Stream

Dudi Vaturi

SEO Experiments  - 
 
Hey,

Maybe someone can help me :-)

What I have to do to make Google show my business name results as Site Link structure?

Thanks all!
David
1
Perry Bernard's profile photo
 
You are most likely to get site links as a result of a brand-matched search. This means you have to ensure your brand is optimised in your website, and doesn't clash with searches that are not your brand. For example: "Jake's Plumbing Services" may trigger a brand matched impression for a website optimised for Jake's Plumbing Services, but if your brand is "Plumbing Services" this becomes too generic and you are most likely to lose the opportunity to get sitelinks in SERPs because the search "plumbing services" applies to many businesses, not just your brand - even though your brand is exactly this.
Add a comment...

Sanket Patel

SEO Experiments  - 
 
 
Mobile-Friendly Web Sites To Rank Better In Mobile Search.
Google's mobile ranking algorithm will officially include mobile-friendly usability factors and app indexing. Making sure your site is mobile-friendly is now more important than ever.
1
Add a comment...

Matt Gardner

SEO Experiments  - 
 
Has anyone had any success in using 301 redirects of good DA / expired domains to customer site to assist with search improvements?
1
John Romaine's profile photoMaja Jovancevic's profile photo
7 comments
 
This method has been very popular with black hat SEOs - it has been thoroughly discussed here::http://www.blackhatworld.com/blackhat-seo/black-hat-seo/619672-method-rank-you-any-keyword-2.html#post6347693 but a tweet to Matt Cutts http://agentblackhat.com/this-is-what-happens-when-you-bait-matt-cutts/ about this topic has raised Google's awareness. I'd be really careful 
Add a comment...

Andre Weyher

SEO Experiments  - 
 
In the category "ridiculous SEO advice", a developer told me today that his SEO strategy is to open his site in chrome and spend 3 hours a day hitting the F5 button (reloading the page) every day to improve his rankings :-D Whats the most idiotic thing you've heard anyone say in regards to SEO? 
18
Nicholas Chimonas's profile photoPatryk Ciechanowski's profile photo
30 comments
 
Well.. it's not that bad and crazy idea. It mayhap help. But personaly I would prefer leaving Pliers on keyboard instead of hitting f5 by hand :D
Add a comment...

Perry Bernard

SEO Experiments  - 
 
An industry colleague has been running two websites with very similar content and structure. On one of them, he has done very little if any link-building, doesn't use G+, or much of any other social media. On the other, he has a full-on link campaign, uses G+ and other social platforms regularly.
Funny thing is, the latter site tends to yo-yo up and down in rank, and is outranked by the former.
Care to comment?
#seoexperiments  
2
Perry Bernard's profile photoJake Mabey's profile photo
27 comments
 
No worries- I'm mobile as well. I will say that I don't think we can take Cutts for his word. As the famous blog post entitled "How Google Makes Liars Out of the Good Guys in SEO," points out, sometimes Google says one thing and does quite the opposite.
Add a comment...

Michael Lucy

SEO Experiments  - 
 
Has anyone experienced that new pages added to a site and/or sitemap are taking longer to be indexed by G?

Is there any new "best practice" for ensuring new pages are published ASAP?

What used to be 3-5 days is now taking considerably longer, perhaps 7-10 days. This observation is effective early Jan 2014. Thanks ahead of time ... 
1
Perry Bernard's profile photoMichael Lucy's profile photo
23 comments
 
yep, been there done that :)
Add a comment...

Frederic Chanut

SEO Experiments  - 
 
Large scale SEO question: Trying to analyse log file to understand Gbot behaviour and fix a number of items for a site with +5M SEO pages.
Looking for some up-to-date ref./litterature on this topic to support analysis and try to help my POC convince tech leads to change a few items...So far most of the material found is quite dated.

Specifically I'd be interested to find info about the impact of items such as:
* Latency/server response on crawl quota/freshness for large scale sites
* infinite loops & bot traps (such as calendars)
* large volume of 301 & 404 on crawl quota for huge sites.
Might be the realm of +Dan Petrovic +Bill Slawski +Bill Hunt +Enrico Altavilla 
Any help is highly appreciated
3
Enrico Altavilla's profile photoDan Petrovic's profile photo
15 comments
 
"written word is easily searchable for future needs" Agreed.
Add a comment...

Dan Petrovic
moderator

SEO Experiments  - 
 
Experiment Update: What counts as an image view in Google+
My favourite trick to gauging engagement on the posts that I share on Google+.
8
2
Dimitar Dimitrov's profile photoDuncan Johnson's profile photo
 
Hey Dan that is an awesome piece of experimentation.

When a G+ API does eventually get released, it will be interesting to see if they include that information.

I have not seen in the regular twitter API that they are sharing the impressions of images/videos you attach to tweets.

