Duplicate Content Penalty - Fact or Fiction?

[gky45]

We publish a series of self help web sites in the Health sector and in our case in certain cases there is a certain amount of duplication of terms i.e. if you are writing and giving a detailed analysis of “Acute Myocardial Infarction” there are only a very few ways that you can accurately describe it content wise.

With ourselves and the more major National Health web sites there are obviously is going to be some form of duplication of content.

How real (or not as maybe) is this so called Content Penalty issue? Does it just primarily relate to whole pages of lifted and copied content or is it more flexible? Does it allow for, in our case, featured definitions of certain items? If not how do News Syndicates get away with syndication of news items etc?

Anyone got any clues?

Patrick

[incrediblehelp]

I really never believed their was a duplicate content penalty. Their could be a duplicate content filter, where Google decides which document (page) contains the original content (most of the time they pick the wrong one) and then all others fall under the one they list first in the SERPs. Now with that being said many other algorithmic factors are also involved in which page ranks highest, meaning the originator of the content doesn't always get to rank first querying a piece of the content in the Google search.

I really don't see your website using definitions along with personalized copy discussing these definition should be an issue at all.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

I really never believed their was a duplicate content penalty.

Jaan can you guarantee that Google or other SE will not change that? What do we do then, when that happens?

Sit back and enjoy?

[incrediblehelp]

Sure they could change that or it could be happening right now! I dont know for sure. All we can do is try to develop informed opinions about some of these factors at Google, Yahoo and MSN.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

Sure they could change that or it could be happening right now! I dont know for sure. All we can do is try to develop informed opinions about some of these factors at Google, Yahoo and MSN.

I think Google are working on that, while I was just reading their quidelines, which seem to me that have been recently updated?

"Don't create multiple pages, subdomains, or domains with substantially duplicate content."

I look from time to time at their guidelines, to have a picture what they dislike and what they might be aiming to achieve. I think that is the best way to avoid any problems in the future.

So I guess we better be careful with such issues in general. ;)

[incrediblehelp]

More importantly they should be improving on how they decide which document is the originator. That is the root of all duplicate content issues.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

More importantly they should be improving on how they decide which document is the originator. That is the root of all duplicate content issues.

That is what I was thinking all the time too man. I hope those Google guys read some times what we write here. LOL

[Weedy Lady]

If there was such a thing as duplicate content penalty 123greetings would not be locked into the number one position for free e cards. The reason they have this position is that they have gazillions of "affiliate" sites with duplicate content, every single one of which has all those thousands of links pointing back to 123greetings.

So what counts? IBL's! And how do you get them? Get suckers to be your affiliates and don't pay them a penny for doing so. And tell the suckers that they are SOooo fortunate to be able to merchandise your material at no cost to them!

If there were any penalties for duplicate content 123 would have been long gone by now instead of number 1 consistently through all the little, medium and big daddies.

[Irishjim]

With all due respect to incrediblehelp's comments, I'm throwing my chit into the babble.

The duplicate content penalty came home to me in quite an interesting way this week when I noticed all my village pages beginning with "Bally," on my Irish tourism site, www.tourclare.com had vanished from the radar.

I thought it would be nice for you Yanks to know Bally referred to a form of community crop rotation practiced in pre-famine days, so I put a blurb on all these village pages with a bit of history on the term and bingo, every one of them went from #1 listings to banishment overnight.

That new Bigdaddy algorithm is good.

I only put original content on my site unless it's a link to another page and then I modify the anchor text.

This one, however, blew my mind. I'd like to have a quick word with the bullocks who coded this gem for Google.

Needless to say, all of you will have to do your Irish research on the word Bally yourselves now. It's good I didn't explain how "Kil" means church in Irish.

Slan go foill

[Cyrus255]

There definitely is NOT a duplicate content penalty.

It's rather hilarious actually.

I had a page, with the first letter capitalized. APPARENTLY I had some links pointing to a non-capitalized version and with PHP it dynamically created that non-capital version.

SAME CONTENT, but it started whooping the other ones in ranking because it was fresher since it was a recent accidental creation. Earned me an extra $10,000 above normal earnings cuz of an accident.

