GT-NextGen Implementation - Feedback and Input Needed!

Site Admin/Owner Joined: Aug 27, 2002 Posts: 17088

Susan, can you post an English version please?

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 3:52 am

guidyy - I'm not convinced have two url's to repeated content has a negative impact on page ranking.
It has been my experience that where duplicated content exists from a few different url's google et al simply drop one or more from the index.

However where there is much duplicate content then some 'trigger' level is exceeded and yes, you would be penalised. I have no idea what this 'trigger level' is but from my own experience it has to be more than 2.

Can you explain how you arrive at your conclusion that people lose ranking by having some duplicated content.

Worker Joined: Nov 22, 2004 Posts: 208 Location: Italy

Guardian,

I've been reading some google groups and SEO articles about both sitemap and google optimization, and there were people complaing about having their pagerank dropped for duplicate content.
Moreover the Next/previous actualli brings to 3 different url for the same page, and function goto page previos 1 -2 -3
add more urls pointing to same content
E.g. on this topic
page1 = postxf8045-0-0.html (this is the 4th url pointing at topic 8045)
I'm not an expert and I might be completely wrong, but why risk?

Guido

registered · Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 6:56 am

guidyy wrote:

Montego,
I know people loosing pagerank for having
http://www.mysite.con/fileone.html
http://mysite.com/fileone.html
Most likely you will not get banned, but your pagerank may be affected.

Guido

This definitely has me concerned then. As Guardian knows, I am very "touchy" when it comes to Google page rank! killing me

It makes it very important for every to know and understand, then, that if they somehow "tap" their site, if they are going to tap Forums, for example, they need to "tap" it everywhere, including all blocks that they use and all possible references to the same page.

Thanks for pointing this out!

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:29 am

guidyy - Yes I agree with you that having a LOT of duplicate content is a 'bad' thing.

Having three links to the same content may not be classed by a search engine as 'a bad thing' BUT when you consider the large number of links available for indexing on a decent sized forum, having that much potentially duplicated content would, I feel, definitely be a bad thing.

I was just curious as to how your friends knew they had been penalised by search engines specifically for having duplicated content - for example, if they had removed duplicated content with no other changes to the site and the PR had gone up dramtically.
I'm curious not to try and prove you wrong but, knowing how PR can vary from time to time but to gather evidence of the fact that removing the duplicate content raised the PR significantly for a sustainable period.

Last year I deliberately made duplicate links to forum posts by means os sitemaps and my PR didnt vary from the year before so I'm very curious.

montego = I think the simplest solution for now at least would be to make the pre/next links visible only to registered users??

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 8:03 am

Guardian2003 wrote:

I was just curious as to how your friends knew they had been penalised by search engines specifically for having duplicated content - for example, if they had removed duplicated content with no other changes to the site and the PR had gone up dramtically.
I'm curious not to try and prove you wrong but, knowing how PR can vary from time to time but to gather evidence of the fact that removing the duplicate content raised the PR significantly for a sustainable period.

Well, google pagerank algorithms, and behaviour is as mysterious as the genesis, so I really do not know,
I've heard people getting penalized (with old pagerank dropped to zero) when they erroneusly submitted duplicate content on sitemap.
Since those are posts on a group, and there is no official answer from google, I cant be sure if it's completely true.
Accordingly, there is nothing offical from google, of how many identical pages cause a penalty.
On the internet, you can read all and the contrary of all about it.
I think it's a wise choice to reduce the risk of a penalty to the minimum.

Guido

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 8:06 am

@Raven

The phpBB.com main site is currently offline, therefore I can´t check there Mods and I couldn´t find any other english version of this phpBB Mod. I´ m afraid it´s not allowed to publish the english version of show Topic Title instead "next / previous by N.H. without permissions. For further information about this mod just visit phpBB.de

http://www.phpbb.de/moddb/showTopicTitle

Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 8:49 am

Susann,

I don't think there's an issue, but it certainly would be okay to send me a PM with the translation Wink

if you felt so inclined Smile

Involved Joined: Oct 09, 2004 Posts: 293

When I was playing with our ranks (we generally sit top 5 but would knock to page 10 plus to see what changes made) with duplicate pages it was easy to do.
Whewn I removed duplicate pages and was bottom of page 1 on most search engines it jumpewd very quickly to top of page 1.
From this It definately had an effect...as to the amount of effect I do not know since at the time the potentual for the jumps was only a page to the top not many pages.
There are other advantages
1/The search engines are not crawling (in the case of forums) a page 3 times plus
2/editing/creating google site map is far easier

Another link that search engines dont seem to pick up but logically (?) they should is the post link at the top of a post on the line between posters name and next to "Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 3:49 am"
Alsa this link has far more potental for use...maybe needs identifing better some how..many do not relise its existance or potentual usage.

Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:04 am

Raven wrote:

First of all, I would like to change the nomenclature from GT to something else.

