Need help
SID
is no more indexed in Google, i'm really confused! Fairly new to this
world, i even do not have much about SEOs and all, forget about
employing SEO tricks.
One point i must tell, my server was down for a span of seven days
nearly two weeks ago, that may be the cause of such action.
Otherwise, I really can't guess what has happened.
Also i've heard that i can request Google for a re-inclusion in their
index. Can anyone please tell me the link.
Most dissapointing fact about this site is that i was working hard to
make it content rich day by day adding new pages one after another.I
have spent many hours to improve its quality, and just before this
occurance and at the same time learnt few basics of web-technologies,
it was picking up good position in Google search for popular search
terms. Page rank was also improving gradually.
Everything was going nice and fine upto this point, and now i am really
scared, confused, do not know where to lodge a request.
I cannot consider acquiring a new domain name as i've fairly good rank
in msn and Yahoo.
So, you can guess, what my situation is.
Thanks a lot in anticipation of some good "To-do" guide.
canadafred
<snip>
I'm disappointed SID. I read your entire plea, delivered with such
humility ... then off I go to the web site.
It's a pity I wasted my energy.
--
zzzz...
Fred
SID
already, i'm fairly new to this field and just learning a little bit
day by day.
What i wrote is not a plea, but the fact that has happened in recent
past, if you have found out anything wrong over there, please tell it
to me.
Please do not keep me guessing regarding what may be the cause that
de-indexed my site. I really require to know so that it should not
repeat that in my next works.
And above all, if you are talking about the looks and feel of that
website, i apologise for the fact that it is not at all good looking
and presently i'm working over it to improve that.
Still, i know Google is great, and i've nothng to say against google.
I only wanted to know what was wrong with that.
Anyway, thanks a lot that you cared to read my post and reply.
Roy Schestowitz
Fred, here's my advice to you:
http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
About half the posts (if not two-thirds) sent to this newsgroup should not be
visible to you.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux Ś PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
6:05am up 13 days 13:02, 8 users, load average: 0.91, 0.79, 0.80
http://iuron.com - Open Source knowledge engine project
Roy Schestowitz
Context:
[ridicule snipped]
Hi Sid,
Judging by some quick searches, you have a PageRank of 1 and one inbound
link is still detectable (albeit no pages are indexed). I am not sure
there is a good reason to suspect banishment. Perhaps you site needs more
links. I took a look at the source code of your front page. The JavaScript
seems harmless and I notice AdSense as well (have they banned you? I hope
not). As for the content, it's rather promiscuously promotional.
Were you ever indexed?
Best wishes,
Roy
PS - When replying in UseNet, you need to quote that whom you reply to.
See the following: http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/
--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux Ś PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
6:10am up 13 days 13:07, 8 users, load average: 1.21, 0.95, 0.84
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
SID
appreciate, i must have done something wrong, though to the best of my
knowledge out of inadvertance and really clueless about what went wrong
with a site that was picking up day by day) done by me may not repeat
in future. But no one has really come out. Earlier when i faced deep
trouble with Google Sitemap, i got many people to extend assistance in
their own way. That is why i posted it here in search of some useful
hints. Please do not utter cursing words, i'm enough demoralised since
last night when i first detected such occurance. It appears that days
have changed for me.
Now atleast anyone from Google member ( i apologise strongly for the
fact that you will have to waste your energy too! for a while ) will
look at my site for once more and tell me what not to do in future.
Please help me out, ....
Roy Schestowitz
See my response in the other path down this thread. I would love to help,
but you absolutely must quote the relevant parts of text to which you
reply. It is a newsgroup, not a dialogue where everyone can get quick
insight into context. The better your posting habits, the more people in
this group will join in and help you with a joint advice.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: Every polar bear is left-handed
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE GNU/Linux Ś PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
6:45am up 13 days 13:42, 8 users, load average: 0.22, 0.43, 0.50
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine
SID
i was indexed in Google's index, almost all the pages were indexed but
the number of pages would vay from one only at times to twenty-four.
