Google removes supplemental results from SERPs - GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

X

Meorazhar

Confirmed User

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 672
Share

Post
#1

Google removes supplemental results from SERPs

08-01-2007, 05:34 AM

Just recently Google has announced at its official webmaster central blog that they are going to stop tagging some search results as "supplemental".

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogsp...ainstream.html

From the comments on the original post looks like it's more to the bad than to the good though...
Tags: None
Meorazhar

Confirmed User

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 672
Share

Post
#2

08-01-2007, 05:39 AM

Wow, the thread is sinking fast.
Bump for the business matter.
Just checked one of my sites and all my supplemental results gone mainstream
Comment
who

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 19593
Share

Post
#3

08-01-2007, 05:41 AM

You're wrong with the title. They are no longer MARKING THEM AS SUPPLEMENTAL - not removing them from the results.
Comment
Meorazhar

Confirmed User

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 672
Share

Post
#4

08-01-2007, 05:50 AM

Whatever...
Nobody cares anyway
Comment
RawAlex

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Oct 2003

Posts: 9465
Share

Post
#5

08-01-2007, 06:03 AM

Yeah, if anything, if read correctly, it says that Google is confident enough of botting all of the pages that they no longer have to mark something as supplemental because they have the ability to check them in a reasonable amount of time.

So in the end, it isn't a bad thing, but a decent thing.
Comment
scottybuzz

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: May 2006

Posts: 14799
Share

Post
#6

08-01-2007, 06:24 AM

Bump for more discussion.

$$$$$ MAKE HUGE MONEY IN CAMS - CLICK HERE $$$$$
Comment
Kevsh

Confirmed User

Join Date: Dec 2004

Posts: 8619
Share

Post
#7

08-01-2007, 06:29 AM

The distinction between the main and the supplemental index is therefore continuing to narrow.

I can see arguments for and against the move, but if the above quote from the article is true then I see it overall as a positive. For a few of my sites that are heavily in the Supps I have a chance to get visits on otherwise very rare terms where I'm buried.
Comment
Cyndalie

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2002

Posts: 3615
Share

Post
#8

08-01-2007, 06:30 AM

Hell of a misleading thread title.

Cyndalie
Marketing Director
StoriesTraffic.com
Comment
StarkReality

Confirmed User

Join Date: May 2004

Posts: 4444
Share

Post
#9

08-01-2007, 06:40 AM

I could be a good thing, although I doubt they'll give pages they marked as unimportant (=supplemental) more importance now...It could just be a dirty trick to move even more results to supplemental (or a "dead part" of the index when it comes to ranking) silently and noone will complain or recognize it.
Comment
JD

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Sep 2003

Posts: 22651
Share

Post
#10

08-01-2007, 06:43 AM

fucking eh.....
Comment
Theo

HAL 9000

Join Date: May 2001

Posts: 34515
Share

Post
#11

08-01-2007, 08:37 AM

interesting indeed
Comment
woj

<&(©¿©)&>

Join Date: Jul 2002

Posts: 47880
Share

Post
#12

08-01-2007, 09:01 AM

thanks for the heads up

Custom Software Development, email: woj#at#wojfun#.#com to discuss details or skype: wojl2000 or gchat: wojfun or telegram: wojl2000
Affiliate program tools: Hosted Galleries Manager Banner Manager Video Manager
Wordpress Affiliate Plugin Pic/Movie of the Day Fansign Generator Zip Manager
Comment
NinjaSteve

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Dec 2003

Posts: 11089
Share

Post
#13

08-01-2007, 09:18 AM

What is a supplemental result anyway?

...
Comment
hungry hungry hippy

Confirmed User

Join Date: Mar 2007

Posts: 249
Share

Post
#14

08-01-2007, 09:22 AM

Originally posted by StarkReality

I could be a good thing, although I doubt they'll give pages they marked as unimportant (=supplemental) more importance now...It could just be a dirty trick to move even more results to supplemental (or a "dead part" of the index when it comes to ranking) silently and noone will complain or recognize it.

my thoughts exactly. this will just make it harder to gauge your strategies.

so don't be happy kevsh your supp'd pages won't suddenly fly up the serps
Comment
Forkbeard

Confirmed User

Join Date: Feb 2002

Posts: 2236
Share

Post
#15

08-01-2007, 09:23 AM

The only recent change has been to remove the tag that *shows* that a page is supplemental.

I've been tracking the supplemental pages on one of my blogs *very* closely for a few days to monitor the effect of some navigation changes. The pages that were supplemental are still supplemental -- which is to say, they only appear in searches for site:url, they appear immediately after all the pages that didn't used to be supplemental, and they still don't show up even when you do a targeted search for phrases from those pages.

So, sorry to say it, but Google is lying. They've eliminated the ability to easily see which pages are supplemental, but they haven't changed the functionality of those pages lately.

