Blog post was indexed in 8 minutes in Google Blog Search...issue is it
is from the RSS feed and not the actually posting from the site....
anyone have other thoughts as to what is causing the rss feed to get
indexed before the site does??
> Either way I cannot locate it in general or blog search so I cannot
> duplicate your findings and have no idea why it may be that way for
> only you.
> On Sep 3, 10:04 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > no ideas?
> > On Sep 3, 4:48 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > Anyone out there at all have a clue about this?
Pop Star billionaire ex charged with killing
22 minutes ago by Celeb
Lebanese pop star Suzanne Tamim was found brutally murdered in her
luxury Dubai apartment at the end of July and now the sad story takes
a surprising twist. Police have charged Egyptian billionaire... ** Due
to an increase in spam blogs ...
Celebrity Gossip from Celebridiot - http://www.celebridiot.com
Where the title" Pop Star billionaire ex charged with killing" is a
link to the post in blue, and "Celebrity Gossip from Celebridiot -
http://www.celebridiot.com" is a link to your site, not the feed.
If you are saying they are getting the information from your feed and
not indexing the feed then, well yes, that's how it works. You write
something, it pings them when it's published, and they grab the feed
and index the new content from that feed. Later Google will actually
crawl the page again but before that they'll use the feed information,
that's the minty fresh indexing. You will also notice that if you
publish something and search for it in the real index your homepage
may show up for a real specific search, like the new posts title,
right away. Even though if you look at the cache it won't show it,
and the snippet won't show the search terms highlighted. That's
because they are giving you credit for data in the feed before they
even crawl it. Later on in the day if you watch your stats they'll
actually crawl it and then the same search will show the search terms
in the snippet, the cache may take a couple days to be updated as they
don't pull the search terms a page ranks for from the cache but
another database.
Either way, your feeds are not being indexed, which is what you said
originally. The data from those feeds is but the real URL is also.
Why is this a concern? Do you have different data in your feeds than
whats on the site? They still end up sending visitors to the same
place, so I just don't get the problem.
> Blog post was indexed in 8 minutes in Google Blog Search...issue is it
> is from the RSS feed and not the actually posting from the site....
> anyone have other thoughts as to what is causing the rss feed to get
> indexed before the site does??
> > Either way I cannot locate it in general or blog search so I cannot
> > duplicate your findings and have no idea why it may be that way for
> > only you.
> > On Sep 3, 10:04 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > no ideas?
> > > On Sep 3, 4:48 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > > Anyone out there at all have a clue about this?
> > > > > trends is picking up the RSS feed before my site...any help is greatly
> > > > > appreciated
> > > > > On Sep 2, 11:46 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > > > > I am a bit confused about this. My RSS feed:http://feeds.feedburner.com/celebridiot > > > > > > is being indexed much faster than my actual site.
Again, the feed is not being indexed, you have shown no proof of that.
The reason why they pull information quicker from the feed than the
actual page is that it is quicker to process due to the nature of the
feed. It's clean, organized, and concise. The actual page has a ton
of HTML which needs to be parsed and figured out, comparing an older
feed to a new feed allows them to quickly pull out what's new and
index that, by the way, it always baffles me why anyone would want to
publish partial feeds for this reason.
> Blog post was indexed in 8 minutes in Google Blog Search...issue is it
> is from the RSS feed and not the actually posting from the site....
> anyone have other thoughts as to what is causing the rss feed to get
> indexed before the site does??
> > Either way I cannot locate it in general or blog search so I cannot
> > duplicate your findings and have no idea why it may be that way for
> > only you.
> > On Sep 3, 10:04 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > no ideas?
> > > On Sep 3, 4:48 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > > Anyone out there at all have a clue about this?
> > > > > trends is picking up the RSS feed before my site...any help is greatly
> > > > > appreciated
> > > > > On Sep 2, 11:46 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > > > > I am a bit confused about this. My RSS feed:http://feeds.feedburner.com/celebridiot > > > > > > is being indexed much faster than my actual site.
> Again, the feed is not being indexed, you have shown no proof of that.
> The reason why they pull information quicker from the feed than the
> actual page is that it is quicker to process due to the nature of the
> feed. It's clean, organized, and concise. The actual page has a ton
> of HTML which needs to be parsed and figured out, comparing an older
> feed to a new feed allows them to quickly pull out what's new and
> index that, by the way, it always baffles me why anyone would want to
> publish partial feeds for this reason.
> > Blog post was indexed in 8 minutes in Google Blog Search...issue is it
> > is from the RSS feed and not the actually posting from the site....
> > anyone have other thoughts as to what is causing the rss feed to get
> > indexed before the site does??
> > > Either way I cannot locate it in general or blog search so I cannot
> > > duplicate your findings and have no idea why it may be that way for
> > > only you.
