|Search for recipes!||Kelly F||2/24/11 3:39 PM|
Hello there Google Search users!
Do you love to cook? Are you a die hard Google searcher? Then today's your lucky day because now Google Search offers a Recipes mode on the sidebar of the results page. Not only that, but you can narrow your results by ingredient, cook time, and calories. Give it a shot and then let me know how it goes by posting here or sending a tweet to @kelly_fee.
Check out www.google.com/landing/recipes for more info.
Let the cooking begin!
|Re: Search for recipes!||Thomas P.||2/24/11 8:52 PM|
And for those to lazy to cook, there's: http://www.google.com/hotpot ;-)
|Re: Search for recipes!||petejohnson1940||2/25/11 4:44 PM|
This is self-serving, but it's driving me crazy. We publish a site http://svkitchen.com with original sous vide recipes for the home cook, at least one fresh recipe each week. We've been diligently publishing for eight or nine months -- nearly 50 recipes -- and our pageviews are slowly but steadily increasing. But Google search ranks us very low. In fact, the new Recipes feature does not list us in three pages of results for the search sous vide home. On a general Google search for sous vide recipes we show up on page eight, well behind some sites with one or two three-year-old recipes.
Sous vide cooks need recipes. There are few useful publications available so far, and we are a prime source of new ideas for water over cooking. Every one of our recipes is tested by multiple cooks and our photography is quite delicious..
We're a bit anemic in terms of links from other sites, perhaps because we're hard to find, but otherwise I think we qualify as a first-class search result. Aside from maintaining our publishing quality, how can we get Google to agree?
|Re: Search for recipes!||Thomas P.||2/26/11 9:30 AM|
Any general ranking issue with your website is better served by asking in the WebMaster Forum.
Located here: http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters?hl=en
If/When posting there and also asking about this new introduced Google Recipes search (integrated into Google WebSearch), then please do include a reference (an URL) to this thread, since not everybody in the WebMaster's Forum may be fully aware about this new feature with Google WebSearch.
|Re: Search for recipes!||meathead||3/2/11 9:15 AM|
I see the recipe search item in the left column on my iPad. I also see it on the latest version of Firefox for Mac. But it does not appear on the left of my latest version of Safari. Any idea why?
|Re: Search for recipes!||meathead||3/2/11 9:21 AM|
Google "BBQ ribs". My site, amazingribs.com is #1 and my recipe #2. Click the Recipe Search button. Even though my recipe was microformatted about a week ago and it passed the Google validator, it is not in the recipe search. If I am good enough to be #1 and 2 prior to recipe search, why am I nowhere to be found after?
|Re: Search for recipes!||meathead||3/9/11 12:09 PM|
I have written about Google's new Recipe Search and I plan to post it in my popular column on HuffingtonPost on 3/10. Is it possible for you to review it and make sure it is factual ASAP?
|Re: Search for recipes!||Kelly F||3/9/11 1:32 PM|
The best place for you to get feedback on your article is in the Webmaster Help Forum. Just click the link below and you can interact with the community there. Good luck!
|Re: Search for recipes!||meathead||3/10/11 9:15 AM|
Thanks. I have published a version of the article today on Huffington Post:
Sure be great to have somebody official at Google tell this amateur if I got it right...
|Re: Search for recipes!||Trey||3/24/11 1:48 PM|
I am (*still*) unable to see the Recipe logo or mode on the sidebar in my google search results at my computer at work. Yes, I am expanding it, and yes I am searching for food ingredients ("ground turkey"). I am able to see it on my Chrome OS laptop, but not on my computer that I use at work (using Chrome, which I updated about 2 days ago.) Any remedy?
|Re: Search for recipes!||innoabrd||3/24/11 9:48 PM|
An excellent essay on the problems with Google's recipe function by Amanda Hesser of the NY Times and food52.com. Hope someone from Google takes note!
|Re: Search for recipes!||bellabruno||3/27/11 7:03 PM|
I tried your recipe search. It is very limited.
I normally search on bing with name of item and any specific ingredients I want. This returns lots of results but the google recipe search brings back very few.
- On google recipe search "spicy meatballs kalamata beef" gets no results
-On bing same search gets 39,000 recipes
-On google non recipe search 35,000 recipes
Whats the point?????
What a waste of time
|Re: Search for recipes!||jordan.boughrum||3/27/11 9:44 PM|
I hope you are able to read this artilce: http://www.food52.com/blog/1838_googles_new_recipe_search, as well as this one http://www.huffingtonpost.com/craig-goldwyn/food-bloggers-how-to-get-_b_833635.html.
While this is an exciting endeavor it also seems that it will push out us smaller than big corporation operations.
|Re: Search for recipes!||daveleb||4/1/11 2:55 AM|
Hi Kelly: I left some thoughts at the Food52.com post and wanted to add that I did a search for myself (by my name) on the Google Recipe Search and it yielded 3100 results. However not one of them led to my site or even the original recipe at my site. They were mostly large corporate websites where people had posted my recipes, or scrapers and sites reposting my content word-for-word.
I don't think that this serves the quality of search engine results, and wonder why my recipes (when I write them) don't fit Google's criterion, but when someone poaches them, they show up? I would really like an answer to that one. It does not seem logical nor does it seem to be the intent of the Google Recipe Search. I would imagine the search is intended to yield quality results, not content poachers.
(I've written to a few of them. A couple of the sites told me "too bad" and one complied. But I simply don't have time to file DMCA notices.)
I would love an explanation of how it is a beneficial thing to exclude the sites where the original recipe appears, and instead feature sites that are poaching content?