Search Results

Search found 26158 results on 1047 pages for 'google panda algorithm'.

Page 87/1047 | < Previous Page | 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94  | Next Page >

• Is hiding content with JavaScript or "text-indent: -9999px" bad for SEO?

  - by Samuel

  So apparently hiding content using "display: none" is bad for SEO and seen by googlebot as being deceptive. This according to a lot of the posts I read online and questions even on this site. But what if I hide keyword rich text using javascript? A jquery example: $(function() { $('#keywordRichTextContainer').hide(); }); or using visibility hidden: $(function() { $('#keywordRichTextContainer').css({ visibility: 'hidden', position: 'absolute' }); }); Would any of these techniques cause my site to be penalized? If googlebot can't read javascript then if I'm hiding through js it shouldn't know right? What about using "text-indent: -9999px"?

  Read the article

• How do I get google to see keywords on a one page web application site?

  - by David

  I'm going to have to link to the web site to explain this, http://www.diagram.ly, it's a free service, so I hope this doesn't break advertising rules. Basically, it's a one page web application, I don't want to create a web site for it. Some background text loads and if JavaScript is enabled, the web application itself then loads. The problem is that Google only seems to be picking up the title of the page and the text on the footer, so the site only appear on Google search for very limited text (based on the title and meta description mostly). I was hoping that search engines would pick up on the background text and index that. The text is factual, not keyword stuffed. Yahoo seems to pick up the text, just not Google. Does anyone have any experience of how Google would view such a site and where I could put the text for a better result? Edit I should mention that Google Webmaster Tools lists the site keywords as "Component, diagramly, feed, mxgraph, share and twitter". Basically the footer and little else.

  Read the article

• Is it true that the Google Spider gives the most relevance of a search result to the first 68 characters of the <title>?

  - by leeand00

  I am reading documentation about my CMS and it states that an HTML page <title> tag is really important in SEO. It states that the Google Spider gives the most relevance to the first 68 characters of a site title. (68 characters being the number of characters that Google will display in it's search engine result pages,) Can anyone verify this is still true? I read in The Information Diet that content farms were getting too good at gaming Google's algorithm for collecting and posting SERPs and so google had to change the search algorithm.

  Read the article

• Migrating from a wordpress.com to wordpress.org blog without harming SEO

  - by kikio

  I've had a Wordpress.com weblog for 3 years. And its pages have a good pagerank and are shown in first search results pages. Because of the limitations, I should migrate to my own WordPress. How to migrate safely with the minimum SEO problems? (I know how to export content in wordpress.com and import it to a new wordpress.org blog.) Note 1: links structure and site design are different on the new wordpress blog. (I don't like wordpress.com links structure :| ) Note 2: as you know, it's not possible to edit .htaccess file on wordpress.com. so I can't use 301 redirects.

  Read the article

• Google Web Fonts v2 propose de nouvelles polices de caractères facilement intégrables dans les sites Web

  Google Web Fonts v2 propose de nouvelles polices de caractères Facilement intégrables dans les sites Web Après la présentation de son nouveau réseau social Google +, et la mise à jour de l'interface utilisateur de son moteur de recherche, Google a procédé à une mise a jour de son API Google Fonts et du répertoire de polices Web Google Web Fonts. Disponible désormais en version finale, Google Web Fonts v2 intègre de nouvelles polices de caractères Web ainsi qu'une nouvelle interface permettant de visualiser rapidement les rendus sur des phrases. Par...

  Read the article

• The sharp decline Statistics of website

  - by Erfan Safarpoor

  My website has had 10 months ago, the statistics are very high. Very high ... But after 10 days of server failure, Marm was 20 times less. I got lost for a long time without making a mistake, do ... I am the source of links that they've hired a writer to pen the final results are seen. But a strange thing: Approximately every two months and was hit again 20 more times and then low again after 10 days! my website url : www.sooran.com (food.sooran.com)

  Read the article

• Why does Google Search Engine reject my title tag's change?