[Irishjim]

I think you may be off topic, Cyrus, although I think your earning ability is brilliant.

Google seems to ignore duplication in PHP. I have RSS feeds duplicating info on many of my pages and none of them suffer.

Slan

[Cyrus255]

Originally Posted by Irishjim

I think you may be off topic, Cyrus, although I think your earning ability is brilliant.

Google seems to ignore duplication in PHP. I have RSS feeds duplicating info on many of my pages and none of them suffer.

Slan

I was pointing out that by merely replicating the same page uncapitalized (by accident) I recieved a major boost in ranking. For freshness.

So there was no penalty for the exact same page being duplicated on my site.

I'm seriously thinking of creating pages with a different letter capitalized for each page. They are static pages with a .html ending (through mod_rewrite)

Except I might get manually banned for that. haha.

[Irishjim]

You could be Google-shot just for thinking that, Cyrus.

Slan.

[Cyrus255]

Originally Posted by Irishjim

You could be Google-shot just for thinking that, Cyrus.

Slan.

GOOGLE: If you're reading this, I am sorry. I never meant to say that! I won't do it! It was purely an accident!

Please I have a family to feed! Well... just myself... but still!!


You know the scary part is, I'm not even really sarcastic...

[southplatte]

Well, I was just contacted by an SEO firm, that works with some pretty big clients and each has rankings in the top 10 for their selected words/phrases, and this is what the guy told me:

We create hundres of small pages on servers that we own, all which contain your keywords from your site pages, then we put small amounts of the content from your web site on those pages as well, and then link them to your web site. This, according to this guy, increases IBLs, keyword exposure and content exposure, without suffering duplicate content problems, if they do in fact exist.

Any thoughts on this in terms of duplicate content and what seems to be doorway pages?

[Irishjim]

We create hundres of small pages on servers that we own, all which contain your keywords from your site pages, then we put small amounts of the content from your web site on those pages as well, and then link them to your web site. This, according to this guy, increases IBLs, keyword exposure and content exposure, without suffering duplicate content problems, if they do in fact exist.

Any thoughts on this in terms of duplicate content and what seems to be doorway pages?[/quote]

Yes, here are my further thoughts. Google is clear they will allow collections of information from other sites if it is in multiple form.

It's the same thing Oscar Wilde said(I think it was him, although it could have been another brilliant Irish writer... there are so many of us).

Anyway, he said, if you steal from one writer, it's plagerism. If you steal from many writers, it's research.

slan

[SemAdvance]

My oh my is this one off the rocker

1. Content is not single words such as Bally (you didn't lose rankings due to that) or ALL CAPPED WORDS (your claims of earning $$$$$ from such goes against everything User Experience has taught us)

2. Content is typically several hundred words.

3. Google rankings are made up of over 100 parts as determined by Googles algorithim. Odd as this may sound nobody knows all 100 parts except the founders and a few engineers.

4. I don't know any SEO firms that would call you up and say they can't get top 10 rankings in the search engines. In fact if they are calling Google has posted their thoughts on this.

http://www.google.com/support/webmas...291&topic=8524

Amazingly, we get these spam emails too:

"Dear google.com,
I visited your website and noticed that you are not listed in most of the major search engines and directories..."

Reserve the same skepticism for unsolicited email about search engines as you do for "burn fat at night" diet pills or requests to help transfer funds from deposed dictators.

There is most certainly a duplicate content penalty...what usually happens when caught is the page is filtered out of the top rankings. I know as I've dont it to myself.

What others have noted opposing is I believe is due to the time factor, because someone may have a month or two of sucess on Google, do not expect it to last long if not done by the Google guidelines. It takes Google some time but they do manage to catch the accidents, cheats, and spammers.

Write original content...post it on your server but available to the general public for a week or so...if you can link to it from your index page after a week or so...or move it to publish it online from another section you might use.

This allows Google and other bots to crawl and index your content and since it is all original, the bots will not see other versions of it online...once it is online, Google and others will know of it already and you will earn first posting credit.

Hope this helps.

