vBulletin

Thank you for visiting. This is our website archive. Please visit our main website by clicking the banner above.
vBulletin FAQ is dedicated to helping the forum owner build, manage and profit from his vBulletin Forum
vBulletin Web Hosting - Free skins and styles for your vBulletin - Search Engine Optimization




Google: Changes in url queries

minstrel
09-18-2006, 01:53 PM
Changes in url queries (http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/changes-in-url-queries/)
By Matt Cutts on Google/SEO
September 18, 2006

One truism you learn quickly at Google is “you are not a typical user.” If you’re reading this blog, the truism probably applies to you too: you’re much more likely to be a power-user, an SEO, a librarian, or someone else who is familiar with the site: operator or the info: operator. But it’s important to remember that many Google users aren’t like that.

Bearing that fact in mind helps explain a recent change in how we handle url queries. Some people call these navigational queries, but at Google a navigational query is typing in [HP] and expecting to see www.hp.com high in the search results. A url query would be something like [www.example.com].

Previously we treated the query [www.example.com] like the query [info:www.example.com], and now we treat it like [”www.example.com”]. The query [info:www.example.com] returns the single url www.example.com if we have it in our index, along with other choices like “see backlinks for www.example.com” (I’m oversimplifying a little, but nothing too bad). The query [”www.example.com”] searches for that as a phrase, and thus returns the ten best matching urls, which will usually show www.example.com at #1 or high in the search results.

Why did we make this change? Bear in mind that you, gentle reader, are not a typical user. If super-duper power-users who know how to refine site: or info: are a set of people we’ll call N, you are probably in that set N. There is a whole different range of people M who just type in www.example.com to get to www.example.com, and who sometimes misspell the url. In math, M >> N means that M is much greater than N. That is, there are many more people who casually type in urls to get to those urls (and who sometimes misspell those urls) than there are super power users. So this change helps M. The N power users can just prepend “info:” to get to the old behavior.

Noppid
09-18-2006, 03:43 PM
I discovered this by accident the other night and didn't even know it. Thanks for the heads up. Being an N, I scratched my head. :p

Hell³
09-18-2006, 04:36 PM
OMG, beign called a power user makes me feel all tingly inside... besides that... I haven't really checked this one but I can concur that "info:" was rather... ummm... redundant to say the least before this change.

Noppid
09-18-2006, 05:23 PM
OMG, beign called a power user makes me feel all tingly inside... besides that... I haven't really checked this one but I can concur that "info:" was rather... ummm... redundant to say the least before this change.


Be humble and just refer to yourself as an N. :p

mandar-seo
09-19-2006, 01:26 AM
Hey this is great piece of info and it again reassured me that SE algo and utilities changes to answer questions with common sense. According to the bad and good is very easy to distinguish. If you find it aligning the common sense then it's good otherwise bad.

With regards,
Mandar Thosar

beller
09-19-2006, 04:27 AM
Thanks for the info Minstrel. Can you tell me how entering info:www.example.com can give varying results from day to day (and even sometimes from hour to hour) With indexed pages dropping off then reappearing again.

minstrel
09-19-2006, 06:13 AM
Can you tell me how entering info:www.example.com can give varying results from day to day (and even sometimes from hour to hour) With indexed pages dropping off then reappearing again.

Yes. Google is broken. No matter how many times Matt Cutts tries to tell us it is our fault.

beller
09-19-2006, 09:43 AM
So whose fault is it? & will it be fixed?

minstrel
09-19-2006, 10:13 AM
I would hope so. When is anyone's guess, though - they have been tweaking and patching for months now and it's clearly not yet "fixed".

Big Dan
09-19-2006, 11:49 AM
For a while by board ranked #3 for some key DJ keywords. I was impressed because that's before I did any SEO work. Now that I've done SEO work, I don't even show up on the first 4 pages. :eek:

Yup, Google's broken.

Peggy
09-19-2006, 12:10 PM
lol.. same here Dan... my adult forum was PR5 til they re-indexed, now it's a 2. Feels like I'm starting all over after a year :rolleyes:

beller
09-19-2006, 03:45 PM
So at the moment is there any reliable method of finding how many pages your site has indexed by Google.
At the moment mine shows 60.. (Out of about 10000)

minstrel
09-19-2006, 07:45 PM
The short answer is "No", since the number keeps changing, no matter which method you use.

Noppid
09-19-2006, 09:27 PM
For a while by board ranked #3 for some key DJ keywords. I was impressed because that's before I did any SEO work. Now that I've done SEO work, I don't even show up on the first 4 pages. :eek:

Yup, Google's broken.

While google is broken in some respects, I think you need to evaluate what you just posted again. :eek:

Hell³
09-19-2006, 09:46 PM
Be humble and just refer to yourself as an N. :p
I don't wanna be "algorithmatized"... more than I already have...

Can't I be something like Q instead?, you know, the kind of ballistic user that just types random terms to see wich one doesn't return 1st page x-rated results in the image search? :D

Noppid
09-19-2006, 10:14 PM
Check your user title. :D

Hell³
09-19-2006, 10:17 PM
:eek: That will have some heads turning :D

Peggy
09-19-2006, 11:04 PM
LMAO.... cute

beller
09-20-2006, 08:27 AM
Sorry Minstral... Just to clarify. So is this problem that the pages arn't being indexed or is it just Googles is not able to acuratly tell you the number of pages in its index.

minstrel
09-20-2006, 08:39 AM
It's a combination of things, beller.

First, the site: query does appear to be broken - Google admitted a few months back that it was and then claimed to have fixed it but I have always wondered if part of it was intentional, much like they did over a year ago with the link: query, to decrease the number of queries to their databases from webmasters looking to monitor and improve their Google rankings.

Second, there are day to day fluctuations and disparities across different datacenters that have continued since the Big Daddy update last spring. It's not unusual to see this for a brief time after an update but it has been going on now for months. This is partly because Big Daddy undoubtedly "broke" things and partly because some of the tweaks and patches applied following Big Daddy to fix the mess made it worse or created new problems.

Google has publicly admitted to a few problems but is basically smokescreening the rest via people like Matt Cutts, blaming it first on black hat webmasters using link schemes and other dubious methods to boost rankings, and most recently on "overoptimization" which is just pure bafflegab in my opinion.

beller
09-20-2006, 08:49 AM
Some good info there. Thanks Minstral


vBulletin

seo book

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum