|ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/23/12 11:00 PM|
I have read the FAQs and checked for similar issues:
My site's URL (web address) is: www.MadisonArtShop.com
My retail website has always come up nicely for the search-term "art supplies" since 2002. It is what we do. We do sell and show one of the web's largest selection's of art supplies. Our visitors tell us daily how they enjoy our presentation and explanation of our art supply products.
Why have we recently been removed from listing for this search term?
I have researched Google's terms and conditions and can guarantee you we have never violated any of these terms and conditions.
Someone told me his opinion, that this is due to the fact that most outside links to our site are text-links for this term "art supplies". Well, that is actually all natural. We never solicit links (That is why we have so few...) Obviously they are linking to us as an authority on this term. Is that a bad thing?
A staff member did produce for us a page of the 20 most famous paintings of all times http://www.madisonartshop.com/20-most-famous-paintings-of-all-time.html for our artists-vistors enjoyment. This seems to be quite popular out there. Is this not good in the eyes of Goggle for some reason.
I would appreciate anyone's advice on this matter.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||Grandmaster Flash||5/23/12 11:23 PM|
You have a nice looking site and I mean that.
Just to get it out of the way, the following does violate Webmaster Guidelines: http://www.madisonartshop.com/addurllex.html (pretty easy to detect) but I'm not going to jump to conclusions that this is the sole root of your issues.
Did you receive any recent warnings in Webmaster Tools?
How about traffic, other terms still performing or did you see a drop across the board?
I did find pages indexed that are now a 404 such as: http://www.madisonartshop.com/childrens-height.html & http://www.madisonartshop.com/task-blue.html & http://www.madisonartshop.com/cordless-eraser.html seems odd to find so many at random in the index. Could it be you have a higher than normal number of recently discontinued products? Google will normally drop 404 pages after they have been crawled a couple times.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||StevieD_Web||5/23/12 11:36 PM|
a real business for a change.
I checked your page:
and was impressed to see goods in stock.
I wasn't impressed by the load time:
10+ seconds. 41/68 scores
Failed to serve scaled images.
Failed to specify image dimensions
These are quality (or lack thereof) signals to Google.
You have 8000+ pages indexed by Google.
How many pages are in the site? I don't know for sure because I am running Xenu on your site, but it is screaming red from broken links and redirects.
Broken links and redirects are not good. Especially not good when your key search query:
is in a field of endeavor where the competition is fierce, large and well funded to the tune of millions and even billions of dollars.
Your site blinks ever so slightly and Google has LOTS and I mean LOTS of competition from which to choose from.
Broken Links, redirected pages. Monster slow loading pages. Link exchanges (http://www.madisonartshop.com/addurllex.html) tsk tsk tsk
Yes, the site is going to take a hit.
I would start with downloading Xenu and fixing the site wide broken links and redirects.
Obviously remove the link exchange and encourage those who may be of questionable value linking to you to remove their back links would be a big priority.
Fix your image issues.
and then tackle the redundant and nearly duplicated page titles (like I said, run Xenu.... you will see what I see).
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||Phil Payne||5/23/12 11:44 PM|
"No store-id passed to the loader script"
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/23/12 11:46 PM|
Wow, Penguin! I had long forgotten about that http://www.madisonartshop.com/addurllex.html! I haven't seen that page in many years. How did you ever find that? I just deleted it.
No, I did not se any warnings.
I cannot open those 404 pages you cite. We had the bad habit of "cutting" discontinued product pages instead of deleting them. How do I find a list of these indexed pages that are now 404 and how do I remove them?
Thank you so much!
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||Phil Payne||5/23/12 11:50 PM|
What about http://link38.socialbookmrkingsite.info/Shopping/Visual_Arts/ ?
Pure crap - limousine hire two entries below you.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/24/12 12:19 AM|
Thank you, Stevie!
Yes we work hard and everything showing in-stock is in stock.
You probably see this a Yahoo! Store. Not sure if I should mention that here :)
We just did a full upgrade from our Yahoo! Legacy Store to their current version V3, which required a full wipe of our old code to brand new coding so it is perfectly clean and smooth. I do not know how it could be faster?
I will check on how many pages in the site. We have over 12,000 items. However, that includes multiple items on single pages.
You also found that very old hapless try at link-exchange from a decade ago. I deleted that now.
How do I find those broken-links and redirects? Xenu sounds like a lot of work. I will get on it.
Was that literal? What do you mean?
>>Fix your image issues.<<
What is that?
I will get to work on my redundant and nearly duplicated page titles.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/24/12 12:21 AM|
Thank you, Phil.
Where do you see this, and how do I fix it?