  - by Michal P.

  I made a simple webpage http://pundaquitboat.michaelspages.com/ giving it the the title tag "Boat – Pundaquit" and I have submitted it to Google bot by Google Webmaster Tools. Then I decided to change the title to "Anawangin trip" of the same page and I submited my webpage again in the same way to Google bot. The result was that the new title of my webpage coexisted with the old title of the same webpage in SERPs for maybe 2 days. After that the new title was rejected and if I enter site:pundaquitboat.michaelspages.com/ I can see that Google has my old copy of my webpage with old title in its database. This problem doesn't occur in Bing when I can enjoy high position of "Anawangin trip" phrase. (In Bing I haven't submitted the old version of title.)

  Read the article

• Google Apps Sync bloated PST file to 14GB

  - by James S

  Back story: I have Outlook connected to my Google Apps email and noticed that some mail never got migrated from my original PST file. I found some VBA code online that compares mail in different PST folders, modified it to find missing and copy those to the target folder. I ran it folder by folder and moved missing mail. Before the exercise the Google Apps PST was about ~4GB and after it was ~4.7GB. Problem: I left Outlook open so Google Sync can copy it online. 24 hours later the Google Apps PST file bloated to 14GB+ and none of the mail has been synced to the cloud. I know that there should be at most ~5GB of mail. Why is the rest of the space being taken up? Funny thing is Gmail shows 3GB as being used online. What I tried: I emptied the deleted items folder and recycling bin I've run Outlook compact PST and it didn't work. I tried SCANPST.exe on the PST and it didn't work. I re-ran compact PST and it didn't work (after SCANPST found and fixed a few errors) Any ideas out there on what caused the problem and how to solve it?

  Read the article

• Why does Google mark one e-mail as spam while does not the other?

