Adding more content - fearing diluting PR and getting SI probs

[Webnauts]

Cass-hacks I am sorry, but seems like you have a lot of free time for a professional, which I definitely don't have, and anyway you know everything, and only what you say is right, and everyone else here is ... whatever, so it makes no sense for me to continue discussing in this thread. I feel that I am doing a mistake sharing my observations and experiences, as they are not taken for serious anyway, or they will be misinterpreted.

[cass-hacks]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Cass-hacks I am sorry, but seems like you have a lot of free time for a professional, which I definitely don't have, and anyway you know everything, and only what you say is right, and everyone else here is ... whatever, so it makes no sense for me to continue discussing in this thread. I feel that I am doing a mistake sharing my observations and experiences, as they are not taken for serious anyway, or they will be misinterpreted.

Is it so hard to prove what you say? All I am asking is that what seems to be little more than conjecture but is given as advice be substantiated some how.

Observations and experience are good but are no better than theories, which must be tested and proven to sufficiently explain the real world to the extent that results based on implementing the theory are predictable, reliable and repeatable. Otherwise it is all only guesswork.

That said, I would agree, this has gone on long enough. The OP seemed to have gotten the answer he was looking for a long time ago.

As for having free time, beyond the fact that is a discussion that really has no place here other than as a Parthenon shot, I allocate a certain percentage of my time to participating in various boards and forums. You just got lucky because there wasn't as much going on elsewhere.

[Webnauts]

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by cass-hacks

The blog article does not state a LOT of things. That does not mean that all the things it does not state are true.

But, maybe the issue is what does "filter" mean that you are using? Do you mean by filtered pages only shown after the "view similar results" is clicked on?

If that is the case, the problem is not with the meta-description or whether or not the page even had one. The problem is that as good as Google is at comping up with its own snippets, it didn't have enough to work with to come up with a unique one for the page in question. That is not a problem of the meta-description or even not having one, that is a problem of poor page content.

On the other hand, if that is not what you mean by "filtering" could you please define it because I've seen so many people use the term "filter" in so many different ways that it is hard to figure out the context.

You were the one who stated there was a contradiction in what I posted based upon what was not posted in the blog. It was you who assumed that what was not posted was true.

Ranking is a separate process from filtering. Ranking is the way a data set for a query is ordered for display to the end user. You need to understand how a query is processed.

Now, the meta description, as well as the title element, can cause a page to be placed into the SI. I've tested and retested it repeatedly. Perfectly useful and unique pages with plenty of content can move into and out of the SI on either of those 2 factors alone. The meta description does not affect the ranking of the site but being in the SI can.

You can add a unique phrase or word to the meta description and nowhere else on the page and that page will not show up anywhere at all in the search results on Google for that phrase or word. You can place that phrase or word on page and allow it to and allow it to be indexed then go back and add it to the meta description and the position in the SERP's will not change based upon doing so. Been tested and retested.

This is why reading carefully what is said (and not said) is important.

The meta description will not affect your rankings within the search results. This is what I posted and it is what the was cited by the blog. A page has to make the search results in order to be ranked.

Sorry, I forgot to add, regarding Supplemental. If a meta-description effected whether one was in the Supplemental index or not, and one changed the meta-description and autmagically moved out of the Supplemental index and started ranking for relevant searches, that would seem to effect ranking then, i.e. no rank before, rank after, no?

This is like saying that salt can cause high blood pressure which can cause a stroke therefore salt causes stokes.

No. Being in the supplemental index is what can affect ranking within the search results since a page there may not make the data set for a query to be ranked at all... for anything.

Dave

[cass-hacks]

Originally Posted by crankydave

You were the one who stated there was a contradiction in what I posted based upon what was not posted in the blog. It was you who assumed that what was not posted was true.

Not exactly. What I read was that one's meta-description has no bearing on ranking.

Your contention was that "filtering" and a page being in the Supplemental index were somehow independent of ranking and, that one's meta-descriptions effected filtering and being in the Supplemental index.

But, if a page is "filtered" or a page is in the Supplemental index specifically due to its meta-description, i.e. it ranks for nothing, that would suggest that its rank is effected,no?

Does a page that is "filtered" or is in the Supplemental index rank at anything other than 0? If it isn't filtered and isn't in the Supplemental index, it would likely rank differently than were either of those two conditions to apply, right?

