FWIW: summarizing a few lessons I've recently learned

1) I had a forum with almost 2000 links on one page.
Google didn't index it.
In responce to a suggestion someone made here, I rewrote
the forum so it pages through the topics, never showing more
than 40 links at a time.
Now the entire forum is indexed.

2) I have a CMS generated site (makes static pages) that
includes hundreds of how-to-do-it boat building
photo sequences.
Many of those pages had maybe a half a dozen links,
and one photo with a short, single sentence caption.
None of those low-text pages were indexed.

I reworked the CMS so it tacks a list of comma-delimited
keywords at the bottom of each page. I try to make the
keywords relevant to the page. But they ARE NOT in
a sentence--just a list of words, like:
"marine plywood, epoxy, fiberglass, stitch and glue, etc"

All those pages are now indexed. Google clearly has
a lower bound on text, below which they don't bother to
index. Further, it doesn't seem to matter that much what the
text is. Supply enough text and they will index it.

3) Just as a curiosity test, I put the made-up word "onamoxible"
at the bottom of one page. A few days later a keyword
search on onamoxible turned up that page. I then removed it.
Onamoxible, now a few weeks later, usually turns up nothing.
But sometimes it still turns up. So some of their servers
are out-of-synch (some still return onamixible, some don't).

On 14 Sep 2006 07:10:16 -0700, "sandy" <Sandy.Pittendrigh (AT) gmail (DOT) com>
wrote:

1) I had a forum with almost 2000 links on one page.
Google didn't index it.
In responce to a suggestion someone made here, I rewrote
the forum so it pages through the topics, never showing more
than 40 links at a time.
Now the entire forum is indexed.

I have two sites maps on my site. Both have well over 2000 links, and
they are cached, spidered and PR'd.

2) I have a CMS generated site (makes static pages) that
includes hundreds of how-to-do-it boat building
photo sequences.
Many of those pages had maybe a half a dozen links,
and one photo with a short, single sentence caption.
None of those low-text pages were indexed.

Before the last PR update, I had pages both with a lot of text and
some with hardly any. Now, some of these [both types] are not indexed.
No CMS - but static html.

There have been some strange things seen with the last PR update.
plh
Paul

--
Handmade Jewelry from Texas
http://www.houstoncrafts.com/turquoise/Choker-112.html
http://www.houstoncrafts.com/turquoise/Choker-104.html
http://www.houstoncrafts.com/Swarovs...hoker-206.html

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On 14 Sep 2006 07:10:16 -0700, "sandy" <Sandy.Pittendrigh (AT) gmail (DOT) com>
wrote:

1) I had a forum with almost 2000 links on one page.
Google didn't index it.
In responce to a suggestion someone made here, I rewrote
the forum so it pages through the topics, never showing more
than 40 links at a time.
Now the entire forum is indexed.

2) I have a CMS generated site (makes static pages) that
includes hundreds of how-to-do-it boat building
photo sequences.
Many of those pages had maybe a half a dozen links,
and one photo with a short, single sentence caption.
None of those low-text pages were indexed.

I reworked the CMS so it tacks a list of comma-delimited
keywords at the bottom of each page. I try to make the
keywords relevant to the page. But they ARE NOT in
a sentence--just a list of words, like:
"marine plywood, epoxy, fiberglass, stitch and glue, etc"

All those pages are now indexed. Google clearly has
a lower bound on text, below which they don't bother to
index. Further, it doesn't seem to matter that much what the
text is. Supply enough text and they will index it.

3) Just as a curiosity test, I put the made-up word "onamoxible"
at the bottom of one page. A few days later a keyword
search on onamoxible turned up that page. I then removed it.
Onamoxible, now a few weeks later, usually turns up nothing.
But sometimes it still turns up. So some of their servers
are out-of-synch (some still return onamixible, some don't).

We knew that about the servers. It isn't actually them as such, it's
the data centres. Go here
http://www.tippy.co.uk/google-datacenter-check/
and run a check for your weird word.

BB
--
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/nacht...lphin-box.html
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/arman...ttle-kiss.html
http://www.crystal-liaison.com/lladr...-topper-l.html

"sandy" <Sandy.Pittendrigh (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

All those pages are now indexed. Google clearly has
a lower bound on text, below which they don't bother to
index. Further, it doesn't seem to matter that much what the

I doubt if this is true. I have a page with very little text, and it got
indexed. It still has little text, but maybe the anchor text etc. all over
the place is enough. But still, I doubt this conclusion.

http://www.google.com/search?q=jim%20hacking

(#2 and #3 here).


--
John Need help with SEO? Get started with a SEO report of your site:

--> http://johnbokma.com/websitedesign/seo-expert-help.html

I doubt if this is true. I have a page with very little text, and it got
indexed. It still has little text, but maybe the anchor text etc. all over
the place is enough. But still, I doubt this conclusion.

Well maybe my conclusion was faulty. But I did make those changes,
and then (seemingly suddenly) those pages started to appear
in Google searches, when they didn't before.