  - by nKn

  I've a Postfix installation which works fine, I don't get any trouble with mails sent through a mail client (in my case, Thunderbird or RoundCube) when the To: address is a GMail account. However, I recently needed to use the PHPMailer tool to send some e-mails to some GMail accounts, so I configured an account to be used via SASL authentication + TLS. I don't mean mass mailing, just 2-3 mails. If I send the e-mail from the Thunderbird or RoundCube clients, the mail is not marked as spam. However, if I use PHPMailer, it always gets catalogued as spam. So I compared both headers and I just can't find the reason why the second is marked as spam while the first one is just ok. The first header sent from a mail client which is not marked as spam: Delivered-To: [email protected] Received: by 10.76.153.102 with SMTP id vf6csp230573oab; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 11:08:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.60.23.39 with SMTP id j7mr45544050oef.20.1408471699715; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 11:08:19 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <[email protected]> Received: from mail.mydomain.com (X.ip-92-222-X.eu. [92.222.X.X]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t5si27115082oej.10.2014.08.19.11.08.18 for <[email protected]> (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 19 Aug 2014 11:08:19 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of [email protected] designates 92.222.X.X as permitted sender) client-ip=92.222.X.X; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of [email protected] designates 92.222.X.X as permitted sender) [email protected]; dkim=pass (test mode) [email protected] Received: by mail.mydomain.com (Postfix, from userid 111) id D8F69120293D; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 19:08:17 +0100 (BST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mydomain.com; s=mail; t=1408471697; bh=wKMX9gkQ7tCLv8ezrG5t4bICm/SSLQsNfTdZMToksWw=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:From; b=qRNcYVdmk+n3D1uuv0FInTx7/LzH2ojck9DgCmabFPvfke233lkojUOjezCUGx7iV DL8EayZ28mzzzHpB7ETeMzop/5OS3BmvFtGKVD9gzc78cDIFXTDoRFAnkRWDR2IOxI SOn5tiyODTFpkbDgJOndzQ6qL5K0S9ASNGCZrNL4= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on vpsX.ovh.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from [192.168.1.111] (unknown [77.231.X.X]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: [email protected]) by mail.mydomain.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 910341202624 for <[email protected]>; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 19:08:17 +0100 (BST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mydomain.com; s=mail; t=1408471697; bh=wKMX9gkQ7tCLv8ezrG5t4bICm/SSLQsNfTdZMToksWw=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:From; b=qRNcYVdmk+n3D1uuv0FInTx7/LzH2ojck9DgCmabFPvfke233lkojUOjezCUGx7iV DL8EayZ28mzzzHpB7ETeMzop/5OS3BmvFtGKVD9gzc78cDIFXTDoRFAnkRWDR2IOxI SOn5tiyODTFpkbDgJOndzQ6qL5K0S9ASNGCZrNL4= Message-ID: <[email protected]> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 19:08:24 +0100 From: My Name <[email protected]> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: My other account <[email protected]> Subject: . Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit . The second header sent from PHPMailer which is always marked as spam: Delivered-To: [email protected] Received: by 10.76.153.102 with SMTP id vf6csp230832oab; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 11:12:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.60.121.67 with SMTP id li3mr44086252oeb.17.1408471930520; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 11:12:10 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <[email protected]> Received: from mail.mydomain.com (X.ip-92-222-X.eu. [92.222.X.X]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id w8si27103806obn.30.2014.08.19.11.12.10 for <[email protected]> (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 19 Aug 2014 11:12:10 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of [email protected] designates 92.222.X.X as permitted sender) client-ip=92.222.X.X; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of [email protected] designates 92.222.X.X as permitted sender) [email protected]; dkim=pass (test mode) [email protected] Received: by mail.mydomain.com (Postfix, from userid 111) id 1999D120293D; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 19:12:09 +0100 (BST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mydomain.com; s=mail; t=1408471929; bh=N1JuHq1S+8GrjHcEK3xn8P1JS+ygEBv5LKe0BiXuVJo=; h=Date:To:From:Reply-to:Subject:From; b=K7tcPyArzSTY91VEw6mAAFtDurSGwgTLGkfUZdC5mqsg0g/1LzmZkgwdjj4NdJa6M E2kDz3dwYN8FcZmbampJYFXxj4NQVtSnzjiWV40rpfOFqD2rXDGNIyB2QOjBZZ4WK3 7s4lyoJ/BrdQH4en8ctLVsDHed/KpHD4iGFEl67E= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on vpsX.ovh.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from rpi.mydomain.com (unknown [77.231.X.X]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: [email protected]) by mail.mydomain.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B42AF1202624 for <[email protected]>; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 19:12:08 +0100 (BST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mydomain.com; s=mail; t=1408471928; bh=N1JuHq1S+8GrjHcEK3xn8P1JS+ygEBv5LKe0BiXuVJo=; h=Date:To:From:Reply-to:Subject:From; b=iXPM0tS36swudPTT4FOHHtPi5Ll6LbR60kNqCinZ8utcWoFE31SFTpoMEq5aCM5ux wQMdFiN8c6vkjRGabmvqFTTIbwJsrToHo/4+Lt5HEBoQQE2Y3T+xGmnmGAHCS6stKB yb7SVmtrIAsVtSMKA8VYIbmu2oYqV3afYt7g0OMQ= Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 20:12:07 +0200 To: [email protected] From: Trying another account <[email protected]> Reply-to: Trying another account <[email protected]> Subject: . Message-ID: <[email protected]> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: PHPMailer 5.1 (phpmailer.sourceforge.net) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" . I also tried: Adding a User-Agent header to match the first one. Removing the X-Mailer header. No one of them made a difference. Is there some significant difference which is making the second e-mail to be marked as spam by Google?