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/24/12 12:22 AM|
Hmmph. I emailed them to remove my link.
What else can I do?
This is an amazing forum!
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||1918 (deprecated)||5/24/12 6:21 AM|
My guess would be that you are "over optimized" for the term "art supplies". Looking at the top results for that term show that the top 3 results have 26,24 and 30 unique domains pointing at them using the anchor text "art supplies". Your site has 125 unique domains pointing at you with that very specific and optimized anchor text. To Google that makes you look like an outlier. My suggestion would be to contact the site that you got those links from and ask them to either change the anchor text to branded, nofollow them or just remove them. Once that is done you can submit a reconsideration request to Google.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||StevieD_Web||5/24/12 4:57 PM|
Read the GTmetrix test page that I performed for your site.
The how to is attached to each section.
Google says 8000+ indexed. Is that close to your own # ?
Good. You will need to wait out the penalty attached to the link-exchange.
BTW, industry links (ie your suppliers) are editorial controlled links. So are your links back to your suppliers. So would be a link from the local chamber of commerce etc.
Link "exchanges" between honest trading partners are expected and encouraged. So long as they demonstrate editorially control. Thus Ford, Apple or your brush manufacturer can link to all of their dealers and visa-verse and there are no problems with those links. It when you accept and give links to any Tom, Dick or Harry that you get in trouble.
It is one scary looking website. But that is the Xenu home page.
Here is the wikipedia link:
and some good destruction's:
I will say that I have ran Xenu on sites with 1 million+ pages. Took a while. But it just plain works.
When generating the report, if you have a lot of broken links then I suggest you don't have a site map generated until you have churned through and repaired a lot of the broken links.
Your site is competing against some of the biggest players in retail. Amazon plays in your sandbox. Michael's, with their 1000+ stores and $500 million IPO is your direct competition. Some of the specialty firms are so entrenched that nobody is going to ever mess with them. And there are tons of vendors who overlap with you.... all of whom have annual sales of well over 1 billion.
You sneeze, fart, blink, squirt, stop for a potty break and these guys will run you over. If your website is slow to load or has issues.... Google can and will easily pick somebody else to rank before you because there are 1000 options and some of them are hugely well respected.
See GTmetrix report. We can discuss each one after you have read the report.
For starters, your images on the about page have not been resampled. Also might be termed "saved for the web". The image is 958 KB in size. Physically it is 2048x1536. On the website though it shows up as <img src="http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/madisonartshop/warehouse001.jpg" width="384" height="288"> (384x288).
The entire data set is being loaded, yet the image is only taking up 384x288 display space.
Running GTmetrix on the about page:
you scored 41/69
the 8 images on page (the one I specified plus the other 7) together could be reduced in size by 5.9 MB (96%).
You need to resample these images. If done if in the site developer, it should be labelled resampling or save/compress for the web. If done in Photoshop/Paint Shop then there is a similar setting.
Yep. That too.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/24/12 11:31 PM|
This is my programmer's response:
"No store-id passed to the loader script? Never heard this. It's definitely not a "standard" error you would get from a browser ."
What and where is this error message?
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/24/12 11:35 PM|
Which site gave me these 125 unique links?
That means change the anchor text to: www.MadisonArtShop.com?
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/24/12 11:47 PM|
"Not sure what you are asking... If you delete a page, you do get to the 404 page, and yes, google will remove those from the index."
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/25/12 12:04 AM|
My programmer says it is only the info page that is slow, and that one slow page shouldn't effect the whole site's rankings:
"Ok, that info page is really bad, he is right about that, because you have those humongous images in the caption and they are resized using html. That means that all those large images have to be downloaded fully before they are displayed in that size. How would you like to handle this? Turn them into a gallery of sort, where you can click the image to bring it up larger? (as a side note, this page is probably not very important for seo though...)
As for the broken links or redirects, I seriously don't see any. I'm running that Xenu tool right now to see what it comes up with"
Do you agree?
Should I fix the info page images to speed up that one page/
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/25/12 1:07 AM|
Is it only that one info page with the slow load speed/ i can ignore that one page, right?
As for the redundant and nearly duplicated page titles, how do i pull up a list of pages and recommendations?
Would you like to fix all this?
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||Phil Payne||5/25/12 3:31 AM|
> "Not sure what you are asking... If you delete a page, you do get to the 404 page, and yes, google will remove those from the index."
Tell your programmer to read the explanation of the 404 server response in RFC 2616. Carefully. The response code to get a page removed is 410.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||StevieD_Web||5/25/12 9:18 AM|
the entire site is slow, the about page is worse than others.
slow is a symptom of a bigger problem and is also a quality signal (lack thereof), especially as to the reasons the page is slow.
