ………………………………… 36
5.5 Specificity of Queries and Landing Pages …………. 38
5.6 Common Rating Problems …………………………….. 42
6.0 Flags …………………………………………………………… 60
6.1 Spam Flag ……………………………………………………. 60
6.2 Pornography Flag ………………………………………… 60
6.3 Malicious Flag …………………………………………….. 63
6.4 Compatibility between Ratings and Flags ……… 63

Part 2: URL Rating Tasks with User Locations ….. 64

1.0 Important Definitions ……………………………….. 64
1.1 What is the User Location? …………………………. 64
1.2 Why are the Task Location and User Location important? …… 65
1.3 User Location, Task Location, and Explicit Location in the query …… 65
2.0 Location-Specific Rating Task Screenshot ……. 67
3.0 The Role of User Location in Understanding Query Interpretation/User Intent … 69
3.1 Queries with Local Intent ……………………………. 71
3.2 Rating Landing Pages when the task has a User Location ….. 73
3.3 Vital Ratings for Rating Tasks with User Locations …… 74
3.4 Rating Examples …………………………… 75

Part 3: Page Quality Rating Guidelines ….. 80

1.0 Overview of Page Quality Evaluation ……………………. 81
1.1 Introduction to Page Quality ……………………………….. 81
1.2 Important Guideline Information ………………………. 82
2.0 Landing Page Considerations ……………………………. 83
2.1 Identifying the Purpose of the Page …………………… 83
2.2 Identifying the Main Content, Supplementary Content, and Advertisements ….. 85
2.3 Rating the Quality of the Main Content ……………… 87
2.4 Rating the Quantity of Helpful Main Content …….. 90
2.5 Rating the Helpfulness of the Supplementary Content …. 92
2.6 Rating the Layout of the Page/Use of Space on the Page .. 93
3.0 Answering Homepage and Website Questions ………….. 95
3.1 Finding the Homepage of the Website …………………….. 95
3.2 Is the Purpose of the Page Consistent with the Website? ………… 97
3.3 Who is Responsible for the Content of the Website and the Content of the Page? .. 97
3.4 Does the Website Have an Appropriate Amount of Contact Information? … 98
3.5 What Kind of Reputation Does the Website Have? …………… 99
3.6 Is the Homepage of the Website Updated/Maintained? ……….. 102
4.0 Assigning an Overall Page Quality Rating ….. 103
4.1 Highest Quality Pages………………………. 103
4.2 High Quality Pages ……………………….. 104
4.3 Medium Quality Pages …………………… 104
4.4 Low Quality Pages ………………………. 105
4.5 Lowest Quality Pages ……………………. 105
5.0 Additional Page Quality Rating Guidance ….. 106
5.1 Assigning a Page Quality Rating to Pages with no Main Content/Error Messages … 106
5.2 Balancing Page Level & Website Level Questions to Assign an Overall Page Quality Rating .. 107
5.3 How to Check for Copied Content …………. 108
6.0 Page Quality Rating and URL Rating ……….. 110
7.0 Page Quality Rating FAQs ………………….. 111

 

Part 4: Rating Examples ………………… 112

1.0 Named Entity Queries ………………………. 112
2.0 Action Queries …………………………………. 119
3.0 Information Queries ……………………….. 122
4.0 Queries that Ask for a List ………………… 125
5.0 Rating Examples for Task Locations other than English (US) …… 129

Part 5: Webspam Guidelines …………….. 131

1.0 What is Webspam ? …………………. 131
1.1 The Relationship between Ratings and Spam …… 131
1.2 Why do Spammers Create Spam Pages? ……… 131
1.3 When to Check for Spam …………. 132
2.0 Browser Requirement …………… 132
3.0 Looking for Technical Signals …….. 132
3.1 Hidden Text and Hidden Links ……. 133
3.2 Keyword Stuffing …………. 135
3.3 Sneaky Redirects …………. 136
3.4 Cloaking ……….. 137
4.0 Helpful Webpages vs. Spam Webpages …… 137
4.1 Pages with Copied Content and PPC Ads ….. 138
4.2 Fake Search Pages with PPC Ads ……… 140
4.3 Fake Blogs with PPC Ads ………….. 140
4.4 Fake Message Boards with PPC Ads ……. 140
4.5 Copied Content that is NOT Spam ……….. 141
5.0 Commercial Intent ……………… 141
5.1 Thin Affiliates ……………… 141
5.2 Pure PPC Pages ……………….. 142
5.3 Parked (Expired) Domains ……….. 142
5.4 Pages with Unhelpful Content and PPC Ads ……. 143
6.0 Phishing Websites …………… 144
7.0 Spam and the Resolving Stage ………… 144
8.0 Conclusion ………………….. 145