  Read the article

• Google dévoile Compute Engine, son offre IaaS pour concurrencer Amazon EC 2 et Windows Azure

  Google dévoile Compute Engine son offre IaaS pour concurrencer Amazon EC 2 et Windows Azure Le Google I/O, la conférence annuelle des développeurs Google, est riche en annonces. Après la présentation d'Android 4.1, Google Glass et autres, Google dévoile Compute Engine. Le géant de la recherche fait son entrée dans le Cloud IaaS (Infrastructure as a Service) et vient titiller Amazon avec son offre EC 2. Jusqu'ici connu dans ce domaine pour sa plateforme d'hébergement en ligne App Engine, Google étend son catalogue afin de répondre aux besoins de ses...

  Read the article

• What is more preferable, Creating dedicated domains for mobile apps that shares different content or associate them with folders in one domain?

  - by Abdullah Al-Khalidi

  I want to consult you in an SEO matter which i am completely lost with, I've built a social mobile application that allows users to share text content and made all the content that appears on the application available via the web through dedicated links, however, those links cannot be navigated through the website but they are generated when users shares content through the app to social media networks. I've implemented this method on three applications with totally different content, and I've directed all generated URLs to be from the main company website which is http://frootapps.com so when users shares something, the url will change to http://frootapps.com/qareeb/share.aspx?data=127311. My question, which one is more preferable, a dedicated website for each app that uses such method? or it is ok to keep doing it the same way I am doing it?

  Read the article

• Does Google rate the webpage by amount of visits?

  - by petiar

  Hi there, there is quite extensive discussion about this topic on another website and I am really losing my confidence. The thing is that I claim that the amount (count) of visits is NOT a criteria for increasing the PR of the particular web because: a) Google just doesn't know about every single visit on a webpage (in case it's not using GA) b) Google just would not rate by something what Google actually affects Thanks for your opinions. Peter.

  Read the article

• AdWords test with two different agencies - can I track their results without them being aware of each other

  - by Drew

  Currently going through a process of testing two AdWords ppc providers at the same time from two separate AdWords accounts. However they will require access to my GA account for linking and ecommerce tracking. Which means that they will be able to see each others results. I dont want this; Is it possible to set up GA so that; Company A only sees Adwords results associated to their AdWords management via GA Company B only sees Adwords results associated to their AdWords management via GA And each company never sees the other company's Adwords results? 100 positive karma points to anyone who can shed some light on this. Cheers.

  Read the article

• want to change host account for google app email ?

  - by Sathyam Shivam Sundaram

  I have a standard ( Free ) Google app Email Service , From last 5 Months we are using this service. Our webiste was hosted on the Third Party Web Hosting Company. Nut Now iam planning to change my Web Hositing provider , but i want to keep my domian in the previous Hosting Company. Can Google App Allow this option of changing web hoster for the registred Domain in the Google App for Email Service. Is there any body done this ?

  Read the article

• Punch Line Marketing

  - by jackman

  There are so many "punch line" websites like: http://www.thatswhyyoufail.com www.canrailsscale.com/ www.nooooooooooooooo.com/ but it's a mystery how they ever get so popular. I have an idea for a punch line website too, but I want to make it BIG! Does anyone have any tips for marketing these kinds of sites? p.s. and no, I do not own any of these sites, and am not disguising it as a question to market them lol.

  Read the article

• GA and Unique visitors again

  - by DDEX

  I take care of a company intranet and measure the traffic with GA. I am absolutely sure that there are no more than 5000 URLs in our company and it is impossible to check the intranet from outside the company network. Yet when I check the number of Unique Visitors (UV) in the last year GA says there were 36.500 of them...How is that possible? I thought UV should measure each URL only once in the given time period. Could anybody explain how this actually works? Can it be that the cookie trackers expire after some time and are counted more then once?

  Read the article

• Google: What does a return to PR 'Unranked' mean?

  - by UpTheCreek

  One of my sites is very new (about 3 months). When first launched it's pages had (unsurprisingly) a Google PR of 'Unranked' [From Google toolbar stats, via the firefox SearchStatus plugin]. After a few weeks these changed to PR0. Just recently I noticed that they are showing PR 'Unranked' once more in Google Toolbar. As far as I know I'm following the Google guidelines. Results for the site still seem to be showing for its keywords. What could this mean?