Please take not of the fact that i've no control of the Advertisements
shown at the top of my webpages as those are inserted by the host. It
was a test site hosted using FREE webhosts, so i've no control over the
advertisements shown there.
Yes, i appreciate it looks something like promotional, i was just
working on that and though you found a PR 1 for the home page, but i
was lifted to PR3 for someother pages of that website, which are more
rich with content.
Roy, i'm really scared. Now i've understood the symptoms of getting
de-indexed in Google.
I have oflate hosted another website, a CMS ( that i've tried to
develop using my small PHP knowledge), it gives me some return from
Adsense as well till date. It shows different products from some
sellers (affiliate link you can say, please do not take it as an
advertisement of that site) , it has over 200 pages indexed in Google
earlier and today i found only 106 are still there. However, my
changed pages are listed higher when i type site:site_name.
For this site, i must appreciate, i made few changes in contents (
actually removed them all, change the description meta-tags and links,
and removed some javascript as per suggestion of Google guideline, the
changes took place every now and then, almost over a span of one month)
I made those changes following the guideline of Google and based on
the reviews of my visitors, Initially the site picked up well in
Google, but now it is gradually decreasing.
Just now i tested it with a tool for prediction of pagerank. It enjoys
PR3, but it is showing that it will be PR 0 ! . I'm really scared now.
Now I know the symtopms and here is the site
http://www.fancy-shoppe.com/
Do you think it is also going to be de-indexed ?
I''ve not been banned from Adsense as yet, i really admire, appreciate
and try to follow up the policies set byGoogle.
I do not know, how far convincing ( " really not plea") i may sound,
but i really want to know the mistake i am making.Please tell me if you
can locate that.
Thanks anyway for your cordial opinion.
you have referred to
Roy Schestowitz
Now that you mention all of this, I am beginning to suspect that the fault
might not be at your end. I suggest you have a look at the following URL's
and attempt to align the symptoms to find out if you are merely the victim
of a Google error (sadly, many of us /are/):
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1959865,00.asp
http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum30/34228.htm
http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum30/34061.htm
(Thank you, Dmitri, for providing these links earlier on)
Best wishes and good luck,
Roy
PS - Please *do* quote when replying:
http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/ . If you don't, as well as
address the question directly to me, many of the other participants will be
unable or unwilling to help you.
--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux Ś PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
7:05am up 13 days 14:02, 8 users, load average: 0.08, 0.40, 0.52
SID
fault
might not be at your end. I suggest you have a look at the following
URL's
and attempt to align the symptoms to find out if you are merely the
victim
of a Google error (sadly, many of us /are/):
Thanks Roy, since last night, almost over twelve hours now, i've kept
on guessing as to what mistake i might have done out of inadvertance.
I've gone through the links that you have referred to right now and
suspect that i'm not the lone victim of this epidemic.
Well, will you please tell me, where can i request Google for a
re-inclusion, i've although re-submitted my URL already for GoogleBot
to crawl once again.
And once again, i'll request anyone from Google's team to please look
into this matter
and suggest a way about what to do in this case.
It is surprising, painful and heart-breaking to see it, yes i've no
word to express my frustrations!
Bye.
Roy Schestowitz
> Now that you mention all of this, I am beginning to suspect that the
> fault
> might not be at your end. I suggest you have a look at the following
> URL's
> and attempt to align the symptoms to find out if you are merely the
> victim
> of a Google error (sadly, many of us /are/):
>
> Thanks Roy, since last night, almost over twelve hours now, i've kept
> on guessing as to what mistake i might have done out of inadvertance.
> I've gone through the links that you have referred to right now and
> suspect that i'm not the lone victim of this epidemic.
> Well, will you please tell me, where can i request Google for a
> re-inclusion, i've although re-submitted my URL already for GoogleBot
> to crawl once again.
