Advanced casestudy for large amount of pages

May 25th, 2005, 1:06 pm

My website dropped badly in the current update and after looking at all the facts I presume it to be PageRank. It happened when I increased my page count from 1000 to 60,000 by adding an online shop. I lost 99% of my Google traffic and 80% of total traffic.

Current site


* All the articles and products also link back to homepage

When it comes to large amount of pages PageRank is more important than I first thought. After reading the page rank paper I came up with this solution (I DO NOT NEED THE 60,000 SHOPPING PAGES TO RANK WELL IN GOOGLE):

Suggested change


* All the articles and products also link back to homepage

Do you think this is the solution or should I take out my shop? According to what I understand from the paper my solution should make my other pages even stronger than before!?

The URL is not on my sign but a good Googler should figure the URL out with some work.

Thanks to awall19 to help confirm the problem

May 25th, 2005, 3:36 pm

Johan007 ... pretty drawings ... but I don't think this is going to address your problem.

Quote:

My website dropped badly in the current update and after looking at all the facts I presume it to be PageRank.

You cannot create page rank internally. In the ideal structure every page of the site would still only equal the domain page rank. You need back links to increase your PR.

Page rank seems to have been revalued the last update. Many sites failed to increase PR and some even dropped a little bit. But this seemed to affect everyone equally, so it should not have changed search ranking.

Quote:

According to what I understand from the paper my solution should make my other pages even stronger than before!?

Page rank is best distributed through flatter structures ... your new design tends to put more clicks between the home page and your products.

I feel this would not only reduce PR of lower pages ... it may frustrate buyers and reduce conversions.

I would consider adding more pages at level two (mini homes) and grouping products and articles from that level. Also consider cross linking articles with relevant products if possible.

May 26th, 2005, 1:20 am

Yes I agree but I failed to say I dont really care about the shop making me money. The site is more about the articles and thats what I want to push up in the SERPS. Now what do you think? I have changed the site to the solution above but I need an expert to tell me if I should take out those extra 60,000 pages instead.

rtchar wrote:

I would consider adding more pages at level two (mini homes) and grouping products and articles from that level. Also consider cross linking articles with relevant products if possible.

Yeah cool will do (just need the technical skills to match the 2 db's)

May 26th, 2005, 9:24 am

The number of product pages is not relevant .... no effect on ranking.

The PR on the product pages are probably too low to affect the site page rank or search rankings. However, if indexed they may provide search terms so visitors find your site.

Without seeing the site --- visitors need a short path to pages of interest.

If you could sort your products into 3-7 groups, create a landing page describing the group (mini home), and link these to relevant articles. Each page can query the same database using different search criteria.

In the articles, if you refer to a product, add a link back to the product group.

This would help flatten the structure and put your most relevant pages 1 or 2 clicks from the main page.

May 26th, 2005, 9:32 am

That’s what I did before if you look at the picture I did. After reading more about the PageRank it is diluting the results pushing all the page down in the rankings after 1 Google update. Google updates every minite by adding pages but real Page Rank only happens once in a blue moon and is not shown on the toolbar.

I thought about deleting all the product pages but this new link structure should restrict the product pages to small amount of PageRank.

PageRank was never important to me but when you add 60,000 pages to 1000 page site believe me its enough to kill the site if it has not got enough back links to support it.

Give it time. If the site does not recover after 6 months I will kill the shopping 60000 pages.

May 26th, 2005, 10:28 am

So, what are you saying?
If you have a huge shopping mall and sell tens of thousands of items... you will have low ranking?

So... sites such as Ebay or Amazon should get very low ranking?

May 26th, 2005, 8:56 pm

Sounds like you already made up your mind ....

BTW - I am not aware of any factor that accounts for the number of pages in the PageRank formula?

May 26th, 2005, 9:03 pm

If you network every single page in one domain to eachother then they will all share page rank. I work for an SEO firm and we have over 80 domains linking to eachother and all the internal pages do the same so it is a ifinitive loop. So all of the pages on every domain etc rank 4. They all share page rank. None of the pages have dif rank.

