Google Still Cant Deal with Meta Refresh (or they are shit?)

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

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • Live
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Technorati

7 Comments | Leave a comment »

  1. 1. ThomasB | July 29th 2005 @ 2:51 pm

    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.

  2. 2. ukgimp | July 29th 2005 @ 3:04 pm

    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!

  3. 3. ukgimp | July 29th 2005 @ 3:12 pm

    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:-) )

  4. 4. volatilegx | July 29th 2005 @ 9:07 pm

    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.

  5. 5. Calum I Mac Leod | August 2nd 2005 @ 5:12 pm

    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.

  6. 6. ukgimp | August 9th 2005 @ 12:44 pm

    okay……but the relavence is shite then :-)

  7. 7. Mylo | January 31st 2008 @ 11:31 pm

    google is going down with theier algorithm , everytome they face new problem with their search engine

Leave a Reply

required

required, hidden

smx

Start with £50 credit in your new Yahoo! Search Marketing account for a limited period only.

+ Advertise Here