On the other hand, were the meta-description improved somehow so as to prevent 'filtering" or being in the Supplemental index, would it not show up in the SERPs where it hadn't in the past and so again, its rank be effected?

Originally Posted by crankydave

Ranking is a separate process from filtering. Ranking is the way a data set for a query is ordered for display to the end user. You need to understand how a query is processed.

You keep saying that ranking is separate from filtering but even though I have asked, you haven't explained what "filtering" you are talking about.

On many different forums many different people have created different "filters" to try to explain what they think is happening. Google blogs, articles and forum posts also mention "filtering" in some fashion or other but often to the extent of rarely are they the same.

I know how queries are processed. The question is though what do you ascribe to this "filtering" term?

Originally Posted by crankydave

Now, the meta description, as well as the title element, can cause a page to be placed into the SI. I've tested and retested it repeatedly.

Do you have a link to the tests you performed? Since they would contradict what I have experienced, I would be interested to look at your methodology to see where the difference in results may come from and then be able to possibly refine the test.

Originally Posted by crankydave

Perfectly useful and unique pages with plenty of content can move into and out of the SI on either of those 2 factors alone. The meta description does not affect the ranking of the site but being in the SI can.

First of all, there is a problem here. We were talking about the meta-description but you seem to be adding the title tag as well.

Did you perform independent experiments based on just the meta-description itself?

Originally Posted by crankydave

You can add a unique phrase or word to the meta description and nowhere else on the page and that page will not show up anywhere at all in the search results on Google for that phrase or word.

Of course, otherwise it would be the same as the meta-keyword in usefulness, i.e none.

Originally Posted by crankydave

You can place that phrase or word on page and allow it to and allow it to be indexed then go back and add it to the meta description and the position in the SERP's will not change based upon doing so. Been tested and retested.

Agreed, meta-description has no effect on ranking. But then again that was never in contention.

Originally Posted by crankydave

This is why reading carefully what is said (and not said) is important.

What is said can also have implications concerning what is said.

If I said, "This page is not in any of Google's indexes.", I didn't say that page would not show up in SERPs but did I really need to?

On the other hand, if I said, "This page is ranked #2 in the SERPs for a keyword.", do I also need to say that it is also not in the Supplemental index and that it is not filtered?

Originally Posted by crankydave

The meta description will not affect your rankings within the search results. This is what I posted and it is what the was cited by the blog. A page has to make the search results in order to be ranked.

That is not the point of contention.

Originally Posted by crankydave

No. Being in the supplemental index is what can affect ranking within the search results since a page there may not make the data set for a query to be ranked at all... for anything.

Agreed. And since being in the Supplemental index or not being in the Supplemental index effects ranking and Google said that one's meta-description doesn't effect one's ranking, it can't very well effect something that can effect one's ranking.

By the way, if one does have a stroke, it can be determined whether one's salt intake was a major contributing factor so your analogy is probably not the best one to use.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by cass-hacks

You keep saying that ranking is separate from filtering but even though I have asked, you haven't explained what "filtering" you are talking about.

Have a look here: United States Patent Application: 0060294155

[crankydave]

Can't put it any simpler cass-hacks...

The meta description has no bearing on ranking within the search engine results. I said it, the blog said it.

The meta description can have a bearing on whether or not a page is placed in the SI. I said it, the blog did not say anything about it at all.

Duplicate meta descriptions can cause a page to be placed in the SI. Being in the SI can cause a page not to show up in the search engine results.

I'll say it again... It is being in the SI that can cause a page not to show up, NOT the reason the page in the SI.

Did the blog post say that a duplicate meta description won't cause a page to be placed in the SI? No. But because a page being in the SI can affect where it shows up in the search engine results, or if it does at all, you automatically leaped to the conclusion that because a meta description cannot affect the rankings within the search engine results it cannot cause a page to be placed in the SI either.

It is the high blood pressure that can cause a stroke NOT the reason for having the high blood pressure.

My analogy is just fine. The conclusions (cause and effect) you are drawing are incorrect.

As far as the title element goes, duplicating the title element within a site can cause otherwise completely unique pages to end up in the SI. You are of course welcome to test this and the meta descriptions yourself using a methodology you are comfortable with.