[Irishjim]

Originally Posted by SemAdvance

My oh my is this one off the rocker

1. Content is not single words such as Bally (you didn't lose rankings due to that) or ALL CAPPED WORDS (your claims of earning $$$$$ from such goes against everything User Experience has taught us)

2. Content is typically several hundred words.

Well then, Sem, I suggest you go back and read my post. This time read for content. I said I had duplicate content in the form of an explaination of the use of Bally in place names, such as Ballyvaughan, Ballyboefey, etc. I didn't say anything about using one word and worrying about it being duplicated.

Before you begin to edify, lad, learn to read.

Slan,

[DMC_34]

Originally Posted by Cyrus255

I recieved a major boost in ranking. For freshness.

I have never seen one shred of proof freshness of content causing a boost in rankings on Google at all.

About the only thing fresh content does its provide frequent indexing. That in itself does nothing to your Google position.

A few of my sites have the same exact content from 2 yrs ago and counting and still rank #1 on Google.

Fresh content and boost in rankings is a myth on Google.

DMC

[davidmg]

Like in the medical profesion any given industry is going to use the same words throughout all the business. You should choose to use alternate descriptive words. I am in the fireplace business for example there are over 20 "Black Wrought Iron Fireplace Tool Set" that look the same just different manufacturers or different sizes. You can call one a "UNIQUE Black Wrought Iron Fireplace Tool Set" another a "STYLISH Black Wrought Iron Fireplace Tool Set" etc but it is still a "Black Wrought Iron Fireplace Tool Set"

What I am saying is from website to website the robots see much the same thing. Unless whole pages are copied "word for word" will it raise a flag. In that case the first page indexed for that content should get it. Even if a few sentences are taken from a page it shouldn't make a difference.

[/img]

[Cyrus255]

Originally Posted by DMC_34

I have never seen one shred of proof freshness of content causing a boost in rankings on Google at all.

About the only thing fresh content does its provide frequent indexing. That in itself does nothing to your Google position.

A few of my sites have the same exact content from 2 yrs ago and counting and still rank #1 on Google.

Fresh content and boost in rankings is a myth on Google.

DMC

Not true. Freshness matters. Freshness of pages, OR links.

Does your site constantly put out new content via other pages?

Or it is also possible your pages continually recieve FRESH links pointing to it, which proves the article is still live and kicking.

As for my experience, it was the first time I put out a new page with a bunch of links to it, in a while. The fresh page was actually a copy, and recieved better ranking with ALL the same content.

You could actually see DUPLICATE pages on the same google search! Within the top 50! My same page only difference was capitalization the first letter!

[TechEvangelist]

Wow! There certainly are a lot of opinions on this topic.

As someone who runs a directory that processes over 100 submissions per day, and runs an SEO company, IMHO there clearly is a duplicate content penalty. It's currently called Supplemental Results.

I see dozens of sites each day where all the pages except the home page have been tossed into Supplemental Results. When I take a closer look, 90% of the time the content is duplicated from another site, most often from article or news sites. Sometimes the issue is affiliate links, and a very small percentage of time, I don't see anything causing the problem.

This is itself a type of a filter, because once a page gets banished to Supplemental Results, it's not likely to drive any traffic with Google. I call that a penalty.

[creditwrench]

I have many pages with duplicate content on them and it seems to make little or no difference to the engines. I get good rankings and top listings on all of them.

I think it depends on what that duplicate content is.
I have a lot of websites and web pages that are nothing but lists of debt collectors with some wording on them.

The content is all copied from somewhere else. None of it is ever original.

I find that the reason one page might get a listing over another page of mine with the same content depends on the search term used more than anything else.

I have often seen where a surfer types in the phone number of a collection agency in the following manner: (405) 616-7901 and that might bring up one or more of my pages and another types in 405/616-7901 and gets another page that has the same name, address and phone number on it as the other but the phone is 405/616/7901 instead of (405) 616-7901.

If he types in 405 616-7901 he gets yet another page as well as a mathematical equation with the answer to the equation. If he uses 405-616-7901 he gets another page and another answer to the equation.

