A Panda Thought - Need Sites Though.....
Posted 13 April 2011 - 04:42 AM
So, ideally need a nice list of Wordpress sites affected by Panda, and ones not affected, then look at tags numbers.
If some Panda winners here wish to contribute anon that that would be cool, such as "10 sites, 4 good, tags in good, tags in bad".
I am trashing many tags which were only used once or twice, maybe thrice...
Of course, may be a wasted effort. Wrote a new article this morning, so a constructive start to the day, followed by a destructive session. Which will hopefully prove to be constructive.... :pieinface:
Posted 13 April 2011 - 07:42 AM
On the other hand, my one site that was hit is not a wordpress site. Mostly static site, with just a couple of php includes for menu, etc.
My two largest wordpress sites both use tons of tags. Those sites were not hit by Panda.
You could always just noindex the tag pages, and leave the tags if they help users.
Posted 13 April 2011 - 07:58 AM
I am not deleting all as I use them as a part of the navigation, as sub-sections of categories. But down to tags with only 3 pages, may stop at 4, maybe 5. Or just have X tags only, somewhere between 20-100 I guess.
One person did claim to recover after removing tags and making some other changes - was mentioned here I think, and speculation that they may have suffered a non-Panda problem. Or it may have been on Michaels blog I read about it. Head is swimming still.
Posted 13 April 2011 - 09:14 AM
I've not got around to it though, I kinda dislike the principle of nofollow - if we are meant to build sites for people not SE's, why do we need to add tags specifically for SE's that have no relevance to people?
I don't use many tags and haven't noticed any changes in either site I have running wordpress, though neither are giant.
Posted 13 April 2011 - 10:07 AM
I have adopted the mass deletion of tags method. All current tags have a minimum of 5 posts now (I think....). Reduced from thousands to 158.
Posted 13 April 2011 - 10:07 AM
Have tried adding the meta noindex to tag pages?
Note: 'follow' is the default and technically should not be necessary but one could make that 'noindex,follow' just to be cautious.
This should remove tags from G's index but the bot and value would pass through normally.
Posted 13 April 2011 - 06:41 PM
I do use some anti-spam and social media plugins that haven't caused any problems so far as I can see.
Plain and simple -- that's what I prefer. I'm not happy with the whole "Web 2.0" design paradigm for blogs. Too many such sites got dinged.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 10:00 PM
That's not a big recovery, but it is movement in a positive direction.
I doubt WP plugins would have any effect unless they just do really terrible things to a blog. My DD blog has 51 active plugins (yep 51) and Panda didn't affect it at all.
Now, yeah, I should probably trim that number down for performance sake, but I don't think plugins are an issue, in general.
Posted 20 June 2011 - 10:01 PM
Beyond content (define as you will) the biggest problems that I have seen on hammered sites I've been allowed to investigate are loss of backlink value (as jonbey has previously mentioned elsewhere if not here) and too many dead ends interrupting value flow through a site. And many WP sites are set up such that tags are dead ends stopping value flow.
If one then applies meta noindex to the tags they accumulate value that goes nowhere. However, so long as the noindex page links out the value continues to flow ... the key is not whether a page is noindex rather whether it is a dead end. Know your internal link structure. And then optimise it.
Yes. Interesting. And not unexpected.
Anybody read this about Panda at Barry's site?
Posted 21 June 2011 - 12:35 AM
Posted 21 June 2011 - 08:15 AM
Looking forward to reading your post, Barry.
Posted 21 June 2011 - 12:29 PM
I think Panda 2.0 should really be called Panda 1.1.
Oh well. Just wanted to get that off my chest....
Posted 21 June 2011 - 01:32 PM
G has always had a strange symbiosis with scrapers... but there have been some interesting if inconclusive (a G specialty) comments (by JohnMu among others) on duplicate content that go well beyond exact match duplication... so the possibility of significant change exists... whether helpful to originating webdevs unknown... so hope, but don't hold your breath...
Edited by iamlost, 21 June 2011 - 01:33 PM.
Reply to this topic
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users