> > > On Sep 3, 10:04 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > > no ideas?
> > > > On Sep 3, 4:48 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > > > Anyone out there at all have a clue about this?
> > > > > > trends is picking up the RSS feed before my site...any help is greatly
> > > > > > appreciated
> > > > > > On Sep 2, 11:46 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > > > > > I am a bit confused about this. My RSS feed:http://feeds.feedburner.com/celebridiot > > > > > > > is being indexed much faster than my actual site.
> Again, the feed is not being indexed, you have shown no proof of that.
> The reason why they pull information quicker from the feed than the
> actual page is that it is quicker to process due to the nature of the
> feed. It's clean, organized, and concise. The actual page has a ton
> of HTML which needs to be parsed and figured out, comparing an older
> feed to a new feed allows them to quickly pull out what's new and
> index that, by the way, it always baffles me why anyone would want to
> publish partial feeds for this reason.
> > Blog post was indexed in 8 minutes in Google Blog Search...issue is it
> > is from the RSS feed and not the actually posting from the site....
> > anyone have other thoughts as to what is causing the rss feed to get
> > indexed before the site does??
> > > Either way I cannot locate it in general or blog search so I cannot
> > > duplicate your findings and have no idea why it may be that way for
> > > only you.
> > > On Sep 3, 10:04 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > > no ideas?
> > > > On Sep 3, 4:48 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > > > Anyone out there at all have a clue about this?
> > > > > > trends is picking up the RSS feed before my site...any help is greatly
> > > > > > appreciated
> > > > > > On Sep 2, 11:46 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > > > > > I am a bit confused about this. My RSS feed:http://feeds.feedburner.com/celebridiot > > > > > > > is being indexed much faster than my actual site.
> That is a footer placed on my RSS feed and does not exist on my site.
> So the test being pulled can't be coming from the site.
> On Sep 5, 11:50 am, JLH wrote:
> > Again, the feed is not being indexed, you have shown no proof of that.
> > The reason why they pull information quicker from the feed than the
> > actual page is that it is quicker to process due to the nature of the
> > feed. It's clean, organized, and concise. The actual page has a ton
> > of HTML which needs to be parsed and figured out, comparing an older
> > feed to a new feed allows them to quickly pull out what's new and
> > index that, by the way, it always baffles me why anyone would want to
> > publish partial feeds for this reason.
> > > Blog post was indexed in 8 minutes in Google Blog Search...issue is it
> > > is from the RSS feed and not the actually posting from the site....
> > > anyone have other thoughts as to what is causing the rss feed to get
> > > indexed before the site does??
> > > > Either way I cannot locate it in general or blog search so I cannot
> > > > duplicate your findings and have no idea why it may be that way for
> > > > only you.
> > > > On Sep 3, 10:04 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > > > no ideas?
> > > > > On Sep 3, 4:48 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > > > > Anyone out there at all have a clue about this?
> > > > > > > > I am a bit confused about this. My RSS feed:http://feeds.feedburner.com/celebridiot > > > > > > > > is being indexed much faster than my actual site.
> Yes. They pull the information from the feed before they crawl the
> page. That's how it works. They however do not index the feed.
> On Sep 5, 11:05 am, Celebridiot wrote:
> > do you see this on the bottom if the search:
> > ** Due to an increase in spam blogs ...
> > That is a footer placed on my RSS feed and does not exist on my site.
> > So the test being pulled can't be coming from the site.
> > On Sep 5, 11:50 am, JLH wrote:
> > > Again, the feed is not being indexed, you have shown no proof of that.
> > > The reason why they pull information quicker from the feed than the
> > > actual page is that it is quicker to process due to the nature of the
> > > feed. It's clean, organized, and concise. The actual page has a ton
> > > of HTML which needs to be parsed and figured out, comparing an older
> > > feed to a new feed allows them to quickly pull out what's new and
> > > index that, by the way, it always baffles me why anyone would want to
> > > publish partial feeds for this reason.
> > > > Blog post was indexed in 8 minutes in Google Blog Search...issue is it
> > > > is from the RSS feed and not the actually posting from the site....
> > > > anyone have other thoughts as to what is causing the rss feed to get
> > > > indexed before the site does??
> > > > > Either way I cannot locate it in general or blog search so I cannot
> > > > > duplicate your findings and have no idea why it may be that way for
> > > > > only you.
> > > > > On Sep 3, 10:04 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > > > > no ideas?
> > > > > > On Sep 3, 4:48 pm,Celebridiotwrote:
> > > > > > > Anyone out there at all have a clue about this?
> > > > > > > > > I am a bit confused about this. My RSS feed:http://feeds.feedburner.com/celebridiot > > > > > > > > > is being indexed much faster than my actual site.