Don't (re-)submit the URL as it has no effect. What you probably want is the
following:
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/reinclusion-request-howto/
I think it's a shame that this important point of reference continues to
reside in a personal, non-professional blog of an employee. They ought to
remove many such feature announcements and HOWTO's to a suitable domain. It
looks very unprofessional otherwise.
> And once again, i'll request anyone from Google's team to please look
> into this matter
> and suggest a way about what to do in this case.
As a general clarification, no-one from Google read this newsgroup, as far as
I know. This is not the first time somebody assumes this. There is a
newsgroup whose address is google.public.support.general, but it's largely a
lonesome monologue. Google are channelling some people in that direction,
but there is barely any community to help over there...
> It is surprising, painful and heart-breaking to see it, yes i've no
> word to express my frustrations!
>
> Bye.
Many of us have been down this road of promaturely blaming ourselves for
something that was due to a server or search engine error. Don't get your
hopes down, but don't get them up either. Shouldn't someone coin a term for
that Google depression symptom, which has become so common? You know,
something like "Googlenerve" or "Googlenxiety"...?
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Prevalence does not imply ideali$M
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE GNU/Linux Ś PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
7:45am up 13 days 14:42, 8 users, load average: 1.45, 0.94, 0.61
SID
This is the first time i laughed over the past few hours. Thanks. Not
only that you are a helpful person, you are a great Councilor as well.
Writely so, i just can't let it go out of my mind. Sites are doing well
with msn and Yahoo, and not with Google.... Google must hire some
experts to council us, otherwise, we people will simply be perished out
of utter frustration for being toyed by Google.
And for anyone looking at this thread from Google group, please do
something to save us, at times we are becoming clueless.
Roy Schestowitz
They already have googleguy and Matt Cutts as so-called gentle oracles... or
that's at least the way I choose to think of them as...
Unlike me, those folks get paid. *bitter, cold impression* (not really...)
Keep an eye on the posts to keep abreast of developments. Webmasters are
humming.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Minesweeper Consultant and Solitaire Expert (MCSE)
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux Ś PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
8:20am up 13 days 15:17, 8 users, load average: 1.06, 0.40, 0.45
Big Bill
<newsg...@schestowitz.com> wrote:
>__/ [ canadafred ] on Wednesday 10 May 2006 21:47 \__
>
>> SID wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> I'm disappointed SID. I read your entire plea, delivered with such
>> humility ... then off I go to the web site.
>>
>> It's a pity I wasted my energy.
>
>Fred, here's my advice to you:
>
> http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
>
>About half the posts (if not two-thirds) sent to this newsgroup should not be
>visible to you.
This is from a certain shark we know, isn't it?
BB
--
http://www.kruse.co.uk/sandbox.htm
http://www.here-be-posters.co.uk/jimi-hendrix-posters.htm
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/armani/index.html
Big Bill
wrote:
It doesn't make a lot of difference right now what you do or don't do
as Google are in a right mess. Plus we're all a bit fed up with
repeating ourselves about it. I am anyway.
Big Bill
wrote:
>Yes Roy,
>i was indexed in Google's index, almost all the pages were indexed but
>the number of pages would vay from one only at times to twenty-four.
Lately that's not unusual.
>Please take not of the fact that i've no control of the Advertisements
>shown at the top of my webpages as those are inserted by the host. It
>was a test site hosted using FREE webhosts, so i've no control over the
>advertisements shown there.
Get another host. If you have very little traffic, then hosting can be
had very cheaply if you look around.
>Yes, i appreciate it looks something like promotional, i was just
>working on that and though you found a PR 1 for the home page, but i
>was lifted to PR3 for someother pages of that website, which are more
>rich with content.
>
>Roy, i'm really scared. Now i've understood the symptoms of getting
>de-indexed in Google.
>I have oflate hosted another website, a CMS ( that i've tried to
>develop using my small PHP knowledge), it gives me some return from
>Adsense as well till date. It shows different products from some
>sellers (affiliate link you can say, please do not take it as an
>advertisement of that site) , it has over 200 pages indexed in Google
>earlier and today i found only 106 are still there.
