Google Sitemaps - anyone getting delays?

Hi, one of my clients has set up a Google Sitemap (list of links
version rather than XML) and submitted it in the second week of August.
Google isn't showing all the pages that are in the Sitemap yet, but are
showing some old pages which have been removed by the site owners.

As far as I can tell, the maps file is to spec (it's difficult to get a
text file of links wrong) and they've submitted it correctly. Their
site is relatively new, about 6-8 months old, and has just over 200
links to it according to Yahoo, with few or no reciprocals and no links
out to dodgy sites.

So... is anyone else getting this sort of delay when submitting site
updates through Google Sitemaps? Or any advice about getting Google to
update quickly?

Thanks

Paul

On 5 Sep 2006 07:05:34 -0700, "Paul Silver" <paul.silver (AT) gmail (DOT) com>
wrote:

Hi, one of my clients has set up a Google Sitemap (list of links
version rather than XML) and submitted it in the second week of August.
Google isn't showing all the pages that are in the Sitemap yet, but are
showing some old pages which have been removed by the site owners.

As far as I can tell, the maps file is to spec (it's difficult to get a
text file of links wrong) and they've submitted it correctly. Their
site is relatively new, about 6-8 months old, and has just over 200
links to it according to Yahoo, with few or no reciprocals and no links
out to dodgy sites.

So... is anyone else getting this sort of delay when submitting site
updates through Google Sitemaps? Or any advice about getting Google to
update quickly?

Thanks

Paul

In my experience Google sitemaps, now web tools, is always some way
behind. If you want Google to update pages then get deep links to
those pages from indexed and regularly crawled sites.

BB
--

http://www.crystal-liaison.com/a-bre...nd-i94966.html
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/a-bre...set-hound.html
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/a-bre...und-puppy.html

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote

On 5 Sep 2006 07:05:34 -0700, "Paul Silver" <paul.silver (AT) gmail (DOT) com
wrote:
snip

So... is anyone else getting this sort of delay when submitting site
updates through Google Sitemaps? Or any advice about getting Google to
update quickly?

Thanks

Paul

In my experience Google sitemaps, now web tools, is always some way
behind. If you want Google to update pages then get deep links to
those pages from indexed and regularly crawled sites.

BB

Have you tried to have Google re-crawl the sitemap Bill if you have made
changes and added it to the sitemap?

Stacey
--
Crafts - Directory - Your Online Crafting Source
http://www.ecraftsonline.net/
A New Focus In Web Marketing - Search Engine Optimization
http://jezsta.com

On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 17:04:13 +0200, "Jezsta Web Productions"
<Please-use-our-contact-form (AT) jezsta (DOT) com> wrote:

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:m34rf2pv9orsl4avojs1jop1g1lvcpe1dd (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
On 5 Sep 2006 07:05:34 -0700, "Paul Silver" <paul.silver (AT) gmail (DOT) com
wrote:
snip

So... is anyone else getting this sort of delay when submitting site
updates through Google Sitemaps? Or any advice about getting Google to
update quickly?

Thanks

Paul

In my experience Google sitemaps, now web tools, is always some way
behind. If you want Google to update pages then get deep links to
those pages from indexed and regularly crawled sites.

BB

Have you tried to have Google re-crawl the sitemap Bill if you have made
changes and added it to the sitemap?

Stacey

Yes. May I remind you that crawling is not the same as indexing.

BB
--

http://www.crystal-liaison.com/a-bre...nd-i94966.html
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/a-bre...set-hound.html
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/a-bre...und-puppy.html

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote

On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 17:04:13 +0200, "Jezsta Web Productions"
Please-use-our-contact-form (AT) jezsta (DOT) com> wrote:

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:m34rf2pv9orsl4avojs1jop1g1lvcpe1dd (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
On 5 Sep 2006 07:05:34 -0700, "Paul Silver" <paul.silver (AT) gmail (DOT) com
wrote:
snip

So... is anyone else getting this sort of delay when submitting site
updates through Google Sitemaps? Or any advice about getting Google to
update quickly?

Thanks

Paul

In my experience Google sitemaps, now web tools, is always some way
behind. If you want Google to update pages then get deep links to
those pages from indexed and regularly crawled sites.

BB

Have you tried to have Google re-crawl the sitemap Bill if you have made
changes and added it to the sitemap?

Stacey

Yes. May I remind you that crawling is not the same as indexing.

BB

May I remind you that I know what crawling and indexing is. I have no
problem with getting pages indexed after the sitemap is re-crawled.
Actually, I have no problem getting new pages indexed with older sites with
PR. Anyway, why I asked, is you said Google is behind with the sitemap and
getting those pages indexed.

Stacey
--
Halloween Stuff - All Halloween all the time!
http://www.halloween-stuff.net/
A New Focus In Web Marketing - Search Engine Optimization
http://jezsta.com

On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 20:28:47 +0200, "Jezsta Web Productions"
<Please-use-our-contact-form (AT) jezsta (DOT) com> wrote:

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:4nerf2hvf0jsc4dp311m3e3ti1p52f0lmo (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 17:04:13 +0200, "Jezsta Web Productions"
Please-use-our-contact-form (AT) jezsta (DOT) com> wrote:

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:m34rf2pv9orsl4avojs1jop1g1lvcpe1dd (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
On 5 Sep 2006 07:05:34 -0700, "Paul Silver" <paul.silver (AT) gmail (DOT) com
wrote:
snip

So... is anyone else getting this sort of delay when submitting site
updates through Google Sitemaps? Or any advice about getting Google to
update quickly?