Part 6: Using EWOQ ……………… 146

1.0 Introduction ……………………. 146
2.0 Accessing the EWOQ Rating Interface ……… 146
3.0 Rating ………………………………………… 146
4.0 Rating Home Screenshots …………… 147
5.0 Resolving Tasks (Re-rating Unresolved Tasks) / Moderators ….. 152
6.0 Commenting Etiquette ……………………….. 154

Part 7: Quick Guide to URL Rating ………………… 156

Part 8: Quick Guide to Webspam Recognition …………. 159

(end as far as I can tell)

86 Google Search Quality Updates

Below is an article from the Official Google Search Blog, “Inside Search” showing the various updates to Google’s algorithm.

Here are a couple that may play a role in how on-page optimization is helped out with proper LSI keyword phrases.

#81933. [project codename “Synonyms”] This launch improves use of query synonyms in ranking. Now we’re less likely to show documents where the synonym has a different meaning than the original search term.
and
gallium-2. [project codename “Synonyms”] This change improves synonyms inside concepts.

Search quality highlights: 86 changes for June and July

8/10/12 | 2:03:00 PM

We’re back with the latest in our series of search quality highlights. We have a couple months to make up for, so this list is a doozy with 86 changes. You might notice we’ve made one subtle tweak as compared with prior blog posts. We’re no longer using separate descriptive names and codenames (we’re just listing one or the other). Many times the descriptive names really just repeated the information in the short description. Names are sometimes useful for providing a unique identifier for a given change, so in cases where we don’t have a name, we’re adding an ID number.

Here’s the list for June:

  • uefa-euro1. [project codename “Answers”] Addition of a live result showing schedule and scores of the EURO 2012 games (European championship of national soccer teams).
  • #82293. [project codename “Answers”] Improved dictionary search feature by adding support for more natural language searches.
  • Better HTML5 resource caching for mobile. [project codename “Mobile”] We’ve improved caching of different components of the search results page, dramatically reducing latency in a number of cases.
  • ng2. [project codename “Other Ranking Components”] Better ordering of top results using a new and improved ranking function for combining several key ranking features.
  • Ref-16. [project codename “Other Ranking Components”] Changes to an “official pages” algorithm to improve internationalization.
  • Bamse. [project codename “Page Quality”] This launch helps you find more high-quality content from trusted sources.
  • Bamse-17L. [project codename “Page Quality”] This launch helps you find more high-quality content from trusted sources.
  • GreenLandII. [project codename “Page Quality”] We’ve incorporated new data into the Panda algorithm to better detect high-quality sites and pages.
  • #82353. [project codename “Page Quality”] This change refreshes data for the Panda high-quality sites algorithm.
  • SuperQ2. [project codename “Image”] We’ve updated a signal for Google Images to help return more on-topic image search results.
  • #82743. [project codename “Answers”] Changes to the calculator feature to improve recognition of queries containing “and,” such as [4 times 3 and a half].
  • komodo. [project codename “Query Understanding”] Data refresh for system used to better understand and search for long-tail queries.
  • #82580. [project codename “Answers”] This is an improvement for showing the sunrise and sunset times search feature.
  • PitCode. [project codename “Answers”] This launch adds live results for Nascar, MotoGP, and IndyCar. This is in addition to Formula1 results, which were already available.
  • timeob. [project codename “Answers”] We’ve improved natural language detection for the time feature to better understand questions like, “What time is it in India?”
  • #81933. [project codename “Synonyms”] This launch improves use of query synonyms in ranking. Now we’re less likely to show documents where the synonym has a different meaning than the original search term.
  • #82496. [project codename “Answers”] Changes made to the movie showtimes feature on mobile to improve recognition of natural language queries and overall coverage.
  • #82367. [project codename “Other Ranking Components”] This launch helps you find more high-quality content from trusted sources.
  • #82699. [project codename “Other Search Features”] We’ve made it easier to quickly compare places. Now you can hover over a local result and see information about that place on the right-hand side.
  • CapAndGown. [project codename “Image”] On many webpages, the most important images are closely related to the overall subject matter of the page. This project helps you find these salient images more often.
  • #82769. [project codename “Answers”] Improvements to the calculator feature on mobile to improve handling of queries that contain both words and numbers such as [4 times 3 divided by 2].
  • Vuvuzela. [project codename “SafeSearch”] We’ve updated SafeSearch to unify the handling of adult video content in videos mode and in the main search results. Explicit video thumbnails are now filtered more consistently.
  • #82537. [project codename “Answers”] We’ve enabled natural language detection for the currency conversion feature to better understand questions like, “What is $500 in euros?”
  • #82519. [project codename “Answers”] We’ve enabled natural language detection for the flight status feature to better understand questions about flight arrival times and status.
  • #82879. [project codename “Answers”] We’ve improved the triggering for the “when is” feature and understanding of queries like, “When is Mother’s Day?”
  • wobnl0330. [project codename “Answers”] Improvements to display of the weather search feature.
  • Lime. [project codename “Freshness”] This change improves the interaction between various search components to improve search results for searches looking for fresh content.
  • gas station. [project codename “Snippets”] This change removes the boilerplate text in sitelinks titles, keeping only the information useful to the user.
  • #81776. [project codename “Answers”] We’ve improved natural language detection for the unit conversion feature to better understand questions like, “What is 5 miles in kilometers?”
  • #81439. [project codename “Answers”] Improved display of the finance feature for voice search queries on mobile.
  • #82666. [project codename “Page Quality”] This launch helps you find more high-quality content from trusted sources.
  • #82541. [project codename “Other Ranking Components”] This is one of multiple projects that we’re working on to make our system for clustering web results better and simpler.
  • gaupe. [project codename “Universal Search”] Improves display of the flights search feature. Now, this result shows for queries with destinations outside the US, such as [flights from Austin to London].
  • #82887. [project codename “Answers”] We’ve improved natural language processing for the dictionary search feature.
  • gallium-2. [project codename “Synonyms”] This change improves synonyms inside concepts.
  • zinc-4. [project codename “Synonyms”] This change improves efficiency by not computing synonyms in certain cases.
  • Manzana2. [project codename “Snippets”] This launch improves clustering and ranking of links in the expanded sitelinks feature.
  • #82921. [project codename “Alternative Search Methods”] We’ve improved finance results to better understand finance-seeking queries spoken on mobile.
  • #82936. [project codename “Answers”] Improved display of the weather search feature, so you can ask [weather in california] or [is it hot in italy].
  • #82935. [project codename “Answers”] We’ve improved natural language detection for the sunrise/sunset feature.
  • #82460. [project codename “Snippets”] With this change we’re using synonyms to better generate accurate titles for web results.
  • #82953. [project codename “Answers”] This change improves detection of queries about weather.
  • PandaMay. [project codename “Search Quality”] We launched a data refresh for our Panda high-quality sites algorithm.
  • ItsyBitsy. [project codename “Images”] To improve the quality of image results, we filter tiny, unhelpful images at the bottom of our image results pages.
  • localtimeob. [project codename “Answers”] We’ve improved display of the local time search feature.
  • #82536. [project codename “Answers”] We’ve improved natural language detection to better understand queries about baseball and return the latest baseball information about MLB, such as schedules and the latest scores.
  • Improvements to Images Universal ranking. [project codename “Universal Search”] We significantly improved our ability to show Images Universal on infrequently searched-for queries.
  • absum3. [project codename “Snippets”] This launch helps us select better titles to display in the search results. This is a change to our algorithm that will specifically improve the titles for pages that are in non-Latin based languages.
  • #83051. [project codename “Answers”] We’ve improved display of local business information in certain mobile use cases. In particular, we’ll highlight information relevant to the search, including phone numbers, addresses, hours and more.
  • calc2-random. [project codename “Answers”] This change improves our understanding of calculator-seeking queries.
  • #82961. [project codename “Alternative Search Methods”] When you search for directions to or from a location on your mobile device without specifying the start point, we’ll return results starting from your current position.
  • #82984. [project codename “Universal Search”] This was previously available for users searching on google.com in English, and now it’s available for all users searching in English on any domain.
  • #82150. [project codename “Spelling”] Refresh of our algorithms for spelling systems in eight languages.
  • NoPathsForClustering. [project codename “Other Ranking Components”] We’ve made our algorithm for clustering web results from the same site or same path (same URL up until the last slash) more consistent. This is one of multiple projects that we’re working on to make our clustering system better and simpler.
  • Hamel. [project codename “Page Quality”] This change updates a model we use to help you find high-quality pages with unique content.
  • #81977. [project codename “Synonyms”] This change updates our synonyms systems to make it less likely we’ll return adult content when users aren’t looking for it.
  • Homeland. [project codename “Autocomplete”] This is an improvement to autocomplete that will help users to get predicted queries that are more relevant to their local country.

