Re: toolbar page rank observations

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:02:31 -0700, catherine yronwode <cat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Google's indexing process can be frustrating. Patience is repaid, but it
is difficult to wait. Page Rank is not important. Serps are important.
Here is a diary:

October 2006
A new 200+ page domain of mine is uploaded. The text consists of 200
one-paragraph articles i have written -- free, informational,
interesting material that would form a short book if printed out in text
form. However, to save time, i had the work htmlized by a hired worker
who has basically screwed it up -- links don't work, pictures don;t
load, and the site is largely disfunctional. This is an html horror
story i will not bother to get into -- but basically, the site is
unusable by the public due to coding errors so ridiculous that you would
all laugh yourselves sick if i explined them in detail. I am not
laughing. :-(

January 2007
After a second attempt to work with the person i hired, and seeing her
make 47 coding errors in 10 sample pages, i realize that i will have to
re-do the html work for the site myself. I groom the top page and a
couple dozen other pages and link to them from one internal page at my
best site. I stop in disgust.

Febrary 2007
I link about three more internal pages into my other site's internal
page. I am tring to wish the problem away, hire anoher coder, anything
but do the work myself. No luck.

March 2007
I fix about 10 more pages of messed up code and link them in. I give up.

April 17th 2007
The new site is #263 for its best two-word key term. I decide to finally
fix it. I create a link from the top page of a pr5 site of mine on a
similar subject. I start my way alphabetically through the pages, fixing
them. I get to the letter B.

April 20th 2007
The new site jumps up to #247 at google for the two-word key term.
Depressingly, all of my other sites, in which the term randomly exists
but is not a targeted phase, rank higher. My own personal home page is
at #177, a wikipedia entry about me is at #154, a page of scholarly
writing by me is #128, a sales page for a book i wrote on the subject is
#4. I add another link to the new site, from the top page of my
scholarly site. My alphabetical tour through the html revisions of the
pages and fixing of broken links arrives at the letter D.

April 22nd 2007
Someone discovers the new site and adds an entry to it from the
wikipedia page about me. My alphabetical revisions of the pages and
fixing of broken links arrives at the letter H. At google, only 18 pages
are indexed and the site rank is still #247.

April 24th 2007
The new site now ranks #205 at google for the keyword term. There are
now 24 pages indexed. I post mention of the new site's URL to usenet
newsgroups. My alphabetical revisions of the bad html on the pages and
the fixing of the broken links arrives at the letter M. I also do some
keyword tweaking to the top pag of the new site.

April 25th 2007
I am told by usenet friends who checked for me that the PR for the
site's top page is 2 -- but now the site has dropped back down to #231
at google for the key phase. The google cache for the site's top page is
per March 19th, and we are back down to only 18 pages indexed. (This
represents normal google data center fluctuation.) My alphabetical trek
through the html revisions of the pages and fixing of broken links
arrives at the letter Q. I add a few more uses of the key phrase on the
index page and finish up the day by making 170 links to 170 different
internal pages at the site from a catalogue page at my other site that
deals with similar subject matter: the catalogue page lists these items
as for sale -- the links to the new site provide non-commerical
informational detail on each of the items being sold.

April 26th 2007
The site has suddenly risen to #82 for the chosen key phrase, the index
page's cache at google has jumped almost a month forward -- to April
24th -- and there are now 104 pages indexed. However, many of the newly
indexed pages are seen in the form of caches that date back to March
19th and are either no longer onsite or their content contains badly
broken links. In other words, what google sees is a new index page and
104 internal pages that predate my alphabetically sequenced html
revisions of the past month.

Today i will be slogging my way through the rest of the alphabet --
letters R through Z. My work on this site has not yet begin to pay off
financially, but the SEO indications are hopeful, even though the site
is a long way from making the first page for its chosen key term.

The moral of this story is that good content, a good internal linking
structure, and a modicum of well-made inbound links will be noticed by
google -- not instantaneously, but over time -- and sooner than folks
think, too. By mid June this site should be producing the kinds of
traffic and serps i expect it to. It may not rise above a pr3 rank --
but the key term is oscure and not all that important in the worldwide
scheme of things. What i am looking for is a justified and white-hat
top-ten serp at google for that key phrase. And i am pretty sure i can
get it.

Time to go back to work.

Very nice story. I would suggest to write or find some indexing
scripts instead of hiring people to HTMLize stuff. Seems to be a waste
of money, since it can be automated.

For myself, I wrote a script that indexes directories with text files,
pictures and videos, making thumbnails as appropriate.

Example of its use is here

http://igor.chudov.com/projects/

I simply create directories as appropriate, download pictures and
videos from my camera, write descriptions with minimal HTML (mostly
<P>), and index everything when I need to.

This is not a site created for SEO purposes, I just describe my
various machanical projects for other interested people. I do not like
to talk about my SEO related activity.

i
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: toolbar page rank observations
    ... Google is stingy about indexing sites, unless there are some high PR ... re-do the html work for the site myself. ... The new site jumps up to #247 at google for the two-word key term. ... Today i will be slogging my way through the rest of the alphabet -- ...
    (alt.internet.search-engines)
  • Re: Lucky Mojo (Formerly "What happened to...")
    ... Is it the "Google Moves the Goal ... >to rank for the TRUST FACTOR, for STABLE SITES, or for LINK ... >sites and other untrustworthy and unstable commercial sites. ... added these high quality links for a long period of time. ...
    (alt.internet.search-engines)
  • Re: Structuring informational content for commercial site
    ... >>>At giving a better rank to pages which have high valuable content. ... and I have sites/pages that rank well in Yahoo ... rolled out their new search engine - I ranked higher on them than I ... Google just took me a little while ...
    (alt.internet.search-engines)
  • Re: Structuring informational content for commercial site
    ... >>At giving a better rank to pages which have high valuable content. ... and I have sites/pages that rank well in Yahoo ... Besides this was not the only thing I do not like about Google. ... say...You think of what site owners say and I think about what users say... ...
    (alt.internet.search-engines)
  • Re: Google Page Rank mystery
    ... >The other address has a Google page rank of four. ... Perhaps the same site but, through links pointing its way, two ... address the problem - not the search engines that are following links ...
    (comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html)
Loading