May 27th, 2005, 1:18 am

I have Edited my first post because I was not clear what I wanted to achieve…apologies.

=============== User #2 ===============

User #2 wrote:

So... sites such as Ebay or Amazon should get very low ranking?

Ebay and Amazon are big enough to support their internal pages....

http://www.dreamlink.net/webhosting/google6.htm wrote:

"Since adding pages to a site often reduces PageRank for already existing pages, it becomes obvious that the PageRank algorithm tends to privilege smaller web sites. Indeed, bigger web sites can counterbalance this effect by being more attractive for other webmasters to link to them, simply because they have more content. "

=============== rtchar ===============

rtchar wrote:

Sounds like you already made up your mind ....

I have 2 options - delete the pages or make the suggested structure changes.

rtchar wrote:

BTW - I am not aware of any factor that accounts for the number of pages in the PageRank formula?

http://www.dreamlink.net/webhosting/google6.htm
http://www.webworkshop.net/pagerank.htm ... al_linking

Becuase the shop contains only a title, 3 word description and picture I was thinking about deleting becuase it could be considered spam and nothing do with Page Rank....

http://www.webworkshop.net/pagerank.html#internal_linking wrote:

Whilst I thoroughly recommend creating and adding new pages to increase a site's total PageRank so that it can be channeled to specific pages, there are certain types of pages that should not be added. These are pages that are all identical or very nearly identical and are known as cookie-cutters. Google considers them to be spam and they can trigger an alarm that causes the pages, and possibly the entire site, to be penalized. Pages full of good content are a must.

... I dont think* this is the case becuase other websites do it.

=============== SEO_Pro ===============

SEO_Pro. wrote:

If you network every single page in one domain to eachother then they will all share page rank.

Bingo but I dont want them to share PageRank! I dont want my 60,000 shopping pages to rank well if it means my content pages suffer. I have a small site with a large number of pages and again I quote:

http://www.dreamlink.net/webhosting/google6.htm wrote:

"Since adding pages to a site often reduces PageRank for already existing pages, it becomes obvious that the PageRank algorithm tends to privilege smaller web sites. Indeed, bigger web sites can counterbalance this effect by being more attractive for other webmasters to link to them, simply because they have more content. "

===========================

Why don’t I want my shopping pages to rank well? I am not doing it for the money… the site editors are my friends and so we do it for fun, our career and media power which we had. We had been ranking number one for most reviews we did (in UK Search engines). Hosting in the UK is expensive so little bit of money came in handy and the increase in pages will increase page rank (but spreads it out too much) - thus the 60,000 page shop. Now I could just delete the shop but I could capitalise on its Page Rank power.

May 27th, 2005, 3:09 pm

ONLY USE IMAGE MAP LINKS TO THE PAGES YOU DO NOT WANT TO SHARE PAGE RANK WITH! THAT WAY AS FAR AS I KNOW GOOGLE WILL NOT CRAWL THOSE LINKS AND THE PAGE RANK WILL NOT BE PASSED ON TO THOSE PAGES BECUASE GOOGLE DOES NOT SEE THEM AS BEING LINKED ANYMORE!

PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG

THANX,

JACOB

May 27th, 2005, 6:00 pm

Sorry SEO_Pro....

Google does follow image maps on my site, I think you meant to say javascript links.

May 28th, 2005, 2:53 am

rtchar wrote:

Google does follow image maps on my site, I think you meant to say javascript links.

True if you provide an abosolute URL on image map links or even a simple drop down. But the best way now is rel="nofollow" attribute tag.

SEO_Pro wrote:

ONLY USE IMAGE MAP LINKS TO THE PAGES YOU DO NOT WANT TO SHARE PAGE RANK WITH!

But I do want those pages to pe spidered. I just dont want them to drop all my pages from first page on Google to 30th etc like they had.