Additionally, you might try using a search engine to find additional thoughts and information...

duplicate meta descriptions - Google Search

Dave

[kgun]

<cite>
you haven't explained what "filtering" you are talking about.
</cite>

Go to page 1 of this thread. Page search (CTRL + F) +

bayesian

Hint: "Google"

"bayesian filtering"

One recursive empirical bayesian filter is the Kalman Filter.

Se also:

The Kalman Filter

Kalman filter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.cs.unc.edu/~welch/kalman/...Kalman1960.pdf

Related links:

State Space Filters

Spinnaker Stats (Excel formulaes).

SpringerLink - Journal Article

Also "Google": The classical wiener problem + Kalman

There are some Japanese experts on this topic like Ito and Katsuhiko Ogata:

"Google": Ito integral

and search / browse from there.

Also "Google":

Katsuhiko Ogata site:www dot amazon dot com

P.S. There are other more general filters

"Google": "Masreliez filter"

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Additionally, you might try using a search engine to find additional thoughts and information...

duplicate meta descriptions - Google Search

Dave

Why can't you be more specific Dave? Google Search

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by cass-hacks

Of course links directly to the Supplemental index pages will help pull them out faster but links to other pages within the site, depending on navigation, will likely help, although at a slower rate.

And if the problem is not low PageRank what then?

[Alana N]

I think quality linking is always important despite what it does for you in the search engines.

In my opinion... it gives your customers content and a reason to come back. I get more reliable consistent traffic from quality partners than I do the search engines at times. Linking just for the sake of linking isn't as good as linking for the sake of quality.

[cass-hacks]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

If you have doubts, add irrelevant or non-unique meta tags on your site, and come back and tell us what happen.

Check the source for all the pages of CASS-Hacks - PHP, Javacript and CSS except the example pages which don't have enough content I would like for the bots to create snippets from. The pages have had their description meta-tag removed.

But, not a single page has changed one bit with regard to being supplemental or somehow getting "filtered".

You said "non-unique" and if there are no descriptions than they would be non-unique. If you say that is not good enough and that they must exist and be irrelevant and-or non-unique then the answer would be to just remove them period.

Originally Posted by crankydave

Can't put it any simpler cass-hacks...
The meta description has no bearing on ranking within the search engine results. I said it, the blog said it.

No argument there so can we stick to where there is disagreement?

Originally Posted by crankydave

The meta description can have a bearing on whether or not a page is placed in the SI. I said it, the blog did not say anything about it at all.

And I said that if a page changes from being in the Main index to the Supplemental index then obviously its ranking changes. It ranks and then it doesn't rank. Most people would consider that a change, no?

Originally Posted by crankydave

Duplicate meta descriptions can cause a page to be placed in the SI. Being in the SI can cause a page not to show up in the search engine results.

You can say it over and over again but repetition does not = fact. Besides, you just said that being Supplemental would cause a page to not show up in the SERPs, which would be a change in ranking from it showing up in the SERPs and since the description meta-tag does not effect ranking, which putting a page in the Supplemental surely would, the description meta-tag does not have any effect on a page being Supplemental or not.

Originally Posted by crankydave

I'll say it again... It is being in the SI that can cause a page not to show up, NOT the reason the page in the SI.

Then what does that have to do with the description meta-tag?

Originally Posted by crankydave

Did the blog post say that a duplicate meta description won't cause a page to be placed in the SI? No.

Read my reply above. If the cause of a page being in the Supplemental and not the Main index then that surely would effect a page's rankings and since the description meta-tag does not effect ranking, then it also can not effect a page being in the Supplemental index or not.

You may think that a page moving to the Supplemental index does not effect its previous ranking but I think most people would disagree. First it is there, then it isn't. That would seem a significant change, no?

Originally Posted by crankydave

But because a page being in the SI can affect where it shows up in the search engine results, or if it does at all, you automatically leaped to the conclusion that because a meta description cannot affect the rankings within the search engine results it cannot cause a page to be placed in the SI either.

It is a fairly logical conclusion. If no change in ranking means that the ranking can change, as it obviously would if a page goes Supplemental than one of those is wrong. Which one?