Then I have other pages where the phone number comes at the head end of the listing and still other pages where the phone number is at the end of the listing.

The engines will usually bring up both pages depending on how the phone number is formulated.

I just haven't been able to figure out which way the engines like their phone numbers forumlated or if they even care.

I think it all depends on how the surfer types his search phrases.

I think that the engines do pay attention to the content in deciding what to serve up however.

I can normally get a listing page into the engines pretty quick. A few days at most. But I have one that I just put up about a week or so ago on a new website called www.themostwantedcriminals.com and the engines seem to be barfing on that one so far.

It has a lot of debt collectors listed by state on the page. The lead in content is very different than anything I've ever seen anywhere. Very original content indeed.

It espouses the argument that debt collectors are the most wanted criminals in America today. If one looks at the theory, it has some merit because debt collectors routinely violate our consumer protection laws millions of times a day in aggregate. I don't know how many debt collectors there are in the U.S. but the number has to be in the tens of thousands of them. So that many debt collectors easily violate millions of times daily. I am saying that if they violate the law then they are criminals, convicted or not and lots of them have been. Some are even ex felons. Just one of the many instances of that is the example of one Mr. Robert Paisola, Western Capital Management of Utah is a felon who has been convicted of child pornography, insurance fraud and parole violation and whose record is freely available to anyone who puts his name in Google. Shows right up on the first page of Google's listing so I'm not infringing on anybody's privacy when I use him for an example.

Now then, the argument that they are the most wanted criminals in America today. Debt collectors routinely refuse or try to escape giving out their phone numbers or their addresses to their victims because they want the debtor to pay right then and there over the phone by electronic means so they are more certain of getting their money and getting it faster than they would by snail mail so they just hate to give out their phone numbers or their addresses. People even have to hunt them down to try to pay them hoping that by paying the debt collector they will get it off their credit reports, but of course that isn't going to happen. It only makes their reports worse than before because when reported as paid that makes it recent collection activity and lowers the FICO score even more. All those people hunting down debt collectors for whatever reason easily makes them the most wanted criminals in America today! So far the engines don't seem to like that argument too much. (LOL)

So does it make any difference about duplicate content? Obviously, if one believes that it does then the right answer to resolve the problem is simply to change the way it says the same thing in some way or other and the engines will think it is entirely different content.

[Irishjim]

Originally Posted by TechEvangelist

...there clearly is a duplicate content penalty. It's currently called Supplemental Results.

Finally a voice of reason, thought and great wisdom. In other words, TechE agrees with myself.

Well done, lad.

Slan,

[computergenius]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

"Don't create multiple pages, subdomains, or domains with substantially duplicate content."

I don't read that as the same issue. I read that as saying, don't add a page which says "buy widgets here", then duplicate that page in various ways across your own system, using different page names. This would be done simply because you wanted visitors searching for "big widgets" to find your page for big widgets, and another page for "large widgets", which in fact has the same content has the big widgets page.

Surely the question is, if my site has the same text as another site, then are Google going to penalise me? The standard answer to that appears to be "yes", sometimes without any proof. Some people say "it should be 25% different", whatever that means.

But there is no denying that the same phrases appear on many different webpages. There are only so many ways of saying "big widgets", so if that is what you are selling, you are surely going to be duplicating to some extent or another.

[Cyrus255]

Originally Posted by Irishjim

Finally a voice of reason, thought and great wisdom. In other words, TechE agrees with myself.

Well done, lad.

Slan,

Does the Googlebot do it automatically, and at what point does it decide? Like say 20 sites, it'll grab the best 5 and put the other 15 in supplemental?

[davidmg]

creditwrench
"So far the engines don't seem to like that argument too much."

Sorry search engines only have a potographic memory, artifical intelligence has been created yet and search engines don't have opinions.


TechEvangelist
I agree with your "Supplemental Results" I believe that does work as the search engines only record what they see or have seen. Like a always tell my programs while I'm teaching them "The search engine is like you with the remote in your hand looking for a movie to watch flipping from station to station. SEEN THAT - SEEN THAT - SEEN THAT!" You have to change some of the content to make it fresh otherwise it becomes ""Supplemental Results""


www.fireplacedistributor.com

[Irishjim]

Well then, Syrus, I'm sure TechE can give you a more professional answer but my understanding from all the reading between the lines is Google collects all these cobwebs from sites no one cares about or links to. Of course, the duplicate pages can go here, too.