While a "slow" page is not going to get you zapped, the causes (FSID for example) will be an issue.
This is especially true if your competition (all 1000+ of them) don't share the same problems.
resample the images. What site platform and/or graphics processor are you using?
what did the report show?
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||1918 (deprecated)||5/25/12 12:04 PM|
This is a link to Open Site Explorer showing the 125 domains linking back to your site with the anchor text "art supplies"
The easiest and most effective way to clean up your mess is to change the link to nofollow or to just remove it.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/25/12 4:24 PM|
Yes, some of my competitors are 500 lb.gorillas...
I am on the Yahoo! Store platform.
I am asking my programmer the rest.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/25/12 4:41 PM|
How do I fix rthis? Contact them one at a time? Ask them to change anchor text to: www.MadisonArtShop.com, or better to nofollow or delete?
If you do this type of SEO work please contact me.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||StevieD_Web||5/25/12 6:53 PM|
>Ask them to change anchor text to: www.MadisonArtShop.com, or better to nofollow or delete?
yes to all. If the link is good (ie a great site, such as the NYT or a manufacturer link) then I would request the url or business name.
If is a ho-hum site that has some goofy/flaky questions about it, then the nofollow request is appropriate.
If the site is just plan trash, the delete request is appropriate.
none of the stuff we are suggesting is beyond your abilities. And outsourcing to strangers is not always in your best interest. If you have to outsource, I would choose somebody local so that I could have face-to-face meetings about your wants/needs/goals.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/28/12 9:52 PM|
This is my programmer's reply:
"...we have no control over server settings like that in yahoo [Store]. If you delete a page from yahoo, it returns a 404 like (I'm pretty sure) it should. But that's beside the point; we can't control server response codes on yahoo."
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/28/12 10:41 PM|
Thanks Again, Stevie.
Do you or does anyone have a good form letter to request the anchor-text change, or nofollow or deletion of link request? omething strong-worded enough that it will not be ignored?
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/28/12 11:54 PM|
My programmer ran Xenu and sent me this:
>>"There are 37 broken links, all of which are links you entered into various caption areas. I can send you a list, these you can only fix by manually editing those pages and fixing the links by hand. And moving forward, just make sure when you enter a hyperlink manually the hyperlink is tested and it works.
It also listed the home link in the breadcrumbs as permanently redirected, which really isn't an error at all, but I'll fix that up for you when the publish is done.
No other errors were listed."<<
Is this what you are seeing? This is causing my problems?
In any case I am fixing these.
(I am running Xenu now. Been an hour or so, and not finished, but no errors or red yet.)
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||ѕquibble||5/29/12 12:36 AM|
A 404 response is perfectly fine for deleted pages, there is no need to change to 410 as google treats both the same anyway.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||StevieD_Web||5/29/12 9:05 AM|
Yes, this is one of many problems.
as I previously stated:
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||Phil Payne||5/29/12 9:17 AM|
> A 404 response is perfectly fine for deleted pages, there is no need to change to 410 as google treats both the same anyway.That's actually an argument I won earlier - Google conforms to RFC 2616:
(Actually it always did conform to RFC 2616, but that's a much longer story.)
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||ѕquibble||5/29/12 9:38 AM|
Google treats 404 and 410 the same >
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||Phil Payne||5/29/12 1:01 PM|
Susan Moskwa is wrong.
The top line in my Webmaster Tools 'URL errors' right now is:
The renamed version was first archived on 18 March 2010. It hasn't been archived since because it hasn't changed:
Among the pages Google claims to have found the URL on is http://www.isham-research.co.uk/drummer_jokes.html - use the Wayback Machine and you'll see I made the same underscore-to-hyphen change at the same time and http://www.isham-research.co.uk/drummer_jokes.html - which has an experimental zero meta refresh on it - hasn't had ANY URLs on it for five years at least. The Googlebot may have picked up old references out in the wild, but not from that page.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||ѕquibble||5/29/12 1:46 PM|
No, Google is not wrong. You are wrong. Please stop misleading users.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/30/12 10:54 PM|
An SEO friend said that asking those sites to remove their links would be shooting myself in the foot. He says that "negative linking" - having to many links disappear is also viewed by google as manipulating links and is illegal. This may be true even asking them to change the anchor-texts.
As for the rest, he doesn't believe it is the cause of my problem, however, may help to fix.
What do you and the rest of forum say to this? Should I request those sites to remove their links, change the anchor texts or leave it as is and suffer with it but not do more harm?