Originally Posted by crankydave

As far as the title element goes, duplicating the title element within a site can cause otherwise completely unique pages to end up in the SI. You are of course welcome to test this and the meta descriptions yourself using a methodology you are comfortable with.

I don't remember saying anything about the title tag. Can we stick to where we disagree and not bring in all sorts of other topics that would likely just cloud the issue?

Originally Posted by crankydave

Additionally, you might try using a search engine to find additional thoughts and information...

There are a lot of results. Was there one or more in particular that prove your point?

kgun - Thanks for the references but what I was asking for was what "filtering" crankydave was talking about, not what is "filtering" is in general.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Why can't you be more specific Dave? Google Search

I read it on the interweb so it must be so. With no supporting evidence or even a logical explanation, the article is less then worthless because people are likely to parrot it must be true.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

And if the problem is not low PageRank what then?

With reference to the OP's site, the problem is low PageRank. The content of the OP's site that is in the Supplemental index that the OP was concerned about is unique and easily of sufficient quality that Google would be very unlikely to judge it not worth indexing.

[crankydave]

cass-hacks...

The conclusion you are drawing is illogical and incorrect. Plain and simple.

Do your own research. I've not the time nor desire to spoon feed you.

Duplicate the meta description on all the pages of your site and watch what happens. According to you, nothing will happen.

You can cling to your illogical and incorrect assumptions if you wish. Your loss not mine.

Dave

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by crankydave

cass-hacks...

The conclusion you are drawing is illogical and incorrect. Plain and simple.

Do your own research. I've not the time nor desire to spoon feed you.

Duplicate the meta description on all the pages of your site and watch what happens. According to you, nothing will happen.

You can cling to your illogical and incorrect assumptions if you wish. Your loss not mine.

Dave

I fully agree. It is just very impressive what SEO experts tell for weird stories.

[incrediblehelp]

With Dave on this one. Seen it happen many times over and when dup description tags were removed or made to be unique, the corrected pages came out of the SI.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

With Dave on this one. Seen it happen many times over and when dup description tags were removed or made to be unique, the corrected pages came out of the SI.

You are only with Dave? What about with me brother?

[kgun]

Originally Posted by cass-hacks

kgun - Thanks for the references but what I was asking for was what "filtering" crankydave was talking about, not what is "filtering" is in general.

OK, and he is of course talking about Query filtering, e.g. like filtering with and SQL statment. That is filtering inside an exsiting SE index / register. Or am I wrong?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by kgun

Or am I wrong?

Sure not man.

[cass-hacks]

Originally Posted by crankydave

Duplicate the meta description on all the pages of your site and watch what happens. According to you, nothing will happen.

I'm guessing you missed the part of my previous reply where I did exactly that.

If you insist that a page that previously ranked but is now Supplemental actually is ranked the same, I think we will never agree.

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

when dup description tags were removed or made to be unique, the corrected pages came out of the SI.

Can you guarantee that the description tags were the only thing that changed, whether on page, off page or within Google?

Originally Posted by kgun

OK, and he is of course talking about Query filtering, e.g. like filtering with and SQL statment. That is filtering inside an exsiting SE index / register. Or am I wrong?

Thanks for trying to clarify that kgun but it doesn't explain what "filtering" has to do with meta-description and how the effect crankydave is talking about supposed to manifest itself or the rational behind it.

In any event though, it seems this is going to have to be chalked up to a differing opinion and leave it at that.

[Webnauts]

Check this out: » Google removes labeling of supplemental results

[crankydave]

Originally Posted by cass-hacks

Check the source for all the pages of CASS-Hacks - PHP, Javacript and CSS except the example pages which don't have enough content I would like for the bots to create snippets from. The pages have had their description meta-tag removed.

But, not a single page has changed one bit with regard to being supplemental or somehow getting "filtered".

Originally Posted by crankydave
Duplicate the meta description on all the pages of your site and watch what happens. According to you, nothing will happen.

Originally Posted by cass-hacks

I'm guessing you missed the part of my previous reply where I did exactly that.

No you didn't.

This is really easy cass-hacks... Use a single meta description and duplicate it across all of your pages and watch what happens.

Originally Posted by cass-hacks

If you insist that a page that previously ranked but is now Supplemental actually is ranked the same, I think we will never agree

I said no such thing.

Dave