  Read the article

• How exactly is Google Webmaster Tools measuring "Site Performance"?

  - by Rémi

  I've been working for two months now on improving our response time (mainly server side) on a new forum (a brand new product on a technical point of view) we've launched in Germany a few month ago and I'm a lot surprised by the results I get. I monitor our response time using Apache logs and our own implementation of Boomerang beacon. Using my stats, I can see that our new product responds in about 680 ms where our old product was responding in about 1050 ms. On the other side, Google Webmaster Tool tells us that our pages have an average reponse time of about 1500 ms today where it was 700 three months ago with our old product. I've figured that GWT was taking client side metrics into account so I've added some measures on our Boomerang beacon and everything looks just fine. I've also ran some random pages on ySlow and Google's Page Speed and everything looks better than it was before. We event have a 82% on Google's Page Speed tool which is quite cool for a site with some ads in it :) Lately, we have signed a deal with Akamai to use two of their products : CDN for our static files (we were using another CDN before but it wasn't very effective) and RMA to improve Networks routes. We have also introduced a new agressive cache mecanism to ensure that most of the pages served to crawlers are cached by our memcache grid. After checking my metrics, it seems that this changes have improved from 650ms to about 500ms, which is good (still not great but it is definitly an improvement). But webmaster tools continues to report an increasing average response time where we see it decreasing in the same time. Have you ever had the same kind of wierd behavior on your sites while doing performance improvements ? Do you have any idea how to monitor the same thing Google does with Site Performance in Google Webmaster Tools so that we could improve our site and constantly check if it is what Google wants ? Edit 2011/07/26 : Thanks for your answers guys ! Nevertheless, I was not precise enough. The main issue we have is not with the Site Performance page but with the Crawl Stats one for now. We probably found an issue on our side with some very slow pages (around 3000 ms !!) and we are trying to fix them. I'll keep you posted as soon I'll have some infos. Thanks again !

  Read the article

• Does the google crawler really guess URL patterns and index pages that were never linked against?

  - by Dominik

  I'm experiencing problems with indexed pages which were (probably) never linked to. Here's the setup: Data-Server: Application with RESTful interface which provides the data Website A: Provides the data of (1) at http://website-a.example.com/?id=RESOURCE_ID Website B: Provides the data of (1) at http://website-b.example.com/?id=OTHER_RESOURCE_ID So the whole, non-private data is stored on (1) and the websites (2) and (3) can fetch and display this data, which is a representation of the data with additional cross-linking between those. In fact, the URL /?id=1 of website-a points to the same resource as /?id=1 of website-b. However, the resource id:1 is useless at website-b. Unfortunately, the google index for website-b now contains several links of resources belonging to website-a and vice versa. I "heard" that the google crawler tries to determine the URL-pattern (which makes sense for deciding which page should go into the index and which not) and furthermore guesses other URLs by trying different values (like "I know that id 1 exists, let's try 2, 3, 4, ..."). Is there any evidence that the google crawler really behaves that way (which I doubt). My guess is that the google crawler submitted a HTML-Form and somehow got links to those unwanted resources. I found some similar posted questions about that, including "Google webmaster central: indexing and posting false pages" [link removed] however, none of those pages give an evidence.

  Read the article

• when google search gives incorrect results - how can it be reported?

  - by vgv8

  If google search query results are incorrect: How can it be reported? What is the procedure to correct it? @Lèse majesté: Incorrect results are the results that do not contain any of the searched keywords in them like in this my question @John Conde, yes I believe it is the right defitition. @DisgruntedGoat, even when there are a lot of results by keycaptcha for "Past 24 hours", the Google.com presents results only on reCAPTCHA. Anyway, they are different from those by google if to search by "keycaptcha" (in quotes) and by other search engines. Everybody thinks that searches by one keyword should be sneakily substituted by google's own promoted brand products?

