Take a look at a pretty competitive term on Google:
online poker
Scan through and see which one stands out a little.
Got it?
VictoriasSecret.com: The Official Site of Victoria’s Secret
Victoria’s Secret - Shop the world’s most glamourous bras, sexy sleepwear, lingerie
and swimwear. Women’s fashion clothing and apparel, shoes, cosmetics, …
www.victoriassecret.com/ - 31k - 27 Jul 2005 - Cached - Similar pages
So how the hell can VS rank for that when they dont even mention the term on page. Then in the back of my mind I remember a viral game that they launched:
http://www.threadwatch.org/node/3129
Well those sneaky (or accidently sneaky) folks at VS now have a meta Refresh from the “link loved” page straight to their main page.
So what does this tell me, either Google is shit with relevancy OR they can’t handle meta refreshes.
both options are not good imho
7 Comments
-
1
29th July 2005 @ 14:51
-
2
I see what you mean Thomas and I agree it is better than listing the page that that the refresh came from. But clearly something is wrong with this scenario, VS should not rank for “online poker” with that web page as it is.
The page that should be competing for the serp should be the pinkpantypoker.com site, which on its merits should not rank cos it aint what it claims to be, since the content and refresh has been altered.
So if google can by definition, can handle meta refreshes that leaves the other option!
29th July 2005 @ 15:04
-
3
I agree with you Thomas, but something is very wrong with this. VS should not rank for that term, not with that site.
The site that should be competing for the rank is pinkpantypoker.com but it is no longer in existance.
So if by definition google can handle metas correct then that leaves the other option as per the title, as lingerie, nice as it is has nowt to do with poker (maybe strip poker:-) )
29th July 2005 @ 15:12
-
4
Suggestion for Google: if a meta refresh is found, the page with the refresh on it should be dumped from the index and the page it points to should be re-spidered and re-indexed.
29th July 2005 @ 21:07
-
5
Google have done some strange things with redirects and META refreshes, but I think this is the right treatment.
Google use backlinks, and in that context it makes sense for Victoria’s Secret to come high for poker - given their pantypoker campaign.
Oh my goodness; I agree with Thomas.
Calum
Avid davidnaylor.co.uk reader.2nd August 2005 @ 17:12
-
6
okay……but the relavence is shite then
9th August 2005 @ 12:44
-
7
google is going down with theier algorithm , everytome they face new problem with their search engine
31st January 2008 @ 23:31
Copyright © 2004 - 2009 David Naylor. All rights reserved |
Isn’t this the way a meta-refresh should work? Google lists the page the meta-refresh goes to now. In the past they sometimes listed the page the meta-refresh came from = hijacking. Imho redirecting-wise everything is perfect, except that the relevancy is questionable.