I'd call it "url-shrink" just because there isn't only google (thanks God!) in the world.

oh yes! I do not like google.... *wink*

Guido

Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 6:13 pm

I noticed a mention of the Google sitemaps up there. Has anyone created a phpnuke sitemap to kick out a valid xml sitemap yet? From google theres a link to a phpnuke one but it sux and only maps the news and doesnt validate..

I only ask cos Ive done one that works brilliantly on one site (nuke 7.6 patched not tapped) it validates in every validater Ive tried and google accepted it. This site is now doing very well in Google thanks v much! (thanks to Evaders for the advice!) take a butchers: http://www.star-wands.co.uk/Harry_Potter/sitemapper.php

But, I tried it on a 7.7 (patched not tapped) site and it wouldnt validate at all. It kicks out a nice looking xml page but no validaters liked it and google just laughed. This site isnt doing so well.

Ive a suspision whats wrong but cant really find the time to fix it (the 7.7 is a clients site, if he wants it better he can pay me more)

Just done my first ravenNuke install so Ill prob test it on there at some point.

Anyhoo, thats all off topic I beleive.

Theres a Sitemap addon that recreates your site in a GT fashion and with a simpler layout. It does most of the modules in one file. Ive got that installed on a site and point slower connections that way. But, all the GT style URL shortening is done in that file. No .htaccess at all. Wouldn't it be possible to put similar code into the modules themselves so the modules take care of the URL shortening? Take a look: http://www.star-wands.co.uk/Harry_Potter/sitemap.php
Just some ideas, Im no where near an expert on this, in fact, everytime I try to GT anything I screw the sites up!

On the topic of keywords in URLs Changing my /html/ dir to /Harry_Potter/ has seen the pageviews soar dramatically from MSN and Yahoo searchs.

Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 6:42 pm

kguske at http://nukeSEO.com has an excellent start of just such a thing - the sitemap to Google that is.

However, regarding your comments on shortening the URL's, it would become a maintenance nightmare to modify all the module and block code to do the re-writing. Everytime you installed a patch or upgraded, you'd be recoding... As far as I know right now, GT is one of the best options available to us.

Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 9:46 pm

Quote:

I noticed a mention of the Google sitemaps up there. Has anyone created a phpnuke sitemap to kick out a valid xml sitemap

Most of our site is GTed but the galleries come up with a lot of errors. I dont want these in the site map.
The best sitemap creator I found is from here
http://johannesmueller.com/gs/
One is able to remove parameters, url words, urls etc from the scanner before scanning saving a heap of time.
Once the sitemap is submitted in the google error report one can see those urls google has trouble with and why...these can then be added to the site map creator or errors fixed as needed
Once I got the site map basically error free, I re submitt an updated once a month, if I remember lol.
Your site map can get very big with dead and duplicate type links like reply, new, member details, list reveiw, reorder, next etc. So I have removed these so they are only visible when logged in.
Note..do not run the sitemap scanner from a machine that u are logged in automatically, because it will pick up stuff as if logged in, then creating urls in the sitemap that become errors on the google report.

registered · Site Admin Joined: Jun 04, 2004 Posts: 6437

Steptoe, how can you be sure that increase in search engine results placement (SERP) - very different from Google Pagerank - increased as a result of the removal of duplicate URLs? There are so many things - mostly unknown - that impact that. For example, if you use Google Adsense - the words on the ads may affect your placement (and probably your Google Pagerank, too). Changes on other websites might affect your placement, too. I guess that's what makes it so hard to be an expert...

Regarding the sitemap, with nukeSEO, you don't need to remember to update your sitemap monthly. Once you create it, it's dynamically updated everytime Google reads it - and not accidentally as a signed-on user or administrator. And, you can control the content you want to include by module. Furthermore, you can modify simple objects to determine what format the URLs use. And, it includes an HTML sitemap, which helps with other search engines. Finally, Montego posted instructions for a GTed nukeSEO sitemap (thanks, Montego!). The only disadvantage I can see is that we don't have a gallery content type...yet. But I suspect that will change with the next release of RavenNuke.
Smile

Posted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:14 pm

guidyy wrote:

I'd call it "url-shrink" just because there isn't only google (thanks God!) in the world.

oh yes! I do not like google....

Check your statistics to see which engines bring you the most traffic...those are the ones I like!

Posted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 12:07 am

Quote:

Steptoe, how can you be sure

1/ Kakariki as a subject is not a greatly sourced after subject, so far easier to monitor than say a nuke or even a fishing site.
2/Dont have adsence to influence
3/Site is primarily international
3/ links (internatuional)to other related sites and from them are routinely checked in case of changes
4/As mentioned in other threads over last yr and the above I can/had physically been able to move our site up and down almost at will, from rank 1 to page 30 odd, seeing what does and doesnt effect on not just google but 15 other engines. This was done one thing at a time over around 9 months.
In that time SE have changed parameters, espec Google MS, yahoo (that order)that account for...well others comes to less than 3%
Ranks are still routinly checked each month with 10 main search parameters...eg Kakariki, karariki breeding