My site with more than 50,00 pages now has a few hundred indexed. We
hear this story from lots of people.
> However, my
>changed pages are listed higher when i type site:site_name.
>For this site, i must appreciate, i made few changes in contents (
>actually removed them all, change the description meta-tags and links,
>and removed some javascript as per suggestion of Google guideline, the
>changes took place every now and then, almost over a span of one month)
> I made those changes following the guideline of Google and based on
>the reviews of my visitors, Initially the site picked up well in
>Google, but now it is gradually decreasing.
And there's really not a lot you can do except observe good practices
and hang on.
>Just now i tested it with a tool for prediction of pagerank. It enjoys
>PR3, but it is showing that it will be PR 0 ! . I'm really scared now.
That tool is a toy! Ignore it!
>Now I know the symtopms and here is the site
>http://www.fancy-shoppe.com/
>Do you think it is also going to be de-indexed ?
>I''ve not been banned from Adsense as yet,
Which would indicate that you aren't doing anything wrong.
Big Bill
<newsg...@schestowitz.com> wrote:
>Many of us have been down this road of promaturely blaming ourselves for
>something that was due to a server or search engine error. Don't get your
>hopes down, but don't get them up either. Shouldn't someone coin a term for
>that Google depression symptom, which has become so common? You know,
>something like "Googlenerve" or "Googlenxiety"...?
Google-phobia. That would be fear of Google itself, though, not fear
of the effects of Google. Um...hyperchondriac would be Googlechondriac
although I suspect we're into Latin and skin there which wouldn't be
appropriate either. Anybody?
Hyper-Googlating? Like when they breathe into bags?
Roy Schestowitz
> On Thu, 11 May 2006 06:10:15 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
> <newsg...@schestowitz.com> wrote:
>
>>__/ [ canadafred ] on Wednesday 10 May 2006 21:47 \__
>>
>>> SID wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> I'm disappointed SID. I read your entire plea, delivered with such
>>> humility ... then off I go to the web site.
>>>
>>> It's a pity I wasted my energy.
>>
>>Fred, here's my advice to you:
>>
>> http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
>>
>>About half the posts (if not two-thirds) sent to this newsgroup should not
>>be visible to you.
>
> This is from a certain shark we know, isn't it?
>
> BB
Yes, but he never swims in AISE. You probably saw him in AWW. His groups of
subscription overlap mine to a large degree (approximately 6 of them).
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: Florida is bigger than England
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux Ś PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
12:25pm up 13 days 19:22, 8 users, load average: 0.23, 0.23, 0.25
www.1-script.com
Hey SID,
There has certainly been a lot said about your (Google's?) problems last
night (those guys in Europe really do have a head start on Internet
discussions, don't they? ;-))
I think I can add something looking at it from a technical prospective. I
would hate to retype a long message I posted here yesterday addressed to a
poor soul also struggling with Google (
http://www.1-script.com/forums/Re-Cache-Question-Can-anyone-help-article31324-1.htm
) but your site shows a lot of commonality with his problems and you add a
sprinkle of your own ones to it.
I think it's pretty well established right now that G has some problems.
It does not, however, help if your site is adding to the complexity of the
situation.
Your site is suffering from the same problem with non-www and www versions
of the homepage being looked at as duplicate pages. Correct that.
Additionally, your HTML is not valid. I'm not saying that mine is ;-) but
in your case you have something before your document type definition
declaration:
<div•class="header">(LF)
This would throw ANY search engine's parsers off even during stable times,
let alone these turbulent ones. Doctype is a pretty important tag because
it steers the parsers towards properly getting data from your pages. Just
make it the very first line in your code.
Also, if you are serious about your site, do get your own hosting. It
costs on the order of $3 per month for starters. Right now you may also be
suffering from any potential penalty imposed onto siteburg.com. I don't
know if there is one, but if there is, you'll suffer too.
