[patman]

http://insidesearch.blogspot.com/2012/04/another-step-to-reward-high-quality.html

I didn't even realize that "keyword stuffing" was still an effective tactic?

[Barryonline]

I think they may have rolled this change out now in the UK.

Almost all of my site have been wiped ou!

[brandonbaker]

Here we go again. This has gone from an attack to a massacre.

[GodMode]

*Gets ready for lolling hard..*

[seoguru]

well, looks like google has been doing their homework

http://insidesearch.blogspot.com/2012/04/another-step-to-reward-high-quality.html

here is the "webspam" site mentioned

http://profitmonarchs.com/

who owns this domain? you are in BIG trouble... you ruined it for the rest of us!

[Initial Effort]

Hmm this should be interesting...it might actually be a relevancy update compared to a spun content update. We'll find out here shortly.

[Linda]

I don't really see from that article that they are going to be able to target spun content. Unless they do a manual review, I doubt that their bot is going to be able to pick out poorly spun content from normal content. Something I picked out in this article is "Notice that if you try to read the text aloud you’ll discover that the outgoing links are completely unrelated to the actual content." That reminds me of services like LinxFish. They would stick your link in the middle of Wordpress posts on entirely different topics and where it made no sense in the sentence. I don't know how widespread this is, but I can see why Google wouldn't like it.

[mrclean]

I don't really see from that article that they are going to be able to target spun content. Unless they do a manual review, I doubt that their bot is going to be able to pick out poorly spun content from normal content. Something I picked out in this article is "Notice that if you try to read the text aloud you’ll discover that the outgoing links are completely unrelated to the actual content." That reminds me of services like LinxFish. They would stick your link in the middle of Wordpress posts on entirely different topics and where it made no sense in the sentence. I don't know how widespread this is, but I can see why Google wouldn't like it.

This has been my theory on why the 'blog networks' went down in the firstplace....How can you possibly have 50 different 'spun articles' on your homepage when google pushes L.S.I. (Latent Symantic Indexing for those who don't know).

With that much unrelated content on a page it was BOUND to set off a red flag.....A page needs to be 'about' something to be properly catagorized (as if in a library)...it can have 'unrelated' links, but jeezzz if the page is about 50 different things how can google index it properly?

Edited by mrclean, 24 April 2012 - 14:41.

[heyman]

I think people are missing the most important part of this post

Here’s an example of a site with unusual linking patterns

The image he's referencing is of a terribly spun article with 3 links. He makes a comment about the spun content, but the part where he mentions those links are used in an unusual pattern is what got my attention. The spun content would be harder to identify through machine learning, but linking patterns is something easy to identify with a very large sample.

What could they be using to define "unusual"? Sentence to Link ratio? Word Count to Links ratio? 3 link pointing to the same site?

[CafeDelMar]

"We want people doing white hat search engine optimization (or even no search engine optimization at all) to be free to focus on creating amazing, compelling web sites"

I lol'd

[seoguru]

i think its more of a commutative of what domains these sites are linking to.

Example, if 100 domains link to the same 1000 different domains, its possible its involved in a link scheme.

[shayne54]

If you look at a "natural" link on lets say an article from yahoo news, the anchor text doesnt always belong or make sense in relation to the aritcle. I can't see how an algorythm is going to sort this out with out causing a lot of colateral damage.

[seoguru]

If you look at a "natural" link on lets say an article from yahoo news, the anchor text doesnt always belong or make sense in relation to the aritcle. I can't see how an algorythm is going to sort this out with out causing a lot of colateral damage.

i highly doubt it has anything to do with anchor text... it has to be how many domains link to the same 10, 50, 100, or 1000 or more domains. These are link schemes, doesnt matter what the anchor is.

this is how HPBL networks were discovered and taken down in the first place. HPBL networks were selling batches of 25 to 100 domains all pointing to the same exact 50 to 100 client domains. The footprint is too obvious and blog networks are the same. ALN has X.***** amount of subscribers with the same domains all trying to share the same domains with all the same backlinking urls

[shayne54]

i highly doubt it has anything to do with anchor text... it has to be how many domains link to the same 10, 50, 100, or 1000 or more domains. These are link schemes, doesnt matter what the anchor is.

this is how HPBL networks were discovered and taken down in the first place. HPBL networks were selling batches of 25 to 100 domains all pointing to the same exact 50 to 100 client domains. The footprint is too obvious and blog networks are the same. ALN has X.***** amount of subscribers with the same domains all trying to share the same domains with all the same backlinking urls

I am specifacally talking about this part of the article:

"Of course, most sites affected by this change aren’t so blatant. Here’s an example of a site with unusual linking patterns that is also affected by this change. Notice that if you try to read the text aloud you’ll discover that the outgoing links are completely unrelated to the actual content, and in fact the page text has been “spun” beyond recognition:"

[dadoc]

A ton of my sites have just tanked big time.......in fact rankings in a lot of my niches have taken drastic changes.

My days as an internet marketer look to be numbered....

Google has dropped the nuke

[shayne54]

I am sure that things are dancing a little now. It's too early to know for sure which sites are going to be hit and which are safe.

[seoguru]

I am specifacally talking about this part of the article:

"Of course, most sites affected by this change aren’t so blatant. Here’s an example of a site with unusual linking patterns that is also affected by this change. Notice that if you try to read the text aloud you’ll discover that the outgoing links are completely unrelated to the actual content, and in fact the page text has been “spun” beyond recognition:"

that exactly my point. I dont think there is much weight behind the relevance of the anchor text to the content in general. Maybe to some degree yes, but not as a factor alone. I believe google finds link networks through the outbound link patterns and the screenshots provided are more observational about how how lazy backlink marketers have got over the years by spamming the backlinking system. Now its not even about the content but more about just dropping a link where they can regardless of content.

[dadoc]

dancin out of the top 100......

[ckc1227]

Well, something is going on. My main site that has been in the top 3 for it's main keyword for 5-6 years now has dropped to number 12 for that keyword, and my second best keyword that fluctuated between 9-12 has dropped to 64. This site has made it through pretty much every update for the past 6 years unscathed, never received one of those illegal backlink warnings, but this one got it. Funny thing is it's not even getting links from sites like the ones described at the google blog.

I think my days as an internet marketer are numbered too.

[Jbar]

Looks like more smoke and mirrors from Google, this time instead of content farms its webspam being targeted. Noticed some big changes and a couple of search terms that has seen a huge inlfux of big brands dominating, sites that were never there.