You can get deeper stats in twitter in impressions and views but you have to employ a more advanced use of their Firehose for API partners. (A lot of processing)

What I'm reflecting on is the fact that if this kind of information isn't in the established twitter API right now then google have to be pretty forward thinking to include it in the G+ API.

Great post.

Add a comment...

Dan Petrovic
moderator

SEO Experiments  - 
12
1
Dan Petrovic's profile photoCarrina Candice's profile photo
8 comments
 
Noted +Dan Petrovic  :) 
Add a comment...

Dan Petrovic
moderator

SEO Experiments  - 
 
Just reporting that we tested the impact of keyword stuffing on "About" section of our Google+ Page and recorded no visible impact in Google+ internal search. The test lasted for a week and was removed today as it violates Google's guidelines[1].

[1]  User Content and Conduct Policy https://www.google.com/intl/en/+/policy/content.html
10
3
Arthur Radulescu's profile photoJaaved Khatree's profile photoJackson Ertel's profile photoIvailo Milenkov's profile photo
5 comments
 
You DO have some guts :)))))))))
Add a comment...

Frederic Chanut

SEO Experiments  - 
 
Greeting fellow search geeks!
We need feedback pls,

I am sure many of you have clients for whom redesign by the 21st April is just not a possibility even if they don't have a mobile page. This is the case for at least of couple of ours. 

The team and I had one too many doritos on Friday and we decided to test how we could 'hack' a mobile site by using optimizely.

I'd love to hear your feedback and see what we could do to improve this post (meme are staying, executive decision)

Thanks folks!
Not enough time to fully optimise your site for Google's April 21st Mobile Update? Here's a quick 3 step, meme filled hack. Come see how it's done.
2
Sabastian Yalpur's profile photoRory Collins's profile photo
4 comments
 
I think people are taking this update too seriously. If Webmaster Tools and Mobile Friendly tools are telling you that you're fine, then you're fine. Otherwise just purchase a redirecting m.site.com domain and you'll be fine.
Add a comment...

Sabastian Yalpur

SEO Experiments  - 
 
 
Less than a week a go, I meet this kid just turn 18. I am not sure if I did share his interview video.This is the kid brave enough and  has gut to tell Giant Google - MATT CUTTS..YOU ARE WRONG.
AND HE HAS PROOF 
2
Maja Jovancevic's profile photoSabastian Yalpur's profile photo
7 comments
 
That was his case study to tell Google "You are Lying or Misleading us" And he did prove it even after deleting all those spam back links mange to stay on the top.
I wouldn't take the risk either of my clients or my own website.
But this kid has point and some way proves my thoughts about Google.
Add a comment...

Geoff Jackson

SEO Experiments  - 
 
So I'm testing what happens when I set the canonical URL on a page (pageA) to a URL (pageB) that 301 redirects to pageA to see if it is possible to rank the canonical URL in organic search even though it 301 redirects elsewhere (to another URL that is fully accessible and indexable by search engines).

Thoughts welcome.
1
Geoff Jackson's profile photoJohn Mueller's profile photo
7 comments
 
The main problem I see with these things (including trying / testing them) is that you can't be sure that it'll remain working in whatever way you find. Essentially those situations are "undefined,"  they can go either way, so if you want them to be handled in one particular way, you should really be as clear as possible about that. 
Add a comment...

Perry Bernard

SEO Experiments  - 
 
Just an observation, which I'm sure many of you have noticed, but wondering if any have more observations they can offer on this: When using Fetch as Google, I notice that if you haven't done one for ages, it fetches obediently within minutes, however, if you already fetched the URL recently, it refuses. Anyone notice how long before fetch will work again for a given URL?
I tested this by making a change in the Meta Desc. then doing the first fetch. Resulted in indexing of the new Desc within 15 min. I then changed it again and fetched again. No change. 24 hours later, still no change. I suspect the fetch was ignored. Between the original page content, first change, then second change, only the Desc differed. The rest of the page was the same.
3
Perry Bernard's profile photoJohn Romaine's profile photo
7 comments
 
Oh of course. They're not going to whack you with a stick or anything. ;0)
Add a comment...
 
Since some days ago when you upload a picture with Exif Title ("AAA") into Google+, that Title become the picture caption. We can suppose that post was "BBB".

Now I test it and, after upload, I checked that caption (Exif Title) "AAA" has been replaced by post text "BBB".

Can you confirm this new behavior?

Google+ seems replaces caption not every case
1
Riccardo “Merlinox” Mares's profile photoPatryk Ciechanowski's profile photo
8 comments
 
As a part-time photographer I can tell You that adding exif and iptc to every picture you make is good way to gain not branded links to Your website (and also easiest way to find stolen pictures... with ahrefs). Facebook and some not only social media websites grab iptc caption by default. And many people just don't remove this grabbed text before clicking publish. also some sites just convert text link to clickable one
Add a comment...