Lastly, my own Google problems led me to think that totally relying on a
free search engine traffic is simply not a viable business strategy. It is
VERY important, but it is not the only way people get traffic. The better
one is to actually develop your site to the point where people, once
visited, would want to return. If they do, this is THE traffic that you
can live by.
--
Cheers,
Dmitri
See Site Sig Below
--
+------------------------------------------------+
| Follow alt.internet.search-engines threads |
| with your Firefox Live Bookmarks! Set it up at |
| http://www.1-script.com/forums/ |
+------------------------------------------------+
Roy Schestowitz
Without any /offence/ intended, America seems to be lagging behind, IT-wise.
The /trend/ seems to indicate this, by some rather artificial means.
,----[ Quote ]
| Seven of the top 10 teams were from Europe, and just one from the
| United States: MIT placed 8th, managing to solve 5 of the 10 problems
| in less than 14 hours.
|
| The poor U.S. showing could provide new fuel for the debate over
| whether U.S. computer programmers lag behind the rest of the world
| when it comes to talent.
`----
> I think I can add something looking at it from a technical prospective. I
> would hate to retype a long message I posted here yesterday addressed to a
> poor soul also struggling with Google (
>
http://www.1-script.com/forums/Re-Cache-Question-Can-anyone-help-article31324-1.htm
> ) but your site shows a lot of commonality with his problems and you add a
> sprinkle of your own ones to it.
Thanks for all the information. I am affected as well, so it has been
valuable knowing the cause.
> I think it's pretty well established right now that G has some problems.
> It does not, however, help if your site is adding to the complexity of the
> situation.
> Your site is suffering from the same problem with non-www and www versions
> of the homepage being looked at as duplicate pages. Correct that.
> Additionally, your HTML is not valid. I'm not saying that mine is ;-) but
> in your case you have something before your document type definition
> declaration:
Unless the site is run by some very strict CMS (and only one such system),
this can be hard to change or reverse. I am hoping that your comment only
refer to short-term impact rather than foresight.
> <div•class="header">(LF)
>
> This would throw ANY search engine's parsers off even during stable times,
> let alone these turbulent ones. Doctype is a pretty important tag because
> it steers the parsers towards properly getting data from your pages. Just
> make it the very first line in your code.
>
> Also, if you are serious about your site, do get your own hosting. It
> costs on the order of $3 per month for starters. Right now you may also be
> suffering from any potential penalty imposed onto siteburg.com. I don't
> know if there is one, but if there is, you'll suffer too.
I fully agree, on both accounts.
> Lastly, my own Google problems led me to think that totally relying on a
> free search engine traffic is simply not a viable business strategy. It is
> VERY important, but it is not the only way people get traffic. The better
> one is to actually develop your site to the point where people, once
> visited, would want to return. If they do, this is THE traffic that you
> can live by.
Agreed again, but it all comes down (to me at least) to the question: what is
the site intended to achieve?
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | WARNING: /dev/null running out of space
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
5:00pm up 13 days 23:57, 9 users, load average: 0.09, 0.44, 0.53
SID
was the beginning of my website venture when i was absolutely novish.
I created a page header.php that would contain header information and
some text containing keyword ( one occurance only in H1 tag ). I was
never in a mind to hide that from my visitors. But the Ad-banner
inserted by the host would overlap that.Also i use position:absolute in
my style sheet definition . So you can assume what has happened. That
header.php got overlapped with the inserted Ad-banner at the top of my
webpage. I really forgot all about that . Now i was scrutinising every
aspect of my first serious site and guess that has done the blunder.
Anyway before making any re-inclusion request i want to check whether
it is totally correct.
However, i really gained nothing from Google for that overlapped
header.php as my site would come rarely in the result page. Rather i
get good response from msn as well as Yahoo!
Let me take a rest for a while almost constantly watching the
developments over the past twenty-three hours and please do not thrash
me out of this race.
