Automated no-index of light pages (zero replies, thin content)

I have purchased the addon too. Seems to be nice way of handling to sort out bad content. Would be nice if ths noindexed pages would be removed out of the xml sitemap.

@cmeinck Ist there a tip of what else you have done to improve quality? Would be nice to share informations of organic visitors in the next week an months.
 
I would find it useful if it was possible to search for threads with either maximum number of words or maximum number of replies.

That way I could check possibly thin content manually and decide whther to keep (and noindex), delete, or improve by adding my own and/or encouraging replies.


Does anyone know if this is possible
 
cmeinck said:
My issues with the add-on were addressed with the latest release.
Click to expand...

I notice there have been a few more versions since this this, how do you feel about it now?

I am thinking of buying this, but notice that there are not yet any ratings or reviews. On the face of it, it looks great - but as you imply if you get the settings wrong (or worse if bugs do that for you) then it could have a negative impact on your forum.
 
Mr Lucky said:
I notice there have been a few more versions since this this, how do you feel about it now?

I am thinking of buying this, but notice that there are not yet any ratings or reviews. On the face of it, it looks great - but as you imply if you get the settings wrong (or worse if bugs do that for you) then it could have a negative impact on your forum.
Click to expand...

Some of the newer features (pages within a forum) aren't working properly on my forums. The author says its been tested and working properly. That hasn't been my experience and I don't have a large number of add-ons. He has been responsive and working to resolve. That being said, I am using the add-on and generally happy with it.

It's certainly getting there and it has the potential to be a wonderful add-on. The author has been consistently upgrading with new features. I'd recommend that anyone looking to use this add-on invest in a tool (Screaming Frog, Xenu) that can scan your site for index vs noindex. Also, there are free Chrome plugins that show you which pages are set to no-index.
 
Mr Lucky said:
I would find it useful if it was possible to search for threads with either maximum number of words or maximum number of replies.

That way I could check possibly thin content manually and decide whther to keep (and noindex), delete, or improve by adding my own and/or encouraging replies.


Does anyone know if this is possible
Click to expand...

For this, you would need Screaming Frog. Before this add-on, I used Meta Essentials from *******. That's the manual option. It can also be incredibly time consuming if you have a big forum.
 
cmeinck said:
For this, you would need Screaming Frog. Before this add-on, I used Meta Essentials from *******. That's the manual option. It can also be incredibly time consuming if you have a big forum.
Click to expand...
Yes, I have Screaming Frog. It would indeed be time consuming for what I'm after..

I was thinking mare along the lines of a search from within xenforo to show threads with no replies or max word count in the post. I would find that very useful
 
Mr Lucky said:
Yes, I have Screaming Frog. It would indeed be time consuming for what I'm after..

I was thinking mare along the lines of a search from within xenforo to show threads with no replies or max word count in the post. I would find that very useful
Click to expand...
Agreed. This add-on does a good job of no-indexing threads with zero replies and under a word count. I certainly de-indexed posts that were driving some traffic. Honestly, it's awful we have to do any of this stuff. Word count isn't always a good indicator of usefulness.
 
cmeinck said:
Word count isn't always a good indicator of usefulness.
Click to expand...

Yep. Hence my desire to have such a such available within the xenforo search. Or maybe it is the enhanced search ????

But anyway I don't understand why Google could just penalise so-called "thin content"

On my other site I have some very useful pages which might containing three words but a very useful image of notated music. Also a page with video tutorials. perhaps Google is OK with videos (provided they are Youtube!)
 
I am happy with the addon too, but there are some small bugs which used to be fixed but nothing minor.

@cmeinck Did you see any improvments in ranking? Our indexed pages dropped from 80.000 to 40.000 - Users down 10-20% and now i hope to see some improvments in Ranking and visitors from google in the next weeks and months.
 
Andre Daub said:
Sorry i mean traffic. (Users from google) But this is because we have noindexed about 75% of our Content.
Click to expand...
That doesn't seem right then. If you noindex pages that are thin, then with or without a penalty, you wouldn't be getting 10-20% of visits from those pages in SERPS.

What I mean is if the traffic drop is due to those pages not being indexed, then you might speculate that previously they were OK and worth indexing.

Obviously it may take time for Google to pick up on your improved indexing and so start to give the better (indexed) pages more weight.

Also I suppose if the reduced traffic is better focussed - loner time on set, fewer bounces, more conversions etc. - then that is obviously a good thing.

It's incredibly difficult to analyse these things.
 
Yes i have removed some threads with traffic, but with zero interactions. Old Threads, or threads which are not relevant to our topic. I hope that this will pay out in long time. ;-)

Time on Site and page per Visitor, are slowly building up. So i think an improvement will not be recognized before next Panda Update.
 
It's important to note that it's not just Panda we are dealing with. My site Physics Forums was hit by the same algorithm change that hit MetaFilter 3 years ago. Google denied that a UGC filter was placed until last year when they finally admitted it. UGC is definitely under attack.
 
cmeinck said:
Agreed. This add-on does a good job of no-indexing threads with zero replies and under a word count. I certainly de-indexed posts that were driving some traffic. Honestly, it's awful we have to do any of this stuff. Word count isn't always a good indicator of usefulness.
Click to expand...
I've added an Enhanced Search suggestion for this. If you think this is a good idea please folks give my post there a like.
 
dethfire said:
It's important to note that it's not just Panda we are dealing with. My site Physics Forums was hit by the same algorithm change that hit MetaFilter 3 years ago. Google denied that a UGC filter was placed until last year when they finally admitted it. UGC is definitely under attack.
Click to expand...

Where did they admit a UGC filter? I don't disagree, but I haven't seen any evidence of this in my research. Regarding MetaFilter, they simply said they would look at it and continue to improve their algorithms. MetaFilter's recovery wasn't part of any large-scale UGC recovery, which I find curious.
 
Andre Daub said:
Yes i have removed some threads with traffic, but with zero interactions. Old Threads, or threads which are not relevant to our topic. I hope that this will pay out in long time. ;-)

Time on Site and page per Visitor, are slowly building up. So i think an improvement will not be recognized before next Panda Update.
Click to expand...

These changes should also have a direct effect on your bounce rate. To get a better understanding of your true bounce rate, I'd recommend reading this article on setting up ABR (adjusted bounce rate). Bounce rate in analytics tends to be a flawed metric. With ABR, you can set a tag and time limit for what you determine is a bounce.
 
dethfire said:
Google’s Matt Cutts: MetaFilter Hit By Previously Undisclosed Algorithm Filter
http://searchengineland.com/googles-matt-cutts-metafilter-hit-algorithm-panda-penguin-193849

Metafilter was hit on Nov 17th 2012 and so was I
Click to expand...

Yep, I've read that as well. UGC sites were hit in November, but Google has never confirmed a UGC filter. It could be that forums were collateral damage, rather than an algo specific to forums.

"What algorithm was it? Google’s Matt Cutts wouldn’t say."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LaxmiSathy
  • Question Question
No indexing thin content forum pages - Before or After Migration
Replies
1
Views
750
Chris D
Chris D
Top Bottom