Here’s the list for July:

  • #82948. [project codename “Other Search Features”] We’ve improved our natural language processing to improve display of our movie showtimes feature.
  • yoyo. [project codename “Snippets”] This change leads to more useful text in sitelinks.
  • popcorn. [project codename “Snippets”] We’ve made a minor update to our algorithm that detects if a page is an “article.” This change facilitates better snippets.
  • Golden Eagle. [project codename “Autocomplete”] When Google Instant is turned off, we’ll sometimes show a direct link to a site in the autocomplete predictions. With this change we refreshed the data for those predictions.
  • #82301. [project codename “Indexing”] This change improves an aspect of our serving systems to save capacity and improve latency.
  • #82392. [project codename “Indexing”] This launch improves the efficiency of the Book Search ranking algorithms, making them more consistent with Web Search.
  • Challenger. [project codename “Snippets”] This is another change that will help get rid of generic boilerplate text in Web results’ titles, particularly for sitelinks.
  • #83166. [project codename “Universal Search”] This change is a major update to Google Maps data for the following regions: CZ, GR, HR, IE, IT, VA, SM, MO,PT, SG, LS. This new data will appear in maps universal results.
  • #82515. [project codename “Translation and Internationalization”] This change improves the detection of queries that would benefit from translated results.
  • bergen. [project codename “Other Ranking Components”] This is one of multiple projects that we’re working on to make our system for clustering web results better and simpler.
  • Panda JK. [project codename “Page Quality”] We launched Panda on google.co.jp and google.co.kr to promote more high-quality sites for users in Japan and Korea.
  • rrfix4. [project codename “Freshness”] This is a bug fix to a freshness algorithm. This change turns off a freshness algorithm component in certain cases when it should not be affecting the results.
  • eventhuh4. [project codename “Knowledge Graph”] We’ll show a list of upcoming events in the Knowledge Graph for city-related searches such as [san francisco] and [events in san francisco].
  • #83483. [project codename “Universal Search”] This change helps surface navigation directions directly in search results for more queries.
  • Zivango. [project codename “Refinements”] This change leads to more diverse search refinements.
  • #80568. [project codename “Snippets”] This change improves our algorithm for generating site hierarchies for display in search result snippets.
  • Labradoodle. [project codename “SafeSearch”] We’ve updated SafeSearch algorithms to better detect adult content.
  • JnBamboo. [project codename “Page Quality”] We’ve updated data for our Panda high-quality sites algorithm.
  • #83242. [project codename “Universal Search”] This change improves news universal display by using entities from the Knowledge Graph.
  • #75921. [project codename “Autocomplete”] For some time we’ve shown personalized predictions in Autocomplete for users who’ve enabled Web History on google.com in English. With this change, we’re internationalizing the feature.
  • #83301. [project codename “Answers”] Similar to the live results we provide for sports like baseball or European football, you can now search on Google and find rich, detailed information about the latest schedule, medal counts, events, and record-breaking moments for the world’s largest sporting spectacle.
  • #83432. [project codename “Autocomplete”] This change helps users find more fresh trending queries in Japanese as part of autocomplete.

And here are some changes we’ve shared elsewhere:

Posted by Scott Huffman, Engineering Director

[article end]

Mastering any particular field especially search engine optimization takes a great level of desire and drive to learn, apply and test the on-going changes that affect the Google search engine results. Becoming actively involved with past, current and future updates and trends can help your website gain the edge in the organic search engine results for your better converting keyword phrases.

×

Get Emailed Today Your No Questions Asked Free SEO Report