Bye.
canadafred
> I don't really find out why are you disappointed, as i have told
> already, i'm fairly new to this field and just learning a little bit
> day by day.
"fairly new" : "novice"
> What i wrote is not a plea, but the fact that has happened in recent
> past, if you have found out anything wrong over there, please tell it
> to me.
I find your overuse of AD networks wrong, your link partners
neighbourhoods wrong ... the whole gimmick of it all wrong!
> Still, i know Google is great, and i've nothng to say against google.
Say what you want about what you want to say. What would you want to
say to Google? Probably something like : "Thanks Google for making sooo
much money for me in the past. Please, please Google, like my web site
again. Rank it high for keyphrase1, keyphrase2, ..."
> I only wanted to know what was wrong with that.
> Anyway, thanks a lot that you cared to read my post and reply.
S'not a problem.
SID
say to Google? Probably something like : "Thanks Google for making sooo
much money for me in the past. Please, please Google, like my web site
again. Rank it high for keyphrase1, keyphrase2, ..."
I'm afraid to say Fred you did not read my posts at all in this thread.
It is very easy to access everyone alike, and commenrs like you are
bound to do the same mistake.
I have not earned a single penny from that website ( forget about
Google search result), The Ads shown at the top of my webpages are
actually inserted by my host ( A free web-hosting service) and i'm not
going to utter rubbish words that you have manufactured from your own
imagination. Such words do never come up in our mind. We are really not
bothered for money , i appreciate i need that too but only to the
extent that is required for survival.
Please be modest while making a comments, this is not the place to
curse and abuse people and cut comments based on falsified presumptions
or better read Roy's advice just after your first reply.
Good luck and wish you understand the real pleasure of life in near
future.
******** Sorry everybody else for my above post, but such
unparliamentary comments really shock me a lot.*********
And i'm afraid to say your guess work is completely wrong. I've pointed
out my mistake and posted it here only after working hard all through
the day to find out what went wrong. I can show you a dozens of similar
sites which are listed in Google index and i know that they will be
there if they do not commit similar inadvertant mistake that i've made.
canadafred
<snip>
Have you ever followed this link from your web site's entrance :
SEO Toolkit - Free step-by-step guides to getting a top-10 Google
ranking!
The crying towel is in the corner and the complaints department is the
second door to the left. Politics is for sissies.
--
zzzz...
Fred
SID
what might have gone wrong, sorted it out from discussion over here,
got that posted too.I could have kept it hidden too as nobody (even
me!) could not sort out what was wrong.It was a mistake done out of
inadvertance and no foul play absolutely no. I dislike to play
unnecessay politics, and don't require a crying towel really.
Hopefully,i have established what i mean, anyway please don't waste
time here anymore. I think both of us should have a better role to play
than this. I'm not going to look at this thread anymore, so whatever
you want you may say.
Thanks for your help and assistance.
Big Bill
wrote:
You still haven't learnt how to post properly.
Roy Schestowitz
> On 11 May 2006 20:51:46 -0700, "SID" <sid.ca...@mybestmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Really i don't need that atleast for this site, i came here to sort out
>>what might have gone wrong, sorted it out from discussion over here,
>>got that posted too.I could have kept it hidden too as nobody (even
>>me!) could not sort out what was wrong.It was a mistake done out of
>>inadvertance and no foul play absolutely no. I dislike to play
>>unnecessay politics, and don't require a crying towel really.
>>Hopefully,i have established what i mean, anyway please don't waste
>>time here anymore. I think both of us should have a better role to play
>>than this. I'm not going to look at this thread anymore, so whatever
>>you want you may say.
>>Thanks for your help and assistance.
>
> You still haven't learnt how to post properly.
>
> BB
Give him a break, Bill. The man is under pressure already. I have sent link
to "Google Groups Reply" twice and he /did/ try to quote correctly.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Black holes are where God is divided by zero"
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects Ś PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
8:40am up 14 days 15:37, 9 users, load average: 1.92, 1.19, 0.76
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine