Jump to content

Cre8asiteforums Internet Marketing
and Conversion Web Design


Photo

killing me...


  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

#1 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 08:11 AM

Could somebody please tell me why Google refuses to update my site after 4 crawls? (they do have a month old page cached)
Could someone PLEASE tell me why spammers rank well before me in SERPS I used to dominate?

Could someone PLEASE tell me what is so wrong with my homepage?

My business can't take this anymore.
This is so frustrating.


thank you
machiner
www.fuega.com

ps..please don't tell me to wait longer...I'm doing that...

#2 Advisor

Advisor

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1142 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 08:20 AM

You don't want to be told to wait, but at this point, it's out of your hands and that's all you can do. No one can force Google to update their index. They have their own timetable, and there's nothing you or anyone else can do about it.

In the meantime, keep trying to find appropriate sites where you can list your site, and simply keep making sure your site is the best it can be. Do things that you DO have control over.

Perhaps try to get some traditional PR (not pagerank) for your site and your business, and look into other ways you can advertise it so that you're not totally dependent upon Google.

Why not write some articles in your area of expertise and offer it to other sites that might be interested? Have a crazy offer that might spark the interest of the press and announce it in a press release. Find forums that are of a similar nature to your business and help others who may have questions you can answer. Join mailing lists along the same lines. Become an expert at whatever you do, so that when people think of your product or service, they think of YOU!

It's not easy, but I'll betcha while you're busy doing all this, Google will eventually update your listing, and you'll be well on your way to making more sales!

Jill

#3 DianeV

DianeV

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 7216 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 08:31 AM

Boy, does your site look different!

I found this in your code:

<meta name="robots" content="index,follow">

<META NAME="Revisit-after" CONTENT="14 days">

There has been comment that using robots tags (not robots.txt) to tell search engines to spider pages can backfire, causing them not to spider. Since the default (without any such tags) is to spider, I'd say leave the tags out, and leave well enough alone.

Your second tag -- the 14 days -- also tells search engines *not* to spider for that many days. You're telling them to stay away for two weeks. Since search engines can appear awfully often (particularly in Google's case), I would get rid of both of these immediately.

You don't need this, either:
<meta name="generator" content="HTML Tidy, see www.w3.org">

#4 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 08:32 AM

Thank you, Advisor.

Most of the sites in my niche market are horrible, low PR, lousy content, etc...those sites that are squared away don't ever write back to me with regard to exchanging links.

Because of this, I have limited back-links, and have tried to make my code as good as it can be...as well, because of this, my friend's web-portal ranks higher than my main site when a search is done for my store name.

You have a terrific idea with writing some content for other sites...

Whereas I do not focus exclsively on google ( fuega does pretty well in all other engines) you and I know ~85% of ALL search traffic goes through it.

It's been months and no sign of google even using my REAL domain name for my store.

better than 6 months ago I renamed the site, new domain name, etc. All other engines caught it...Google refuses to recognize my new domain name. I wrote to Google 5 times on this. Never a response.

What I have done is re-host my old domain name on another server. I made 4 very small pages all with a link to my store (sure keywords, title, etc) and a bit o' nonesense content on each page.

I saw that google indexed it a week ago....this is so frustrating.

I know alot of us are in the same boat. I don't spam, yet spammers dominate my SERPS, even DEAD LINKS!

I could go on forever...thank you for your response.

machiner

#5 DianeV

DianeV

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 7216 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 08:34 AM

By the way, Jill's suggestions are excellent ones -- whether you are doing well in the search engines or not. Search engine traffic, while fairly vital for most sites, is not the end-all and be-all of all marketing promotion.

(P.S. Check your robots.txt file, if you have one, to ensure that you don't have anything weird in it.)

#6 glengara

glengara

    Gravity Master Member

  • Members
  • 110 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 08:44 AM

Strangely your site doesn't seem to be in the G directory for the cat it's in DMOZ - Shopping > Niche > Hippie
How long has it been in DMOZ?

#7 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 08:45 AM

Dianne,
I just added those meta tags this morning...a while back I used them, and that was the only real difference in my code, so I put them back.

I will heed your advice, because ...well, because I'll try anything to be in Google's good graces.

Did you see anything "wrong" or bad about my code?


I use lots ot title tags etc with keywords throughout my site.

Yeah, the site's a bit different.

thank you for your response

machiner

#8 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 08:49 AM

My site has been listed in DMOZ since March, 2003.

I have been waiting for it to appear in the Google directory....

#9 DianeV

DianeV

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 7216 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 08:52 AM

Okay, so the pages were listed, and then you redesigned it?

Were they always using SSI (server side includes)? If not, then your URLs are different than they were before.

#10 Advisor

Advisor

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1142 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 09:07 AM

Most of the sites in my niche market are horrible, low PR, lousy content, etc...those sites that are squared away don't ever write back to me with regard to exchanging links.


Why in the world would you want to exchange links with horrible sites? You would actually add a link on your page to a page that stinks?

You've got to change your mindset. Don't sit and look for sites that YOU can add to your site. Look for sites that would be interested in linking TO you. Directories for one.

But what's this about changing domain names? Are you saying that you're still hosting the old domain and have a completely different site at it? The fastest way for you to get the new domain indexed is to place a 301 permanent redirect on the old domain pointing it to the new one. If you keep an old, but different, site at the other domain, chances are your new one will never get indexed.

Redirect it permanently and Google should add it fairly quickly.

Jill

#11 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 09:13 AM

Are you alluding to the fact that SSI is killing me?

Yes, originally I tracked using a .gif...then I took advantage of a "real-time" shopping bag indicator with my cart script. To use that, I had to put SSI tags on all the product pages.

So, yes, originally all pages were .html

now all pages are .shtml.

I read many strings on this and the general consensus was that they were no real issue.

?? What are your thoughts or experience?

thank you

#12 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 09:18 AM

Hello, Advisor...

No way... I don't trade links with those sites I mentioned. I wrote that as an example of wyh I don't have many backlinks.

Yes, I employ a permanent redirect...this is mostly for my old page names and .html extensions. I have permanently redirected all to current pages and .shtml. As well, one cannot redirect domain to domain unless they are in different folders on the same server.


Advisor, I don't sit idle and wait for anything...I actively seek out (none in past 3 weeks, however) relevant sites I can get to link to me...trade if necessary. <edit--add> I am listed in all major directories, but none that I must pay for </edit>

Clarification:

I re-hosted my old domain on a different server with the hopes that google would see it and correct the problem. I wait for this, as I only did this 10 days ago.

#13 DianeV

DianeV

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 7216 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 09:20 AM

There's no real issue as to using SSI, so far as I know, but if you rename your pages in any way, you've renamed them. This includes from .htm to .html to .shtml to php to ....

I believe the X-bit hack (a bit of code that goes into your .htaccess file) allows .html pages to parse SSI on an Apache server.

Unfortunately, you have now tapped the entirety of my X-bit hack "expertise". LOL

#14 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 09:22 AM

What's wrong with re-naming pages?

I will look for the x-bit hack.

If pages are renamed does that mean it could take Google 5 months to re-index (or NEWLY ) them?

Is that what you mean. If so, at least that's some clarification.

thanks

#15 DianeV

DianeV

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 7216 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 09:30 AM

Nothing's wrong with renaming pages ... but the new URLs will have to be picked up by the search engines, that's all.

page.htm
is not the same as
page.html
is not the same as
page.shtml
etc.

#16 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 09:34 AM

That x-bit hack works fine!!

Now, the quarter flip...my pages have been named .shtml for almost 2 months.

I wonder if I should change them?

All the scripting works fine.

Hmmm..

machiner

<edit> I gotta say how much I appreciate all the comments and help thus far. Really...thank you all.</edit>

#17 DianeV

DianeV

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 7216 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 09:36 AM

It was that easy?

Well, for the rest of us, do share the URL where you found the explanation of how to implement it.