Deep in my heart, however, I think all those good new sites out there that have been, yes, I'm going to say it above a whisper now, SANDBOXED are there, too.

Of course we know Google doesn't really have a sandbox. They've made that abundantly clear. They're only having us on.

Slan.

[freehits]

Originally Posted by TechEvangelist

As someone who runs a directory that processes over 100 submissions per day, and runs an SEO company, IMHO there clearly is a duplicate content penalty. It's currently called Supplemental Results.

I see dozens of sites each day where all the pages except the home page have been tossed into Supplemental Results. When I take a closer look, 90% of the time the content is duplicated from another site, most often from article or news sites.

Maybe one way to get there, but I have many there that are all hand written, so Not always a connection though maybe the generci penaly once found out.

I think Dup content penalty is the #1 most often given 'bad advice' excuse for poor rankings. While it may be a cause in large DB sites with little actual content, suggestion like all the same menu may be causing duplicate content penalty, is insane.

Whole pages maybe, but a good degree of common content throughout a site is common. And with all the scraoers out there, 75% of the internet would be in Supp if it was sensitive.

[Irishjim]

Originally Posted by "freehits

And with all the scrapers out there, 75% of the internet would be in Supp if it was sensitive.

I'm getting high from all the smoke being blown here... thank you, freehits.

Where did you get the percentage? I suspect the voice of God but we'll be kind, lad.

It seems like I have a lot of time on my hands today but I'm in the middle of working on two websites and publishing a regional magazine. This topic is just too riveting .

slan.

[freehits]

You may have noticed something called a dramatic point and dramatic exageration. Of course all of the internet isnt a scraper or 75%.......

The point is, if it is as sensitive as people suggest by always claiming "duplicate" as a cause, then nothing would be above such a claim.

For lack of a better example this thread is giving the advice that the menu is duplicate, and that may cause his supp problems.
http://webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=64581

The fact that any competetive search has some scrapers int he top 20 sugests it is not a sensitive as commonly asserted and shouldnt be the first concern in most ranking problems.

Even you hand written site has been scraped here.
http://www.travelirelandguide.info/Ireland97157.aspx

[Irishjim]

Originally Posted by freehits

You may have noticed something called a dramatic point and dramatic exageration. Of course all of the internet isnt a scraper or 75%.......

The point is, if it is as sensitive as people suggest by always claiming "duplicate" as a cause, then nothing would be above such a claim.

For lack of a better example this thread is giving the advice that the menu is duplicate, and that may cause his supp problems.

The fact that any competetive search has some scrapers int he top 20 sugests it is not a sensitive as commonly asserted and shouldnt be the first concern in most ranking problems.

Point taken, freehits, couldn't resist the slagging. If you're after takin' offense, I apologize and did realize you were dipping into a bit of hyperbole, there.

We have an expression, "Don't break your knee on a stool that's not in your way." I suspect I passed too close to your barstool, lad.

Slan,

[freehits]

I am just an ex smoker...so when you say smoking....i get all edgey :D

[SemAdvance]

Irishjim

I am not your lad...your kid...or anything else you care to refer ot me as and do not take kindly to your tone.

The whole theme of your post centered around the word "Bally", you spoke nothing of the other content.

Next even though someone may have agreed with you( I didn't see those words) supplemental results have little to do with duplicate content... and everything to do with duplicate head tags used on dynamic sites.

For example

This site has ZERO duplicate content

http://www.khinsider.com

It has over 19,400 pages of which 19,390 are in the supplemental results.

Results 1 - 10 of about 19,400 from www.khinsider.com for . (0.57 seconds)

Enter the URL in the Google search box and click pages from the site and at the bottom of the resultant page you will see the supplemental message.

Now I will repeat Zero duplicate content.. and 99.90% of the sites pages in supplemental index.

