32 replies to this topic

[projectphp]

http://googlewebmast...mainstream.html

(Blahg blah blah blah, we are getting better blah blah, fresher, deeper, blah blah)... we've decided to stop labeling these URLs as "Supplemental Results."

So stop fucking bugging us about it. There are no supplemntal results, there is only one index, at least AFA you will ever know!

[Jill]

It's interesting because in Toronto I was on a panel with Adam Lasnick from Google, and everyone was asking him about supplementals. Chris Sherman finally said, "why don't you simply stop labeling them and then there won't be such a clamor about it anymore?"

Apparently they took Chris's advice!

Personally, I think it's brilliant. I don't think there's a need to label them either as it simply makes webmaster's focus on things that don't generally matter.

[projectphp]

More information is always better. Most people are idiots. WHy build a knowledge business aimed at idiots?

[Jill]

I disagree. They were pointing out something to people that the people seemingly had no control over anyway. And in most cases from what I could tell, it was a non-issue.

In other words, by labeling supplemental results, they were creating a frenzy where there was no need for one.

They're now simply going back to the way it should have been to begin with. There was never a reason to label those results as supplemental.

[projectphp]

The other side is that search isn't about webmasters; it is for people who want to find stuff. I want information. That is why I use SEs. I don't care if webmasters panic. I can't stop them, especially NOT passively when I have tried and failed actively.

Knowing a page is supplemental helps me as a searcher, in part because it means I know the update was less recent, but also becasue it means all the data for that seacrh is dodgy. That is information that I, as a searcher, like to have. The downside (webmasters crying) isn't a price I am concerned about paying, and that comes from an SEO forum junkie who will likely answer questions about it for the next several years.

So far, we have lost the ability see all links and now supplemental results listed as such because a few people cry. What a real shame that an information tool, one that is suppossed to not only connect me with information, but provide me with tools to judge the information, is being dumbed down simply because a few people cry (and a few others waste theirn resources).

I really wish there was a comprehensive and open source SE that allowed me to see all the scoring factors, because I would really like to customise the ammount and type of data shown on SERPs per listing, I really would!

[Jill]

Knowing a page is supplemental helps me as a searcher, in part because it means I know the update was less recent, but also becasue it means all the data for that seacrh is dodgy.

Seriously? I never would have imagined that the average user has ever even noticed the supplemental label.

[torka]

This article from Jim Boykin's blog appears to be potentially relevant to this discussion...

--Torka

[incrediblehelp]

As long as these previously known supplemental pages are "actually" in the same index and treated the same as the pages not previously in the SI then I think it is fine to remove the tag. Unfortunately I don't think that is the case. I think they just got rid of the tag.

[projectphp]

Seriously? I never would have imagined that the average user has ever even noticed the supplemental label.

You calling me Average? LOL.

That is really my issue: who SERPs are aimed at. They dumber all the time.

[1dmf]

well, i've had pages in suplimental, done an exact phrase match , got only 6 results and my page in suplimental wasn't one of them, so I do not beleive it when it is claimed there is no difference and if limited results show from the main index the suplimental index is searcherd as a backup.

If that was the case my page would have shown, it didn't , so what other conclusion can I make?

[Randy]

The thing I never got about the whole SI hubbub (from the Webmaster perspective) is how having some little tag in Google made any difference at all.

If a page doesn't rank well, it doesn't rank well. And the solution has always been the same regardless of whether one sees a Supplemental next to the listing or not. Make the page more Important. Or in other words make sure the page has excellent, unique content, make sure you're linking to it sensibly from other important pages of own site and try to get some links to it from external sites.

The same solution applies whether the page is in some mystical Supplemental index, or if it has been fully indexed but simply isn't ranking well for its target phrase(s).

[Jill]

Exactly, Randy!

And from where I sit, supplemental index pages are generally useless pages that shouldn't even be indexed anyway (let alone ranking).

[incrediblehelp]

Your right Randy, but it is a nice heads up to know which pages are in a separate index as I said above. If they aren't (or never were) in a separate index, then your right who cares!

[piskie]

IMO, some pages were in the supplemental index for simply having identical HTML Titles. I think so because I fixed a few by just making the Titles appropriate rather than Pasted Clones. I don't think that cetegorised them as:

supplemental index pages are generally useless pages

There are Pros and cons for this development and obviously it won't please everybody as this thread demonstrates.

[Jill]

And you needed those pages to be labeled supplemental to know that it was a bad idea to use the same title tag on them? Umm...ok