Thanks

Paul

In my experience Google sitemaps, now web tools, is always some way
behind. If you want Google to update pages then get deep links to
those pages from indexed and regularly crawled sites.

BB

Have you tried to have Google re-crawl the sitemap Bill if you have made
changes and added it to the sitemap?

Stacey

Yes. May I remind you that crawling is not the same as indexing.

BB

May I remind you that I know what crawling and indexing is. I have no
problem with getting pages indexed after the sitemap is re-crawled.
Actually, I have no problem getting new pages indexed with older sites with
PR. Anyway, why I asked, is you said Google is behind with the sitemap and
getting those pages indexed.

Stacey
In my experience it is. It probably varies from site to site. I dip in

and out and see stuff that I know has changed and it isn't reflected
in the Google sitemap data, is how I know.

BB
--

http://www.crystal-liaison.com/a-bre...nd-i94966.html
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/a-bre...set-hound.html
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/a-bre...und-puppy.html

Paul Silver wrote:

Hi, one of my clients has set up a Google Sitemap (list of links
version rather than XML) and submitted it in the second week of August.
Google isn't showing all the pages that are in the Sitemap yet, but are
showing some old pages which have been removed by the site owners.

As far as I can tell, the maps file is to spec (it's difficult to get a
text file of links wrong) and they've submitted it correctly. Their
site is relatively new, about 6-8 months old, and has just over 200
links to it according to Yahoo, with few or no reciprocals and no links
out to dodgy sites.

So... is anyone else getting this sort of delay when submitting site
updates through Google Sitemaps? Or any advice about getting Google to
update quickly?

My take on Google sitemaps is that they were not created for the benefit of
webmasters. In my viewpoint, the sitemaps program appears to be created
primarily for Google's long-term debugging of Googlebot(s). Everything
else is a smokescreen, although the Sitemap control panel can provide
useful information that is not necessarily dependent on having a sitemap at
all.

Don't expect Google to follow your instructions in the sitemap -- use
standard SEO to make sure Google can spider your pages, and to make sure
that Google thinks those pages are important (i.e., IBLs -- in this case
maybe a couple of deeplinks). Then wait...

If the site is not "important" (new web site and/or not a lot of IBLs) then
it might take more time.

Google will remove the old pages eventually if the site is sending
correct "404 Not Found" headers. You can use the livehttpheaders Firefox
extension to check. If the site is sending 404 or 301 headers for pages
that have been removed, then just wait...

__/ [ z ] on Tuesday 05 September 2006 22:03 \__

Paul Silver wrote:

Hi, one of my clients has set up a Google Sitemap (list of links
version rather than XML) and submitted it in the second week of August.
Google isn't showing all the pages that are in the Sitemap yet, but are
showing some old pages which have been removed by the site owners.

As far as I can tell, the maps file is to spec (it's difficult to get a
text file of links wrong) and they've submitted it correctly. Their
site is relatively new, about 6-8 months old, and has just over 200
links to it according to Yahoo, with few or no reciprocals and no links
out to dodgy sites.

So... is anyone else getting this sort of delay when submitting site
updates through Google Sitemaps? Or any advice about getting Google to
update quickly?

My take on Google sitemaps is that they were not created for the benefit of
webmasters. In my viewpoint, the sitemaps program appears to be created
primarily for Google's long-term debugging of Googlebot(s). Everything
else is a smokescreen, although the Sitemap control panel can provide
useful information that is not necessarily dependent on having a sitemap at
all.

Aye. I never fancied Google Sitemaps (for a variety of reasons actually
http://tinyurl.com/htre4 ). Crawling of the site in a page-by-page fashion
provided good and fast coverage. XML may be good for prioritising pages, but
depth of pages implicitly achieves this. Moreover, XML seems like a matter
of convenience to Google. Rather than crawl sites to study their structures
(and most possibly create a crawling schedule), Google wants the Webmasters
to do all the work off-line, i.e. on the filesystem, which saves bandwidth.
Not only does it lock the competitors out (unless they catch up with
non-standard 'extensions') but it also delegates work to others, which
reduces Google's workload.

Don't expect Google to follow your instructions in the sitemap -- use
standard SEO to make sure Google can spider your pages, and to make sure
that Google thinks those pages are important (i.e., IBLs -- in this case
maybe a couple of deeplinks). Then wait...

If the site is not "important" (new web site and/or not a lot of IBLs) then
it might take more time.

Google will remove the old pages eventually if the site is sending
correct "404 Not Found" headers. You can use the livehttpheaders Firefox
extension to check. If the site is sending 404 or 301 headers for pages
that have been removed, then just wait...

I can't recall seeing you in AISE before, but you have some good insights to
share. *smile*

Best wishes,

Roy

--
foo bar!
http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Load average (/proc/loadavg): 0.42 0.54 0.53 2/133 4927
http://iuron.com - semantic search engine project initiative

Thanks for everyone's replies. I have been following normal SEO routes
for getting a site spidered - plenty of incoming links and deep links
where possible - so I'll wait for that to kick in. I too think it's
pointless to do something special for Google, but as the client had all
ready started using G Sitemaps I needed to check in to it.

Ta again

Paul