<And you're welcome.>

#18 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 09:40 AM

wicked!

http://my.execpc.com...bh.htm#xbithack


took all of 3 seconds.

Glad I could offer something useful.

machiner

#19 DianeV

DianeV

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 7216 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 09:44 AM

You're welcome.

I'm still seeing .shtml page extensions; do you rename them to .html (or whatever they were before)?

#20 bragadocchio

bragadocchio

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 15634 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 09:48 AM

Good ideas so far.

Just starting to look now, but I've found one thing to change. I don't know that it has had a negative impact or not. (Supposedly, this is a problem that Google overlooks.)

In your Robots.txt file, part of what you have there follows:

User-agent: Mozilla/4.7 (compatible; Intelliseek; http://www.intelliseek.com)

Disallow: *

The asterisk there is nonstandard. It should just be a "disallow:" with an empty space after it. The asterisk does work as a wildcard in a robots.txt file when identifying all user agents, but not files.

If you remove that particular asterisk, it will achieve want you want, without having a negative impact on your site. (and may have a postive one.)

#21 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 09:52 AM

<edit>Diane, </edit> I only renamed one page...just for testing...I will rename all of them soon.

Thanks

#22 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 09:55 AM

my robots.txt file now reads:

User-agent: *
Disallow: /cgi-bin/
Disallow: /stats/

Thanks

machiner

#23 Guest_Lots0_*

Guest_Lots0_*
  • Guests

Posted 14 July 2003 - 09:58 AM

If you remove that particular asterisk, it will achieve want you want, without having a negative impact on your site.

I agree with Bill, I would change this ASAP.

Also, some good advice would be to slow down a little. If you keep changing things (like renaming your pages) google will never catch up to you. Lately it is not unheard of to have to wait 4 months for a low PR page to be updated. And the last two months google has been having some "problems" that are delaying a lot of sites from being updated.

#24 DianeV

DianeV

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 7216 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 10:01 AM

Good point, Lots0. I'm not sure when the pages got converted to SSI ... machiner?

#25 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 10:03 AM

Lots0,

That's exactly why I haven't renamed all of my pages.

I will take advantage of the x-bit hack, however.
Perhaps next month.


Thank you for your input.

machier

#26 DianeV

DianeV

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 7216 posts

Posted 14 July 2003 - 10:04 AM

And now, you're suffering from too many options. LOL

#27 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 15 July 2003 - 01:00 PM

I got spidered by searchengineworld.com (don't know why...) so I went to their site, followed a link and read that dynamic pages are frowned upon by Google. Now, this is someting we have all been cognizent of for some time. What I didn't know is that would include .shtml pages.

I also am aware that google has made great strides in order to better crawl an index dynamic pages.

http://www.searcheng...ders/google.htm

I am wondering more now whether I should employ the x-bit hack, rename all my pages, do some redirects and hope for the best.

Any thoughts?

What I dod NOT want to do is suffer 4 more months of no listing in Google...

Thanks for your continued thoughts in this thread.

machiner

#28 Black_Knight

Black_Knight

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 9339 posts

Posted 15 July 2003 - 01:54 PM

There are certainly plenty of SHTML pages in Google, even without counting all those that have been rewritten and hidden using the various hacks.

Google have said in the past that they do not penalise any page extension. They simply either support, or do not support. Google supports shtml.

However, Google does seem to take it easy on sites that are known to be dynamic. It spiders them more slowly, thus helpfully sparing them some processor loading. This can mean that less pages get spidered within each monthly update of course.

If you have over 1,000 pages, I'd probably suggest using the url rewriting or x-bit hack to hide the SHTML nature of the pages. However, you'd better then be able to handle the full-on indexing of Googlebot as if your pages were truly static.

#29 search-engine-placement

search-engine-placement

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 67 posts

Posted 15 July 2003 - 08:39 PM

However, you'd better then be able to handle the full-on indexing of Googlebot as if your pages were truly static.