Milosko Bejdak

SEO Experiments  - 
 
Hey guys! So I made a serp rank checker. It checks google serps every hour and graphs them. Serp checking is free, but the tracking is not. I was thinking of adding a feature to export to google spread sheets ? Thoughts? Feature requests? 
http://serprankchecker.com
1
Tauseef Azhar's profile photoMilosko Bejdak's profile photo
8 comments
 
Thanks let me know how it works for you.
Add a comment...

Dan Petrovic
moderator

SEO Experiments  - 
 
Who's got a YouTube channel?
If you've got a YouTube channel linked with your Google+ page I'd like to ban you temporarily so you can tell me what happens.

I have a strong suspicion that GoogleWebmasterHelp channel banned or muted +Dejan SEO 

If I log in as myself or the page I can see our share pop up as a comment here: Are pages from social media sites ranked differently? but if I go incognito the comment is nowhere to be found: http://imgur.com/TzlGYgI

Interestingly, re-shares of our our video post are visible. For example one from +Karol Dziedzic https://plus.google.com/wm/4/+KarolDziedzic/posts/PggxCRe67aW shows up as this: http://imgur.com/6YLazj3

I can also see any comments made by our page on somebody else's share: http://imgur.com/QBh7s0e

All this while I'm writing an article about Google+ and wonderful comment integration with YouTube. Doing my best not to burst into a rant.
2
1
Dan Petrovic's profile photoTony “Tiggerito” McCreath's profile photoGeoff Brand's profile photo
7 comments
 
I'm linked if you need more victims.
Add a comment...

Marta Gryszko

SEO Experiments  - 
 
Lately I've updated some SEO tests results connected with treating nofollow links by Google and the "first link counts" rule. I've noticed some changes I'd like to discuss with you.

1. In case of 2 text links where the first one was nofollowed, Google used to have problems with counting the anchor text of the other one. Some people said there were problems with indexation of such a page.
UPDATED: Now Google ignores the first nofollowed link and counts the anchor text of the second dofollow link. How did I check it? I put 2 links to the same page, using such anchor texts: "nof2013ollow" in the nofollowed link and "flw0131do" in the dofollow link. Google shows the page for "flw0131do".

2. In case of 2 links where the first one was a graphic link and the other one was a text one, Google used to ignore the alt tag of the first link and count the anchor text of the other link. The text link had higher priority regardless of whether it was placed as the first one or not.
UPDATED: Now Google follows both the alt tag and the anchor text of both links. How did I check it? There were 2 link - the graphic one had the alt tag "pi20ct13" and the text link had an anchor text "pre20mm13" and Google displays linked page for both of them. At the moment not all DCs show such results but I can see that on more examples - this updated test is quite fresh but the old ones confirm their results.

3. It's still possible to make Google count all anchor texts for more than 1 link from page A to page B, by using the # sign, ie.:
- domain.com/
- domain.com/#
- domain.com/#section1
etc.
11
2
Enrico Altavilla's profile photoJackson Ertel's profile photoFrancois J.'s profile photo
12 comments
 
+Tony McCreath : that's an interesting theory. If links are sorted by their uniqueness before applying the rule, then the example made by Marta would work.
Add a comment...

Dewaldt Huysamen

SEO Experiments  - 
 
Share your views comments, and who wants to test? Share tests here too.
6
2
Tim Capper's profile photoDewaldt Huysamen's profile photoAlessandro Folghera's profile photoAndrea Moro's profile photo
12 comments
 
Ok cool but clients I am referring to was html clients.
Add a comment...

Luke Chapman

SEO Experiments  - 
 
3-Way Linking
Has anyone seen any detailed experiments on 3-way linking? It's a nice theory, but I assume that it goes against Google's guidelines, given the following statement.

"Some webmasters engage in link exchange schemes and build partner pages exclusively for the sake of cross-linking ... This is in violation of Google’s webmaster guidelines and can negatively impact your site’s ranking in search results."

Yet there seems to be a lack of information online (a few articles from years ago). I assume it'd be very easy for the Big G to pick up on patterns for this sort of thing, even if the sites were hosted on different C-block IPs. But it seems like plenty of sites are doing it?

I have seen some suggestions (e.g. http://www.seobook.com/2013-predications) that 3-way linking and link buying will come back into fashion.

Reciprocal links are a natural part of the web (http://www.seomoz.org/blog/whiteboard-friday-sitewide-reciprocal-and-directory-links), especially for websites within the same niche.

Do you think that this sort of linking is an issue if all the sites involved are related? Have you seen any experiments run on this?
3
James Norquay's profile photoAndrew J. “Dental Genius” Lopez's profile photo
35 comments
 
Link from relevant sites that provides content that is related to your niche. If your buying or selling links means that  most likely you are involving yourself in a link scheme of some sort.
Just don't do it!
The architecture of this as +Dan Petrovic mentioned above should look like "one messy bush".
I feel whether its strategic or natural, today's algorithm requires close attention to back-links and the related content from the back link. Its no longer a numbers game, but a quality game. 
Add a comment...