Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Sandbox Preventive Measures
Posted 08 June 2005 - 03:36 AM
Anyone knows how to prevent a brand new website from being sandboxed?
what is the maximum link to build in order to prevent being sandbox?
Posted 08 June 2005 - 09:14 AM
Scottie's article actually does state that ... "As far as we are concerned here, they are 2 different issues [aging delay & sandbox]. If you post and tell us your site is in the sandbox, we will ask you about your linking strategies that may have caused this."
This was written back in early February, so the definition may have changed, but I think it's more likely people just use the 2 terms interchangeably. But if we're going to refer to this article for clarification, we should be consistent with what it says. Is there a difference between the two? ... and if there is as Scottie states, then greatone is not in the sandbox, but is affected by the aging delay.
Concerning a new site "oh greatone" ... it's real, dig in and get used to it. My site stayed in oblivion for approximately 1 year and 10 days, then magically moved up to more competitive positions. It sucks, without a doubt, but unfortunately there's nothing you can do but be patient and wait till Google decides to release you from it. Most sites seem to be released sometime after 6 months, but others have to wait longer. It initially appeared they released sites in large batches, but I've not heard of many released at the time mine was.
<edit>pretty cool that aging delay automatically links to the article when you post ... maybe sandbox shoud too?</edit>
Posted 08 June 2005 - 09:49 AM
Anything that has to do with getting links too quickly, or whatever, is strictly a business as usual spam filter.
Again, that's just my opinion.
Unfortunately, the sandbox (or maybe we should call it the spambox!) is a term bandied about for any site that simply can't get rankings in Google these days.
Posted 08 June 2005 - 10:15 AM
there seems to be two things in place.
The domain age factor and a link age factor which seems to be proportional to the perceived competitivness of the link anchor. If one don't getcha, the other will
Posted 08 June 2005 - 12:45 PM
AS Jill points out, we can't really define the term in our narrow definition because everyone everywhere who can't get their site to rank well in Google claims they've been sandboxed.
Posted 09 June 2005 - 08:21 AM
It used to be that subdomains did not get caught in the delay. I'm not sure if that loophole has been filled or not.
Anyone know for sure?
BTW, I am a HAPPY CAMPER today as the one new site we designed and optimized starting nearly a year ago has FINALLY paid its dues and is outta the stinkin' sandbox!
Posted 09 June 2005 - 10:27 AM
Posted 09 June 2005 - 11:53 AM
Right, indexing is definitely not a problem.
When you're hit by the aging delay, basically you won't rank for anything of any interest to you, except maybe company name, or a geographic phrase or whatever. The site I mentioned couldn't rank for exact title tag stuff even with 5 or 6 words from it.
Now that it's out, it's ranking just as one would expect. Still needs some work (links) to gain the most competive phrases, but all is going as one would expect sans sandbox.
Posted 09 June 2005 - 11:58 AM
Posted 09 June 2005 - 12:21 PM
We launched the revamped site, complete with subdomains, on July 23. We saw our first new rankings for the main site on July 26. On August 10, we saw the first rankings for the subdomains -- some of them even top 5 rankings for some very competitive phrases.
Posted 09 June 2005 - 04:56 PM
The aging delay doesn't feel nearly as oppressive when your mindset is one of "I'm still building it," instead of, "How long do I have to wait!" Then as you plug away at the next piece, suddenly you have the pleasant surprise of finding that you're showing up in the rankings.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users