Why is this ???

Because again all of the head tags except for 10 are the exact same throughout the site.

This amazing... yet simple edification is brought to you by an American of many ethnicities.

Not sure where in the search marketing industry... what ones' ethnic background has to do with things.

Signed

Don't agree / proof provided

[stretch dog]

On this issue of "duplicate" content penalty being Supplement Index...

I agree in theory but not in experience. The www.performbettergolf.com site that i have discussed on other threads is a perfect example.

It supplemental, but the supplemental pages are not the 450 plus pages that are missing in google, they are old articles that where removed last year, very old blog posts and a bunch of "empty" blog comment pages.... just utter crap.

I wish all the articles, product pages and every other page was actually in the SI... cause right now they simply do not exist to google.

My point, is there are a number of duplicated articles from an older better established authority site that is owned by my client. If your theories are correct about duplicated content being penalized by being dumped in the SI, then there should be 80 of the www.performbettergolf.com articles currently showing up in the SI... and in fact NONE are.

Where did they go... once upon a time they were there... and what about the product and other main pages, the articles site map, the main site map, and 24 perfectly good article index pages that i created in order to categorize the articles for ease of navigation thus improving the user experience and help the damn search engines theme everything more effectively.

Msn got it, Yahoo got it... meanwhile Google must think everything we've done was to somehow trick them into thinking we had something we don't... lol.

Google has totally screwed up this time. Perhaps their intentions were good, but as has been suggested on another thread... perhaps they rolled out Big Daddy a little prematurally... in my opinion.

I digress... i rant... i find google a challenge!

SD

Ps... screw it, i'm going for a beer!

[Irishjim]

Originally Posted by SemAdvance

This amazing yet simple edification is brought to you by an American of many ethnicities.

Not sure where in the search marketing industry... what ones' ethnic background has to do with things.

Signed

Don't agree / proof provided

All right, then, SemAdvance (are you sure that isn't Semi-Advanced?), I have no clue as to what you are raving about.

My post clearly stated I wrote a brief history on the Irish word, Bally, but you seemed to think I was talking only about the word itself.

You seem to be a bit tense, lad. Perhaps you should travel and see the world a bit. It would improve your perceptive abilities... and perhaps widen your narrow knowlege base.

Slan go foill,

[SemAdvance]

Hey stretch

Google has totally screwed up this time. Perhaps their intentions were good, but as has been suggested on another thread... perhaps they rolled out Big Daddy a little prematurally... in my opinion

.


Or the other side of the coin when you have many sites continuing to rank well before and after BD then one must think perhaps it is the site and not Google..

I don't see how anyone (not singling you out stretch) can sit on the outside of a company, not knowing it's operations with any authority whatsoever, and then proclaim the issue one has, is with said company.

That is like me saying I cannot get the rugs in my house... to match the paint on the walls in your house...being complete distant strangers as we are and then me blaming you for this situation.

[SemAdvance]

Irishjim said

You seem to be a bit tense, lad. Perhaps you should travel and see the world a bit. It would improve your perceptive abilities... and perhaps widen your narrow knowlege base.

Perhaps if you stop trying to degrade others you'll look like less of an ass

I lived in Europe for over five (5) years traveled to every most of the countries.. including communist East Germany before the wall came down..in addition I have travelled to all 48 states and some of Asia.

Make another stupid statement please!!

[Irishjim]

Originally Posted by SemAdvance

Make another stupid statement please!!

Well, you asked for it, Semi-Advanced...


Philly.

[SemAdvance]

looks at Irishkim and his cat

well at least one of you can follow instructions...

care for a cat treat Jim???

[Irishjim]

Originally Posted by SemAdvance

looks at Irishkim and his cat

well at least one of you can follow instructions...

care for a cat treat Jim???

Man, I want some of whatever you are smoking.

By the way, I don't believe you've ever been out of Philly. Nobody who has ever been to Europe (the most advanced part of this globe as we all know) would ever exhibit the low class you do, lad.

[jtdavis228]

Duplicate content is when you copy and paste exact text from one web page to another. If you paraphase that idea in your own words, it's not duplicate content. I would suggest using original graphics, if you don't have any, rename the graphics you do have using keywords that bring people to your site. Throw in some "ALT" text and include content, and most of all, put the page in your own words. Get the general idea of what you are talking about, then explain it like you would to a patient or someone coming into your office. By putting the page in general terms you increase the likelihood of having people view your page.

[Webnauts]

I would kindly like to ask here some posters to slow done a bit, while some posts are getting here kind of offensive!?

We are all here to find out how Google handles duplicated content.

Thank you.

[SemAdvance]

Webnauts

I dont know where you come... from but I stand my ground when insulted.

Perhaps you could remind someone to shove their arrogance right up the same spot their head is.

Done & unsubscribed...who needs to argue his pompousness??

Not I

[pemburung]

It would seem to me that guessing about dupe content - and Irishjim's first post referred to dupe content within one website, not across websites - or any other matter with G right now is moot. There are too many changes going on continually to be able to gauge what is doing what. We have a bunch of duplicate content on one site as we cut and paste travel itinerary days into new itineraries for clients, and put them up on the web as separate pages. They were once indexed by G, but some have been dropped from the index entirely, others are in supplemental, along with the "template" generic example closer to the home page. (On an interesting note, I have seen that on some occasions a phrase in quotes will not be found by G, but take away the quotes and the same phrase is found. Seems opposite to the idea of quotes to me.) A couple that are totally different to the others are still indexed in main. None have links other than from within our site, so a lack of links is not the factor killing them in G. They are virtually all indexed in MSN and Yahoo.

So, within sites, who knows? Google has said somewhere that reasonable repetition within a site is to be expected, and not punished. But then, I don't think G knows what its algo is punishing, or by now much else of what it is doing. Seems like there's a movie here. (Have you ever wondered about the increase in computer-generated rubbish being OK by G, while nicely crafted, content laden sites are being dropped? The bots are supporting their own kind. Where's Ahnuld as the good guy when you need him?)

However, Irishjim, repeating the same information is not good for the client, regardless of what it is doing for SEs. Instead of explaining at length the meaning of Bally over and over, just do a small clause along the lines of "Bally occurs in a lot of irish names - here's why" linked to one explanation on a separate page. Explain "kil" there with similar links throughout the site. Clean up the pages for the reader, get rid of any SE problems, and you may even find other sources link to it for the explantion. Three run hit.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by SemAdvance

Webnauts

I dont know where you come... from but I stand my ground when insulted.

Perhaps you could remind someone to shove their arrogance right up the same spot their head is.

Done & unsubscribed...who needs to argue his pompousness??

Not I

SemAdvance, I don't think that I mentioned any names of posters here.

And just to your question where I come from, I am a half Greek (Asian Minor) and half American (Cherokee Indian), and I hold a dual nationality (Greek & U.S).
If that is what you want to know. :)

More about me: http://www.webnauts.net/curriculum.html

But I still didn't get it: Why did you feel offended?

By the way if you have unsubscribe from this thread, you will never find out who I am if you where really interested. :)

[Irishjim]

Originally Posted by pemburung

As for our German friend, I apologize for any discomfort you felt from the lad from Philly.

No need for apologies, while I did not feel any discomfort for the lad from Phily. I am a moderator and I am just doing my duty. ;)

And by the way, I am not German, as I have previously explained. I just live in Germany. :)

[Irishjim]

Originally Posted by Irishjim

No need for apologies, while I did not feel any discomfort for the lad from Phily. I am a moderator and I am just doing my duty. ;)

And by the way, I am not German, as I have previously explained. I just live in Germany. :)

This wasn't my post. I suspect the server is heating up. I'm a bureau chief for a regional newspaper and have no need for more conflict than my job requires.

As for the lad from Philly, I hope he can take a deep breath, settle down and take an Evelyn Woods course in content reading.

[pemburung]

I didn't say that either. What's up, mod?

[Irishjim]

Originally Posted by pemburung

I didn't say that either. What's up, mod?

I love this forum. It's like being back at AOL in the early 90's working away at trying to train Guides.