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||5/30/12 10:57 PM|
I get what you are saying. Leaving gogle for 5 years with a link that 404s does not sound healthy.
However, Susan Moskwa does work for Google and posted on google's own blog not to worry about it. How can you say she is wrong?
In any case, my guess is that google is coming back for these 404's because of my own 37 broken links. I'l clean up my broken links, hopefully tonight, and that will solve both issues, right? Do you see more 404's than my own broken links?
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||ѕquibble||5/31/12 12:29 AM|
I would question more the thoughts of your seo friend regarding removing links. I have never heard that having too many links disappear is viewed as illegal and manipulating. If you do have spammy links pointing to your site which you have placed, then it is best that you arrange for the removal.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JohnMu||5/31/12 3:25 AM|
I just want to drop a short note regarding 404 vs 410.
Edited: In the meantime, we do treat 410s slightly differently than 404s. In particular, when we see a 404 HTTP result code, we'll want to confirm that before dropping the URL out of our search results. Using a 410 HTTP result code can help to speed that up. In practice, the time difference is just a matter of a few days, so it's not critical to return a 410 HTTP result code for URLs that are permanently removed from your website, returning a 404 is fine for that.
Sharon, it looks like you're working on the right things already :). In particular, it looks like our algorithms may be treating some links to your site differently than they may have been treated in the past. If you're aware of unnatural links to your site - in particular, links that are against our Webmaster Guidelines - then I'd recommend working on having those links removed. If you find issues like that which you can resolve, then I'd recommend submitting a reconsideration request after resolving those issues. If you find that there are issues which you can't resolve at all, then I'd recommend documenting those issues and the work that you have done to have them resolved (eg in a Google Spreadsheet) and submitting it with your reconsideration request.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JohnMu||5/31/12 2:44 PM|
Upon double-checking (always a good idea, right? :)), it looks like I was wrong -- we are now treating 410s slightly differently than 404s. In particular, as I mentioned above, when we see a 404 we'll sometimes want to confirm it to make sure that it's a permanent removal. With a 410 HTTP result code, we don't need to do that. In practice, for most sites, the difference will be minimal. When a URL returns 410, we might still crawl it from time to time though, just to make sure that it's still returning a 404/410. If you can't serve a 410 HTTP result code, then that's fine -- this is not critical.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||6/3/12 5:33 PM|
Thank you, John.
Sharon & I will continue working on these.
I was told that Yahoo! Store does not have an option to 410 urls, only 404s.
I am still being advised that Google does not appreciate requesting back-links be removed. However, I will try with at least a few.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||Grandmaster Flash||6/3/12 8:23 PM|
"I am still being advised that Google does not appreciate requesting back-links be removed."
That sounds like a frightening piece of advice, I hope there are conditions associated with that statement. If Google has identified an un-natural link, nothing but good can come from its removal.
Those who disagree with me typically seem to think that removing a link is admission of guilt.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||StevieD_Web||6/3/12 10:13 PM|
>I am still being advised that Google does not appreciate requesting back-links be removed. However, I will try with at least a few.
Stop and think for a moment.... what motivation/reasoning/logic is behind your friend's declaration?
Is your friend the person who attained the links? Is your friend a competitor? Is your friend reading "SEO for Idiots" circa 1999 ?
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JohnMu||6/4/12 12:44 AM|
Regarding: "I am still being advised that Google does not appreciate requesting back-links be removed. However, I will try with at least a few." - I can assure you that our algorithms (and manual reviews) definitely appreciate the removal of any known, Pagerank-passing, unnatural links to your site. If you're aware of issues around our Webmaster Guidelines that you can resolve, I'd definitely work to resolve them as much as possible.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||ѕquibble||6/4/12 4:22 AM|
re >> I was told that Yahoo! Store does not have an option to 410 urls, only 404s. ""
And it does not matter if your pages return a 404 instead of a 410. To suggest that it does matter and lead site owners to make changes that may cost money and will cost time is mischief.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||6/5/12 11:07 PM|
Angry & John,
My understanding of the rational behind not requesting removal of those links, is that any link change by request, to add or remove, is "unnatural".
These links I am dealing with are actually natural, as far as I know.
However, they may be directory links that were submitted by IMHO a rather poor SEO firm. - The only one I ever hired was Mat Sila at Dream Systems Media. I expressly told him not to violate any google guidlines, which he agreed to do calling it "100% white-hat". I believe he applied to directories with the same anchor-text causing this problem of my being over-optimized for this keyword. I have since contacted Mat and his team about this. But they do not respond.