They may indeed change them later, that's always possible. But today, we still have as many supplemental pages as we had yesterday, Google is just playing hide-the-ball like they did when they stopped updating PageRank in a timely fashion.

Offering sponsored blog posts and custom writing services.
Comment
mrkrabs

Confirmed User

Join Date: Mar 2007

Posts: 567
Share

Post
#16

08-01-2007, 10:47 AM

Originally posted by NinjaSteve

What is a supplemental result anyway?

bump for this question
Comment
Altheon

Confirmed User

Join Date: May 2004

Posts: 506
Share

Post
#17

08-01-2007, 11:00 AM

I liked being able to see which results were in supplemental since you could easily identify the pages that needed more link love.
Comment
sonofsam

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Dec 2004

Posts: 18648
Share

Post
#18

08-01-2007, 12:17 PM

Originally posted by NinjaSteve

What is a supplemental result anyway?

duplicate content would fall into supplemental

original content does not.

I like turtles.
Comment
bobby666

boots are my religion

Join Date: Nov 2005

Posts: 21765
Share

Post
#19

08-01-2007, 12:38 PM

a bump for the worth, generally
Comment
bdld

$100,000

Join Date: Dec 2001

Posts: 11452
Share

Post
#20

08-01-2007, 12:47 PM

thread title is false, at the very least misleading.
Comment
SmokeyTheBear

►SouthOfHeaven

Join Date: Jun 2004

Posts: 28609
Share

Post
#21

08-01-2007, 12:52 PM

Originally posted by Forkbeard

The only recent change has been to remove the tag that *shows* that a page is supplemental.

I've been tracking the supplemental pages on one of my blogs *very* closely for a few days to monitor the effect of some navigation changes. The pages that were supplemental are still supplemental -- which is to say, they only appear in searches for site:url, they appear immediately after all the pages that didn't used to be supplemental, and they still don't show up even when you do a targeted search for phrases from those pages.

So, sorry to say it, but Google is lying. They've eliminated the ability to easily see which pages are supplemental, but they haven't changed the functionality of those pages lately.

They may indeed change them later, that's always possible. But today, we still have as many supplemental pages as we had yesterday, Google is just playing hide-the-ball like they did when they stopped updating PageRank in a timely fashion.

actually when you do site:domain.com they no longer appear as far as i can tell. well they do and they dont..

when you search site:domain.com it will show 1-100 of XXXX pages

lets say x is 3333 , if you are search 100 results per page and go to the last page of results ( should be 900-1000 ) you will notice a different number.

for example on one of my domains it shows about 2k pages for site:domain.com but when i scroll to the bottom it only shows up to page #3 , when i go to page 3 it says 332 of 332 at the top instead of 332 of 2000

last week it was showing the full amount of pages but the last 700 were listed as supplemental.

so it showed the full 1000 , now those supplemental pages are gone ( kinda )

hatisblack at yahoo.com
Comment
baddog

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Apr 2001

Posts: 107089
Share

Post
#22

08-01-2007, 12:59 PM

Originally posted by bdld

thread title is false, at the very least misleading.

Not really. Just means that with popular keywords instead of showing up as a supplemental result, you probably won't show up at all.
Comment
he-fox

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jun 2006

Posts: 2884
Share

Post
#23

08-01-2007, 01:08 PM

this sounds like good news to me.
Comment
yahoo-xxx-girls.com

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jul 2006

Posts: 3143
Share

Post
#24

08-01-2007, 01:21 PM

Tech question for you all...

My site is: www.PrismVoD.com however I'm indexing xml and have moved my index.xml to a different directory with my .htaccess pointing to http://www.prismvod.com/lesbian-vod/index.xml ... Is this an example of a supplemental index ?

Google likes rss and atom feeds but does not seem to like straight xml ... does anyone have any comments regarding this issue...

.

sig too big
Comment
squizzel

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Feb 2005

Posts: 900
Share

Post
#25

08-01-2007, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by sonofsam

duplicate content would fall into supplemental

original content does not.

actually that is wrong. It is more to do with links, domain authority, and link juice pointing at a page. You can get duplicate content to rank very well if you have a domain of authority. Contary to popular belief what your suggesting is old news and hasnt been relevant for over a year. It pays to be clued up.

Last edited by squizzel; 08-01-2007, 01:55 PM.
Comment
hungry hungry hippy

Confirmed User

Join Date: Mar 2007

Posts: 249
Share

Post
#26

08-01-2007, 02:02 PM

Originally posted by squizzel

actually that is wrong. It is more to do with links, domain authority, and link juice pointing at a page. You can get duplicate content to rank very well if you have a domain of authority. Contary to popular belief what your suggesting is old news and hasnt been relevant for over a year. It pays to be clued up.

what he said..

dupe content is a myth created by white hats to (try) to protect their beloved content
Comment

Previous template Next

Working...