  Read the article

• How can I exclude content in my notifications bar from being indexed?

  - by Liam E-p

  Of course I want my content to be indexed pretty fast by search engines, however not my notifications bar. My notifications bar contains the last 30 changes to content on the site, and I don't want this to show in my SEO meta. As all the notifications are generic, it often doesn't provide any relevant information. As I said the notifications are generic. If an article named "123" was created, it would create a notification that says "Article "123" was created by xxx at 12:00AM". I'm now wondering if this is a content design problem. As only 1/3 of this information is actually relevant to users (the title, what happened). By SEO meta, and irrelevant notification data being shown, I mean this - Basically what I was wondering, is how I could optimise this, so search engines wouldn't show this generic nonsense.

  Read the article

• Which is better for search engines, repeated phrases or different phrases with the same meaning?

  - by George Botros

  When I'm designing an ads website I have two options: Let the advertiser to choose from some predefined lists to create the new ad. For Example: product list ( T-Shirt, Shorts, Suit, .....) Color list ( Black, Red, .....) Let the advertiser to write his own descriptive content for the product For Example "Amazing suit with a good price" I like the first Scenario but which is better for search engine optimization [SEO], repeated phrases or different phrases with the same meaning? Note : assuming each page will contain one or more ads

  Read the article

• How to prevent Google Analytics from adding a second slash between domain and page specific URL when viewing a page?

  - by Jeromy Anglim

  I have a blog http://foo.tumblr.com. I sometimes go to Site Content - All Pages on Google Analytics and then navigate to page listing and then click the icon to take me to that page on my blog. However, instead of opening http://foo.tumblr.com/post/1234/blah.html Google Analytics is opening http://foo.tumblr.com//post/1234/blah.html (i.e., it is adding a second slash between the domain the page specific component of the URL). How can I stop Google Analytics from doing this?

  Read the article

• Virtual Pageview Goal Funnel Not Tracking Correctly

  - by cphill

  I have an AJAX form that has three stages: 1. The landing page where a user fills out a form and selects between three question sets and clicks begin assessment 2. The assessment page, where users fill out questions relating to the question set that they selected on the landing page. 3.The results page, which shows whether they are at High Risk or Low Risk. Since this is an AJAX form that does not open a new page for each step of the process, I implemented a virtual pageview that would fire on the pageload of each step of the form process. The following is my virtual pageview setup for each stage: /form/begin-assessment /form/assessment/* (* = Three different virtual pageviews depending on the users selection of the three sets of questions: /one, /two, /three) 3./form/finished-assessment I have set up three separate goals to track user progress through each step of the form assessment. Here is my Goal setup: Goal Description: -Goal Type: Destination Goal Details: -Destination: /form/finished-assessment -Funnel: On Step 1: /form/begin-assessment (Required: Yes) Step 2: /form/assessment/one (Step 2: replace /one with /two or /three and you have my two other goals setup) Now my goals are recording the correct data in the first step and show the completions in the destination, but the second step does not show any drop offs. They show the same data as the destination. Any ideas of how I set up the goals wrong?

  Read the article

• Will this sitemap get me de indexed from Google?

  - by heavy rocker dude

  My site's URL (web address) is: http://quantlabs.net/private/sitemap.xml Description (including timeline of any changes made): Will this sitemap get me de-indexed from Google? My new site map just got spidered by Google for some reason. It is located at http://quantlabs.net/private/sitemap.xml, is this in danger of getting me de-indexed from Google's index. Does it look like spam even though it is not meant to be? I am trying to figure the limitation in terms of Google's threshold before they deem it a spammy sitemap. This is sitemap contains automated postings which are different with the stock symbol provided. The amount of postings within the Sitemap are quite a few in a small amount of time.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94  | Next Page >