Ttrimm
1
If the new Panda algorithm is hurting so many, who is it helping?? It has to be helping someone!
system
2
Noone. It is helping noone.
“Google’s recent algorithm update aimed at improving the quality of search results has captured a great deal of attention – both positive and negative. The general consensus seems to be that the results are in fact better now, but still not perfect.” "“I got an e-mail from someone who wrote out of the blue and said, ‘Hey, a couple months ago, I was worried that my daughter had pediatric multiple sclerosis, and the content farms were ranking above government sites,’” Cutts is later quoted as saying. “Now, she said, the government sites are ranking higher. So I just wanted to write and say thank you.’” http://www.webpronews.com/google-panda-algorithm-update-whats-known-whats-possible-2011-03
The user who is googling the web?
Nah, most on-topic results are on the first page…unless you are so lazy that you don’t feel like moving your own head to see something, you can just scroll down. The algorithm was good as it was.
Well, those on-topic results are on the first page because of many algorithm changes including the Panda ones. It was a treat to have the scraper/made for adsense sites fall away in the SERPS. Unfortunately we were lumped in with the low-quality content farms that were intended to be hit. But, we have our own quality issues, which we are addressing. Here’s a radical idea that could be a huge boost in the long-term. @JackHerrick
@Krystle
@ChrisH
What if we < noindex > every single article created, and only remove that if an article receives FA or Rising Star status?
I guess I could tell you that www.wikihowl.com
received a 20% increase in Google sourced traffic following the Panda update that hit wikiHow. Not because they are a high quality content site, but because those originally above in the search results were deemed to be low quality.
Question: What would < noindex > be?
An instruction to Google (and others) not to index this page (do not use in search results).
system
10
Well,
Interesting! Never even heard of that before now, but I guess people on wikiHow always learn something new each day!
So, if I put the noindex thing on my userpage, it wouldn’t be searchable thru Google?
Well, knowing what it is now, I say it’s not a terrible idea, but I think that when an article starts as a stub, but then is fixed, the < noindex > can be removed.
I’m going to have to search the old forums for an answer, I think it is No, but forget why. Addition: It would be need to be done this way (and wasn’t feasible at the time): http://www.wikihow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7094
I actually think the searcher could win in all of this, because I know from the work I’ve done at library school and for my job that a lot of the top 10 results for Google searches I’ve done have come from content farms. For example, did you know that eHow and its sister site Livestrong both list RV parks and eHow also lists vacation home rental information? And that no sources for the information are listed, nor the date updated? There are some social science topics I researched online in a project for library school to compare sociology reference materials (like subject encyclopedias) to what’s available for free online. Many of the first results were from sites like Squidoo and Associated Content or sites that republished Wikipedia. So, if done the right way, this could really help people find reliable results. My problem with the panda algorithm is that it doesn’t account for the wiki model. I assume Wikipedia isn’t hurt by this algorithm, because it already gets a ton of traffic and is linked to a ton of other websites. I don’t know about other wikis though.
Maniac
14
If this would prove to work, an alternative would be to add the no indexing to every new
article created and have it removed automatically once the article proceeds through NAB… the process of boosting articles may have to change, though that lack of indexing might be a little bit easier of a transition for the site. It doesn’t fix the quality or accuracy issues from the past, but it will fix any future ones before they show up in search engines. Furthermore, it won’t make wikiHow look like it only has a few thousand articles (from the search engine standpoint).
@Davecrosby
when I click on your link to the old forums, it says: Critical Information You have been banned from this forum. Please contact the webmaster or board administrator for more information. @Krystle
?
Lojjik
16
Nah, this bit goes in the <head> section of the HTML making up wikiHow, rather than in the body content (where the content of pages are). I do suppose not indexing non-FAs would raise page rank, etc. but there are a lot of high quality articles that may not be FAs because of their topic. I know I write a lot of articles on technical topics, and wouldn’t apply to a general public audience such as those featured on the Main Page.
system
17
@AndrewG1999
The old forums are retired, they are non-functional, so if something doesn’t work correctly there, that’s why. @Davecrosby
De-indexing has been considered but the conclusion, in a nutshell, is that if we de-index some of our articles, there is the very real possibility that we will commit “search engine suicide” and hurt ourselves more than the panda update ever did.
Well, you’d be committing Adsense suicide, but be one heck of a quality site in the search results.
It’s why I called it a radical idea, it fixes the problem at too big a cost. Mind you, I liked that idea of only allowing indexing after NAB.
system
19
Mind you, I liked that idea of only allowing indexing after NAB. I like that idea too. ^^ I think this idea is a good compromise for us… kind of like vegetables… wash before eating? (NAB before putting them out for the reading public to consume?)
Ttrimm
20
The problem with that last theory, is that they can be around for several months before getting done in NAB. And then when we boost them, say we boost/NFD them, they are round for at least a week longer.