Angry Pengin, my friend who advised not to request removal is not the one who caused these links, is not a competitor and seems to have an understanding of these issues. 2 others in this field agreed with him. One told me that she knows many who tried to request removal of bad links and that hurt thier rankings even more.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||Phil Payne||6/6/12 1:44 AM|
> No, Google is not wrong. You are wrong. Please stop misleading users.I will not bother waiting for your apology.
But in general - I much prefer analysing a company's performance by watching it rather than listening to it. The same applies to small domain farms - three today already.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||ѕquibble||6/6/12 5:13 AM|
Apology ? There are tens of thousands of users that you have misled over the years which you should be apologising to. And people who post in this forum for the first time are unaware of your history of lies, fud, incompetence and total lack of proper experience.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||6/7/12 10:51 PM|
>> I don't see the redundant page-title issue. Your page titles are the "name" values, and those are typically unique per page.<<
My programmer responded to this:
" I don't see the redundant page-title issue. Your page titles are the "name" values, and those are typically unique per page."
I don't see it either in the Xenu report I ran. Where do you see it in the Xenu report?
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||StevieD_Web||6/7/12 11:54 PM|
as your programmer stated " those are typically unique per page"
Typically isn't good enough.
My original statement: redundant and nearly duplicated page titles
doing a quickie run through I found this these
Jack Richeson & Co. Inc. Kolinsky Sable Oil Brush, Filbert
Jack Richeson & Co. Inc. Kolinsky Sable Oil Brush, Filbert
Jack Richeson & Co. Inc. Kolinsky Sable Oil Brush, Filbert
Single Door Unit - Wall Mounted Cabinet
Single Door Unit - Wall Mounted Cabinet-6
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||6/9/12 10:56 PM|
I found pages with different sizes:
Jack Richeson & Co. Inc. Kolinsky Sable Oil Brush, Filbert, Size 20
Jack Richeson & Co. Inc. Kolinsky Sable Oil Brush, Filbert, Size 16
What am I supposed to do, combine these and do the sizes as options?
As it is i am getting top 3 rankings on a search for "Jack Richeson & Co. Inc. Kolinsky Sable Oil Brush, Filbert"
They are different sizes.
Where do you any page titled: "Computer Desk"?
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||StevieD_Web||6/9/12 11:41 PM|
I would add sku or order numbers as the first option to differing the page titles, with the sku number being written first rather than following the rest of the description
same with alt image titles...... anything you can add to the description to enhance/differentiate the image (and thus the page) from another one is in your best interest.
Speaking of best interest.......
started running Xenu again on the site...... Lots of red. in fact 23528 broken & redirected links found by Xenu
broken and redirected links are some of the easiest errors to address and they haven't been.
1) Fix the easy broken links (hint, hint all your social media links are being redirect.... use the correct url will solve about 20,000 of those 23528 broken and redirected links.)
2) Fix the broken and redirected internal links
3) Fix the outbound redirected and broken links (ie to the shopping cart)
4) Then tackle the page specific issues (speed, titles etc)
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||6/12/12 10:48 PM|
My webmaster replied to your comments:
>>"The last report I sent you was the most recent and it had almost no broken links, so I'm not sure what he is referring to...
"No, the social buttons are always generated as iframes, so they are notredirects. The add to cart buttons are subbmit buttons to the cart page,
and they are not redirects either."<<
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||StevieD_Web||6/13/12 2:54 PM|
Your site is not doing well. I expressed my opinion.
Your "webmaster" claims "it had almost no broken links" . I am finding broken links, which are a true quality signal because lazy webmasters don't want to fix the links. Now, it seems your webmaster is defending the practice of allowing broken links to exist with the comment "it had almost no broken links". To me that sounds like a webmaster using the work day to go fishing or take 3 hour lunches rather than performing repairs in the best interest of the client or employer.
As to the redirect issues. I really don't give a hoot if the buttons are generated in iframes. Xenu is able to find them as redirects and I suspect Google will do the same. In fact Google is reading more and more content that webmasters are trying to hide behind creative scripts. Hide. Not a good thing.
As with the broken links, the webmaster is choosing to ignore the issues. So be it. It is a choice the webmaster made. But I believe it is the wrong choice. And the long term does not bode well for your website when your webmaster would rather defend the existence of the error rather than taking 1 minute of time to make a single change to a site wide link.
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||7/14/12 8:06 PM|
I have sent this to my webmaster to fix the redirects on my socials and add-to-carts.
Where do you see this on Xenu? Xenu for me shows broken links, redirects and orphans, not redundantcys. How do you see that?
|Re: ranking for "art supplies"||JackMadison||9/5/12 2:12 AM|
How does he get away with this?
(go to with out broken spaces.)
He advertises recipricols?