That's an understatement, I don't recal the last 24hr period that Googlebot didn't partially spider our main site of 2000+ pages. I think it has it's own room in one of the sub directories and pops in and out late at night to party :-)

David

#30 Black_Knight

Black_Knight

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 9339 posts

Posted 16 July 2003 - 05:24 AM

On one site, with a 400,000 item database behind it, Google spidered 3,000 pages per day on average after one month (following URL rewriting in that case).

#31 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 16 July 2003 - 06:48 AM

Then perhaps I DO want to rename, x-bit, redirect, and chmod, ey?
Prior to these pase two weeks, googlebot visited me daily, for almost 2 months -- just teasing -- no updates to the index.

The last time Googlebot saw fit to visit me was the 13th of July.

I just got a bunch more quality backlinks, which as far as I know, Google is 3-4 months behind in updating for sites, perhaps now is the time to rename.

Lots0 thinks I may be shooting myself in the foot -- Google will never catch up to me--- any differing opinions?

I have done everything Google's Rules outline, as well I employed many things gleaned from this and other forums, not to mention a good dose of common sense...over the past 5 months my site...all I can say is WTF?

It's not in my nature to actually ask "OK what do I do?" but I need that..."OK Do this" from someone. I can't sit here powerless. Hell, I'm almost ready to organize, petition, and sue...what? It could happen. There is no reason My site, or ANYBODY'S, should suffer this nonesense while playing by the rules. There is evidence of Google apathy, neglect, and non-responsive behavior. Ya...I am venting...but I know plenty of really smart lawyers, and a senator or 2. Shhhh..I can dream.

machiner

#32 Black_Knight

Black_Knight

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 9339 posts

Posted 16 July 2003 - 07:09 AM

If those robots tags specifying "revisit-after" were on the site when it last came around, it would cause Google to abandon its normal schedule as you'd asked. It would, as the tag told it, never return in less than 14 days and would crawl only sometime after 14 days had elapsed (sometimes a long time after, because in cancelling your scheduled visit, you'd probably go to the end of the queue).

#33 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 16 July 2003 - 07:14 AM

Absolutely. The kicker is I put that meta tag on my site for 1 day, on the 13...that kills me.... index, follow, and return in 14.

A bonehead move. Bad timing.
My actions I'll suffer from. Kicking and screaming...but sucking it up.
It was a moment of desperation, when clear heads fail.

LOL

Thanks, Ammon

machiner

#34 Black_Knight

Black_Knight

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 9339 posts

Posted 16 July 2003 - 07:24 AM

I couldn't help but notice that the Google Toolbar reported a PR3 for your homepage, which is rather low. A higher PR will help you to get spidered more often and more deeply.

Your Links page has a PR0, but considering you use a redirect that is protected from being spidered by your robots.txt, it shouldn't be a penalty, its probly simply a matter of having been renamed since it was last crawled, and thus there is no PR for the current URL of the page ... sound right?

Have you considered writing up an article or two about hemp jewellery and trying to get the published anywhere at all? Maybe find a few young people's forums that allow links in signatures to be spidered and make a few genuinely useful posts that'll get your link spidered. And of course, don't forget to submit to all major (and not quite so major) web directories that you can.

Its definitely of highest priority to you right now to implement some form of link-building strategy. It doesn't need to be a full-on hardcore one, just simply building up some legitimate inbound links that the spiders will find - giving you a chance that they'll crawl your site from others, not just on their scheduled visits to your site.

#35 bragadocchio

bragadocchio

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 15634 posts

Posted 16 July 2003 - 07:30 AM

I got spidered by searchengineworld.com (don't know why...)


That was me :)

I was using their spider simulator program to test, and see what a spider saw when it visited your page. Looked fine.

I really believe that you shouldn't sit on your hands and wait, but should work to do all you can to not be dependant on one or two search engines.

Regardless of Google rankings, there are millions of sites on the web, and the right combination of content on your site, and contacts that you may make can make a difference.

So, who might like your site? Go find some people with music sites that might be interested. Invite them to your forum...

