Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Bourbon Update - trying to sort out aftermath

  • Subject: Re: Bourbon Update - trying to sort out aftermath
  • From: Lupercali <celery@somanyspoons.com>
  • Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 05:45:52 +1000
  • Newsgroups: alt.internet.search-engines
  • Organization: The stark raving mad comet of inertia
  • References: <1121034809.7d36cc16ac51eb91a0cc465c4e2b341f@teranews> <dat5tj$17t1$1@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk>
  • Reply-to: address@in.sig
  • Xref: news.mcc.ac.uk alt.internet.search-engines:63205
Thanks to all for help, past and future:

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 08:08:22 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
<newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote:

>The dates you quoted are quite aligned with those when Google 'patches' were
>installed, which would indicate Bourbon was the culprit. Several sites lost
>traffic throughout Bourbon and traffic was restored (not always from what I
>hear) almost completely at the end. In my particular case, I seem to have
>been badly panelised by Google Images and I have not the slightest clue as
>to why.

Yes, I forgot to mention that. Previously we were heavily spidered by
Google Images; now they virtually ignore us.

Actually I haven't checked on that since the re-adjustment. It may have
corrected somewhat.

>I wrote a few bits about Bourbon during the time I was badly affected (
>http://www.schestowitz.com/Weblog/index.php?s=bourbon&submit=Go+%E2%80%BA )
>and as far as I can recall, the sites to be suffering at the end, ideally,
>should be scrapers and spam sources. Either way, the equilibrium was broken
>in what was the biggest Google update in many years.

I know we were squeaky clean so far as anything deliberately against
Google's policies. My co-ed's theory at the time of the initial virtual
obliteration of Google referrals was that we may have been effectively
penalized for switching from an html site to a database-driven URL site.
However that happened a couple of years ago, so this seemed a little
unlikely to me. Still, I can manually code html but haven't much of a clue
about PHP/SQL, so she's probably right.   

>As for the solution or suggestion:
>You mention the 23rd of June as the date of recovery. Bourbon was in fact
>completed a week or so beforehand.

Yes, that was my understanding, too. Or at least it was my understanding
that it was _going_ to be completed about a week prior to that date. 

>Is it possible that you have similar content elsewhere? As in mirrors? 

Nope. Not unless they've been kept secret from me. I came on board as
co-editor some time into proceedings. 

>reviews of foreign films that overlap with others? 

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but I think I can safely say that
nothing 'overlaps' with anything else in any meaningful sense that I can
think of. 

>If you post the URL, we
>can perhaps look at the structure of your site and get a better clue.

Sure. The front page is http://www.keyframeonline.com


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index