1. Welcome to DNTrade. If you want to find out about the latest domain name industry news or talk, share, learn, buy, sell, trade or develop domain names - then you've come to the right place. It's a diverse and active community, with domain investors, web developers and online marketers - and it's free! Click here to join now.
    Dismiss Notice

Website Not Good Enough For Google

Discussion in 'General Domain Discussion' started by geodomains, May 19, 2011.

  1. Chris.C

    Chris.C Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    2,098
    Likes Received:
    124
    I wholeheartedly agree.

    I know over the years I have learned a lot more from my failures and set backs than I have my successes. If nothing else it will be a great learning experience.

    The important thing to remember is that Google doesn't "define" anything and they like keeping everything ambiguous.

    Whilst the AdSense policy is that you are allowed a maximum of three ad units that doesn't mean that the Google search algorithm that ranks your site doesn't take into consideration the ad to content ratio, and may deem it to high.

    My understanding is that most areas of Google work independently, i.e. the AdSense team work separately to their search quality team which work separately from the youtube developers. Each team is aiming to improve their section of Google, "largely" regardless of what implications that has of the other sections.

    My point is that the policy of one part of Google doesn't validate another part. They work independently achieving independent goals.

    The fact it is "unique" doesn't make it "good" quality.

    I'm not saying it's bad quality, I'm just saying that most leading experts are chatting about Google becoming increasingly aware of the subtle differences between good and bad quality content and no doubt they will begin to start factoring these qualitative indicators more.

    To each their own I guess.

    ;)


    They are not obligated to. Their secrecy is essential otherwise gaming the system would be that much easier - and let's be honest, that's exactly what we are all trying to do.


    Agreed.

    Though with that said there are huge number of sites whose "unofficial objectives" are to increase AdSense revenues, but as I mentioned in a previous post the majority of these sites do a good job of at least giving the "impression" that making money is not the main objective.

    I think these are good suggestions.

    I'd also like to throw in there that link units tend to be quite effective when well-positioned and they are small enough that when glancing at a site they don't make you think MFA.

    Also from what I have been reading lately (yes John I do a lot of reading) is that having ads on your site isn't an issue in itself, but where they are positioned can matter (particularly above the fold).

    So for example if you have large ad blocks at the top of your page above your content with link units and maybe a large header image the people who come to your site are initially only seeing ads, maybe a picture and some navigation links, which will be great for ad CTRs, but is bad for user experience as Google is directing them to your site because Google believes that your site has the content they are looking for.

    I know I personally am moving to designs that avoid putting large ads above my content and I'm opting for the larger ads appearing directly below content and within navigation bars.

    These can achieve good CTR without the site looking like an MFA.

    Of course this isn't the official line from Google, but from what I'm reading and what I've experienced personally I would be surprised if this wasn't the case.


    It was only my opinion that it "looks" like a MFA site. And I'd expect that a Google website reviewer would probably think the same, not to mention that a number of people within this thread also seem to agree that it looks like an MFA.

    Now I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that, but one has to be realistic about the likelihood of success when asking for reinclusion request when this is the case.

    I think djuqa runs allot of sites, has a lot of experience and obviously does well for himself - so from that perspective alone, anyone who doesn't at least "listen" to him is probably doing themselves a disservice.

    I'm not saying I agree with everything he says or act on it, but he is definitely someone that I will at least listen to.

    You can call me ignorant if you want and if you really think that I don't know what I'm talking about I'd encourage you to block my posts via your forum settings.

    You're definitely not obliged to listen to what I have to say.

    And at the same time I'm more than happy to dedicate more of my time to working on my own business if people don't get any value from what I have to say.

    Your damn right I paraphrase, cite and even quote those that are the leaders in their respective fields whether it be Jeremy Schoemaker or Aaron Wall (who are the biggest proponents that a key ingredient to success is not making Google look stupid).

    And, yes, I stole a term Jerry Shoemaker coined years ago, but that's why I used the term in inverted commas.

    I don't claim that all my thoughts are original, they're not, nor that I have perfect knowledge, I try to talk with caution because there is so much ambiguity in internet marketing.

    Most importantly I'm not out there repackaging an info product and pushing it on gullible people. I know that there are smarter people than I that have all said it before. I was just trying to help Geo understand why a Google reviewer might not feel compelled to push the site back into the index.

    I don't disagree that Google may not penalise a lot of crap sites out there, but in my experience Google operates largely on one strike and you're out policy.

    They have always been ruthless with the quality of their search index just like the rest of their products and services. So you can bet your bottom dollar that when it comes to reincluding sites they are not just going to reindex junk just because there is other junk already in there.

    If you don't get that, then I think you're missing the bigger picture.

    I think you're looking at this from the wrong perspective. You're saying why "shouldn't" this site be included in the index. The Google reviewer is looking at the site from the perspective that it has already been kicked out, why "should" this site be included in the index.