See if some of them might be interested in moderating sections of the forum. Build a community.

I do think that Google will come back, and will catch up to you. But, there are lots of things that you can do that don't involve activities at the Googleplex.

#36 DianeV

DianeV

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 7216 posts

Posted 16 July 2003 - 07:31 AM

Ammon's and Bill's suggestions are excellent, as usual.

machiner, the difficulty here is in making suggestions when we don't really know why your "new" .shtml pages have not yet been included by Google. For all we know, if you make changes now, Google would have picked up the new .shtml pages tomorrow. I can only suggest what I would do if it were my site:

(1) I would go over the code with a fine-toothed comb to ensure that everything is in order. It does seem to be.

(2) I'd check that any of the sites you've linked to including outbound links on the first page, are not "bad neighborhoods" per Google. (Bad neighborhoods aside, the only way I would link to another site from my front page would be because it was the greatest site in the world; why send people away when they just got there?)

(3) Handle the old site you mentioned here because, for all you know, Google is seeing these as duplicate pages -- and, as I understand it, they are. The fact that the extension is different -- .html/.shtml -- does not make duplicates non-duplicates.

If the above are okay, then, if it were *my* site, I'd consider what *I* eventually wanted to have happen and make the choice between whether I wanted to x-bit hack the site. And implement Ammon's suggestions for getting links to your site.

#37 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 16 July 2003 - 07:46 AM

Thanks everyone,

I am in every free directory, (gimpsy DMOZ, mamma, etc, etc.) I have amassed greater than 100 quality inbound links (try telling Google that) On my linkers page, none of the folks I link to are below PR4, most are higher. I do very well in EVERY search engine that doesn't rely on Google. I am no fool...my eggs are not in one basket...but the biggest basket happens to "rule the world" I would be a fool to be in different.

I renamed my pages to .shtml better than 2 months ago.

Today my beauties are gone for the day (Woohoo!!!!! Ahem!) so I have some time.

What I will do is...an excellent idea...write 2 articles, and spread them around. Rename my pages, to .html ( I wanted to do it anyway...not so much for SEO...for me.)


Oh, some of my .shtml pages have been indexed..but appended to old outdated nonexistant pages.

I know everyone screams Backlinks, Backlinks...but my ranking was far better off before I had any. LOL, now That's funny, ey.

Regarding redirects, I use a script to capture all link traffic...maybe I should abandon that strategy in favor of letting Google spider my links page? Ahhh...

I am enjoying this discussion. Thank you all.

Brian
Dad, wannabe webby, player of Bass guitar, poet.
in that exact order

addendum: I was actually hoping someone would find a problem with my code.

#38 DianeV

DianeV

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 7216 posts

Posted 16 July 2003 - 07:52 AM

> I use a script to capture all link traffic

Could you explain this?

Personally, when we move sites from one server to another, or change domain names, I generally remove all pages and use .htaccess to do a 301 redirect on all page requests to the index.html which says "we've moved" and gives a link to the new domain. I sometimes use a 10-second meta-refresh to take visitors to the new domain. This seems to take care of it.

It's pretty simple, and avoids the duplicate page problem entirely.

If I'm really concerned about the links, I again redirect the page requests (on the new domain) to the proper directories. Generally this doesn't have to be kept up too long.

<added> But it's great for someone like me, who doesn't like messy directories. LOL </added>

#39 machiner

machiner

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 76 posts

Posted 16 July 2003 - 08:05 AM

All external links from my site have this line preceding them:
cgi-bin/ax.pl?

following the ? is the http://www.domain.com

This allows me to see how many times someone left my site going to "big ed's domain" as well, or how people are leaving my site.

This is why all my links are "re-directed"

#40 DianeV

DianeV

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 7216 posts

Posted 16 July 2003 - 11:17 AM

Okay.

By the way, I'd like to amend my comments above: it's best to leave your old pages at your old site, as it may take search engines months to pick up the new IP address.



RSS Feed

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users