Is Google Just Weird?

[crashingflwrgrl]

I've been getting some weird results in the G. SERP's lately which in turn have been affecting my ranks.
Here's an example...
http://www.google.com/search?q=site:...&start=40&sa=N

Notice there is no title or cache?

This is also occuring for some other sites....
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...%3Awalmart.com
http://www.google.com/search?q=site:...8&start=0&sa=N
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...cornopolis.com(same host as me)

Any ideas as to why this may be happening and how I can fix it?

NOTE:Someone brought it to my attention that Google may think I am spamming by having to many keywords in my product descriptions which show up on pretty much every page of my site (mainly the taillights...which is mostly what I sell). It has also been suggested that it's a duplicate content issue because my products are also in the "MonsterMarketplace" and my ".html cataloge" which is here...
http://www.coolights.com/browseproducts/

It's also been suggested that Google is just weird...lol

Any ideas at all?

[cbp]

Thats called partial indexing - do a search for it.

It means that Google knows about the url but has not yet crawled it (eg new site or page) or had trouble crawling it (eg server was down; host blocking it; session ID's; etc)

CBP

[MathsIsFun]

I noticed this with my site, too (site:marketlistshop.com), and I likewise have a database-driven shopping site.

I was wondering if Google was getting nasty because so many of my product pages are alike.

But surely most ecommerce sites are like this? Most of the html is duplicated on each site - headers, indexes and footers dominating.

So maybe Google is in the middle of some interesting update.

[crashingflwrgrl]

Okay I've done the research on partial indexing and found out alot (thanks cbp).

I have concerns though because these pages have been in the G. index for months, it's not like they were newly added.

I guess it's time for an website overhaul. I will examine my internal link structure and create custom .html pages for each of my main keywords and get related sites to link to them. I'm told this should help.

Other than that I'm completely at a loss on what to do.

Any other suggestions?

[Stoma]

Questions:

What is the 'normal' way for dynamic pages to show up with a site: command?

I notice if you do site:webproworld.com the results are pretty horrendous. But it's common for dynamic pages to show up well in the Serps.

Is it significant that the extensions on the dropped static pages are in upper case ie. '.HTML'?

Maybe Google has an alogrithm that says something like, 'drop all pages not spidered for 14 days that don't have an .htm or .html extension - they're probably dynamic and have changed by now anyway'.

Are the dynamic and static URLs on coolights.com just different ways of addressing the same pages? ie. a duplicate content problem?

Would monstermarketplace.com be seen as some sort of 'domain farm', especially since all the client sites are presumably on similar IPs?

[crashingflwrgrl]

But it's common for dynamic pages to show up well in the Serps.

Actually from all I've read it's just the opposite. Pure html sites seem to do much better.

Is it significant that the extensions on the dropped static pages are in upper case ie. '.HTML'?

I don't think it matters at all...and they weren't "dropped".

Are the dynamic and static URLs on coolights.com just different ways of addressing the same pages? ie. a duplicate content problem?

The dynamic (.asp) pages are data base driven which allows me to have a vast amount of products and an on-line shopping cart. The static html pages are just a good way to showcase the products for the search engines specifically because they don't like dynamic ones. There is nothing wrong with it. Alot of sites have on-line cataloges.

Maybe Google has an alogrithm that says something like, 'drop all pages not spidered for 14 days that don't have an .htm or .html extension - they're probably dynamic and have changed by now anyway'.

Not likely.

Would monstermarketplace.com be seen as some sort of 'domain farm', especially since all the client sites are presumably on similar IPs?

Monstermarket does excellent in the Google SERP's. I suspect if it were "shady" in any way it would be quite the opposite. Check it out and decide for yourself though. But...if it is a "domain farm" then so is Froogle.

http://www.monstermarketplace.com/