Google not indexing new pages

[vicksm]

I'm sure this is a common gripe, but I'm perplexed as I recently revamped a website for a client. Only 3 of their pages had been indexed by Google. We took down their old site and put up a holding page as he was rebranding and didn't want the old site there any more. The holding page was indexed. The new site has now been live for over a month, and none of the new pages have been indexed yet. Also, none of the incoming links have been registered. I'm worried that the site may have fallen into a black hole somewhere, and I'm not sure whether I should re-submit it or not. The pages are totally legitimate, no keyword spamming etc. If it was a new domain, I wouldn't expect it to appear for several months, but as an established site, I was expecting results by now. Other search engines have picked up all the new pages. Any tips/advise/insight would be greatly appreciated.

Vicky

[ctabuk]

Hi, post it here in the forum, that way we get a chance to see it and it gets spidered. Please put your URL in your profile too.

[vicksm]

Thank you for your reply. The website I'm referring to is: http://www.workham.com.

[ctabuk]

Actually the word Venue is used too often, but all the pages can be spidered, there are no bad links that I could find. I'll do an IPB on it, so I'll move the thread to Marketing, as it is more of a promotion thing than seo.

OK Here we are in marketing.
The keyword 'Hotels' is like a needle in a haystack, so I've produced a report that the Major SE's will all use (in this case Google.com)I hope the report will give you some insight.

[greeneagle]

I am seeing 90 pages indexed by GOOGLE, How many do you have?

Ken

[wrmineo]

A few points that might help for future, better results:

You have a declared XHTML DOCTYPE, but your keywords and description are not closed properly for XHTML, but as HTML, creating some unnecessary errors.

You also have a blank H2 heading when looking at the main page via W3C, appearing like this:

• (h1)Workham Hotels and Venues
  (h2)*blank*
  (h2)Unique hotels and venues for every occasion

Also, I'm only seeing one page (index.html) in Google too. If Ken is seeing 90, it may be a matter of waiting for the multiple indicies used by Google to synchronize.

[vicksm]

Wow, as the first time I've posted to this forum, I'm really overwhelmed with everyone's response. Thank you so much for all the help everyone has contributed.

I have amended the xhtml errors which wrmineo identified - thank you for those.

I also only see the index page indexed in Google. I'm heartened that Greeneagle sees so many. The total number of pages in the site is 54. If it's a question of waiting for them to synchronise, I guess I just need to be patient.

ctabuk also sent through an IPB report to me, so I'll have a look through that and report any findings which may be of use to others.

Thanks again for everyone's input.

Many thanks

Vicky

[wrmineo]

Originally Posted by vicksm

Wow, as the first time I've posted to this forum, I'm really overwhelmed with everyone's response. Thank you so much for all the help everyone has contributed.

I have amended the xhtml errors which wrmineo identified - thank you for those.

I also only see the index page indexed in Google. I'm heartened that Greeneagle sees so many. The total number of pages in the site is 54. If it's a question of waiting for them to synchronise, I guess I just need to be patient.

ctabuk also sent through an IPB report to me, so I'll have a look through that and report any findings which may be of use to others.

Thanks again for everyone's input.

Many thanks

Vicky

I'm pleased to see that you're pleased with the social, peer power of WPW - that's what it's all about IMO!

I'm even more pleased to see that you're eager to post back any findings that others may find useful - adding to the wealth of knowledge and experiences that make WPW go round :)

[vicksm]

I just wanted to report back my findings so far. Heartfelt thanks to ctabuk who sent through an IBP report and hence introduced me to Axandra.com which has a wealth of information.

The conclusion that I have come to having read one of the newsletters on Axandra and various other articles is that the site is probably in the sandbox as a result of the major overhaul and it's simply a question of having patience.

I can't see any reason why the site may have been blacklisted. If anyone has any other views on this, I'd be interested to hear it. Ctabuk mentioned that the word Venue is used too often - I have addressed this and reduced the density of this keyword on the home page.

One of my key concerns is that running a search in Google of link:www.workham.com doesn't bring up any pages even though various incoming links exist - admittedly not many yet.

Does anyone have any insight as to how I would know if the site had been blacklisted, and if so, what can be done about it.

Many thanks again

Vicky

[ctabuk]

I'm blushing, No it won't be 'black listed' it's a nice site, put the URL in your profile and that will help with the spidering. It's a time thing, that's all.

[greeneagle]

IMO - There is absolutely no "sandbox" issue here with;
http://www.workham.com/

Go to:
http://googlerankings.com/ultimate_seo_tool.php

and check your page for 1,2 and 3 word keyphrases:

The 1s are too competitive, half the 2s don’t congeal and most of the 3s don’t make sense strung together minus the “stop word” list!

Here’s one of your best:
corporate venue locations
in which you currently rank:
#17 out of 1,140,000 in Google

Get up, dust your pants off and rewrite your ad-copy, until it’s right!
Review the nonsensical phrases the way the SE’s might there!
Not much else stands a chance at your level of competition or phrase/word pairing to ever be searched!

There is no “sandbox” here, and most probably not anywhere else either!

After modifying your ad-copy, act on the other forums in Marketing and High Ranking Directory Submissions to gain “generic” IBLs!

Somebody needs to tell you the truth here so that you can act in the right direction. I hope you don’t take it too brutal, I am just trying to help!, as well as help discard this god awful “sandbox” myth that so many fall prey to!

The ”aging” issue “CAN” (operative word, in case everyone missed it) apply to over-aged links as well as under-aged!

You rank well for one of your most sensible and probably most commonly sought after 3 word keyphrases… Get up, quit crying “Oh the sandbox got me”, dust your pants off, get out of the dirt, shuck this foolishness and go on about adjusting your ad-copy on your pages like the SE’s want to see it!

IMHO - There is absolutely no “sandbox” issue here, as in most cases I look into!

Visit this thread for more on the imaginary GOOGLE "Sandbox" Monster hiding just under your bed or in your closet:
http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=49752

Good luck and Best Regards,
Ken

[vicksm]

Well, I must admit, it's quite a talking to, but everything you've said is really positive, and despite having to pick my pride up off the floor, I'm really grateful that you took the time to review the site for me. I've read others of your postings and know you're not one to mince your words, so I'm not taking any of it too personally. And I'm glad to hear that you don't think we're in the sandbox, imaginery or not.

Thank you for your posting and giving me a shake up.

Vicky

[ctabuk]

His Bark is worse than his bite, but his Brother, now that's a different beast! Seriously, please go to profile and add the website. Each time you post, the spiders will follow the link.

[greeneagle]

vicksm,

There is quite a bit more to be found on this topic at:
http://webproworld.com/viewtopic.php...r=asc&&start=0

Hope it helps,
Ken