    When coming at it from the other way the is case a lot harder to win because the site isn't of what I would call "high value".

    Now this is a bit of an unusual case in that the site was built on a domain that was already kicked out. Truth be told if this sort of site and content was on a fresh domain that had no black marks with Google it most likelihood it would still be in the index and ranking well.

    Even I have sites that are worse looking with less value than this site that still rank, and still rank well, but they get the benefit of the doubt because they haven't been kicked out yet.

     
  2. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,669
    Likes Received:
    1,094
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    You obviously put a lot of time and thought into this post, and I commend you for that.

    I can't say who is right, and who is wrong, because I'm a troglodyte when it comes to this sort of stuff.

    However, the purpose of this forum is to exchange points of view, and share knowledge. If people don't agree with someone else, that's absolutely fine - and anybody and everybody is welcome to say so.

    But please, can everybody play nice? Treat people like you would like to be treated yourself. Otherwise it just degenerates into a slanging match. No one wins from that.

    "There endeth the lesson from the old fart Admin".
     
  3. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,669
    Likes Received:
    1,094
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    I see that the site has been taken down, and that the domain is now in "pending delete".
     
  4. djuqa

    djuqa Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Messages:
    758
    Likes Received:
    2
    YES at my request
    and FYI everyones benefit, I at no time implied that J. Bahr created the site.
     
  5. DnEbook

    DnEbook Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2008
    Messages:
    6,235
    Likes Received:
    766
    So who created the site ????

    simple question

    i smell BS from a number of directions
     
  6. DnEbook

    DnEbook Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2008
    Messages:
    6,235
    Likes Received:
    766
    perhaps stupid question ......does host give it away ?
     
  7. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,669
    Likes Received:
    1,094
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Not really a simple question Spacey. I don't imagine that someone is going to stick their hand up and confess.
     
  8. geodomains

    geodomains Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    838
    Likes Received:
    99
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Okay, my daughter has rebuilt the website www.glutenfree.com.au and I've now done a re-consideration with Google, so fingers crossed they'll accept it now. :)

    Don
     
  9. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,669
    Likes Received:
    1,094
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    That's looking great Don. Congrats to your daughter.

    What did she use to build it?
     
  10. geodomains

    geodomains Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    838
    Likes Received:
    99
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Thanks, same software xsitepro, just used one of their templates this time
     
  11. James

    James Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Messages:
    2,780
    Likes Received:
    460
    Some times they just keep knocking back sites, my advice is if it keeps happening try and send a reply via the help forum (make a bit of noise) Google employees do read these if enough noise is generated - http://www.google.com/support/forum...=HC&utm_medium=leftnav&utm_campaign=webmaster

    I feel it works more effectively then sending emails to them direct because they don't listen, its like paypal customer support soo bad.
     
  12. geodomains

    geodomains Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    838
    Likes Received:
    99
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Good news www.glutfree.com.au was accepted by Google today for reinclusion, yippee :D

    Now to calm down my daughter, she's already talking seo this and do that.

    Don
     
  13. Chris.C

    Chris.C Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    2,098
    Likes Received:
    124
    That's awesome news!

    And all it required was a bit of spit and polish.

    :D
     
  14. Rhythm

    Rhythm Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,162
    Likes Received:
    118
    Did a search for gluten free and this is ranking 2nd after wikipedia.

    Ditto for many other keywords. EMD FTW
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2012
  15. geodomains

    geodomains Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    838
    Likes Received:
    99
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Yes has been #1 for last 6 months and ranking well for lots of keywords, but dropped last week with latest algo update.

    Daughter was doing nicely for a while, she's too busy with study to do anymore work on the website, but she is certainly hooked on getting passive income.

    Don
     
  16. AlexBailey

    AlexBailey Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2012
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who isn't? Haha.

    But, well done on the domains re-inclusion and success.
     
  17. Rhythm

    Rhythm Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,162
    Likes Received:
    118
    The thing about the site that (IMO) could be tweaked is the high font variation - too many different fonts - and maybe lose the top menu (left menu fits in better).

    Of course if the clicks drop after my proposed tweaks than ignore everything I said and put it back to how it was before.

    RIP SEO (great custom number plate idea for Matt Cutts)
     
  18. vilsonkarl

    vilsonkarl Membership: Community

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    website is good but can not believe that is done by 14 years Daughter...
     
  19. geodomains

    geodomains Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    838
    Likes Received:
    99
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Ha ha, she does not even tell her friends as they wouldn't understand.

    Don
     
  20. marketingweb

    marketingweb Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    172
    Likes Received:
    0
    I didn't have the benefit of seeing the origional site. BUT to me the one thing that still lets it down is the lack of a logo.

    A logo can be a wordform as heading text, doesn't have to be fancy. But in the standard font it is in, as well as being jammed a few pixels too high up on the page, this lets down the whole rest of the site.

    Also, the "credit" on the footer goes over the bottom border, at least on firefox, haven't bothered to check on anything else.

    Just a thought.
    Matt