12 replies to this topic

[deja]

Google uses algorithms to calculate PRs and rank pages, and punishes sites as well without manual intervention. 4 billion pages and over 100 million sites seems make manual intervention impossible.

If this is true, sites with exactly duplicate content will not be considered spam or be penalized 'cause Google directory is really the duplicate of dmoz.

any insights?

[rohgan03]

Exactly duplicate content will be considered as spam.

Directory using another directory as feed is another matter alltogether.

[Jill]

Exactly duplicate content will be considered as spam.

No it won't.

Jill

[rohgan03]

Oh yes....for duplicate content only 1 shows ups in SERPs...right?
Basically its not worth adddin duplicate content unless there is some specific legitimate reason.

[OldWelshGuy]

Duplication is not so much spam, as a complete waste of time.

[deja]

duplication of content is neithr spam nor waste of time. Content duplication, in most case, is the result of successful site, not spam. In the early days of the web, mirror (making duplicate content available on other sites), was the only technology available to improve site performance. nowadays, big corporate (google, hp and etc) uses load balencing software (logical mirror, instead of physical mirror) for better performance. For individuals who run successful sites, still use physical mirrors to make the valuable content available to users worldwide. Once mirrors are setup, you don't need extra time to maintain them at all.

it's not 100% out of question, if Yahoo and MSN decide to provide directory using dmoz.

[Grumpus]

The trick here is that you have to look at it as a "filter" and not a "penalty". You see the word "penalty" thrown around a lot when it comes to Google - it's very rare to see the word used accurately or appropriately.

What happens when Google finds duplicate content is that it filters out all but the "most important for that specific search term" of the duplicate files from the batch it's found. So, the trick, when trying to get syndicated content to rank in Google is not just to get it rank well for the term, but to also get it to rank #1 amongst the set of pages that are also running the same content on their site. In many cases, no one is particularly good at SEO (or the page just isn't very relevant to that term) and it'll appear deeper in the listings and your job is easier. But, if the page is relevant to the term, then you have to be that much more relevant.

So, if the content on the pages are (virtually) the same, how do you get them to rank better? Well, there's lots you can do.

-A good page title is a start.

-Get the page's PR up. Sure, we talk about how PR has been devalued over the years, it's the penultimate tie breaker and duplicate content equates to a tie.

-Having links to other pages within your site (or other sites) to other related articles is good. The links will likely have similar keywords and won't be on the other pages. It'll stand out.

-Have a killer site structure that lends to themes and concepts. more info on Site Structure

Those four things will give you a good start. There are lots more things you can do, as well. Just remember, it's not a penalty, it's a challenge.

G.

[rohgan03]

Grumpus: V informative thread on site structure

[msdetta]

Google directory is really the duplicate of dmoz.

Um, I really have to disagree with the above as I feel it needs some clarifying.

Google, through its bots, has many sites that are not listed in dmoz, so it is not a duplicate of dmoz. While Google does take the rdf dump from dmoz, the directories are independent of each other.

The biggest difference is that dmoz is the only directory where editors actually review a site by looking at the site and determining if there is unique content, and then providing an impartial description of the site.

Ok, off the soapbox now

[Jill]

Actually, Diane, the Google Directory IS the same as DMOZ.

Google has both the Google Directory and the Google Search Engine.

[1seo]

Well, the Google Directory is a less updated DMOZ. I believe last update was done in October still...why oh why don't they upgrade it more often.

[bwelford]

Actually the Google Directory was updated from the DMOZ directory about two weeks ago. Prior to that the previous update was in November 2003.

[OldWelshGuy]

Apparently Google have been having a problem with the data feed from DMOZ.