Forum:Google searchs

Google searches for wowpedia pages do not work well. For example, searching google for 'wowpedia hallows end' returns 'hallow's end' on wowwiki as the top result. Even searches with 'site:wowpedia.org' do not return decent results. Clearly google has not indexed wowpedia yet. Is there anything that can be done about this? It will likely hurt the site's usage. --Sip0s (talk) 12:58, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * As noted on the Google Ads forum discussion, my ads are recognized by google to be highly relevant to people wishing to search for "wowpedia". (Actually, one in three people looking for the search term click on the link...which is making it too expensive for me to maintain).   The admins need to put a high priority to fixing this problem, as I can confirm there are hundreds of people looking for wowpedia and not finding it.  And that is just people typing wowpedia into their google search bar.  Let alone people looking for various topic-based information and not being informed by Google that we can provide it as an alternative to other sites which are on page one. Ddcorkum (talk) 19:32, 29 October 2010 (UTC)


 * As far as search engines are concerned you haven't replaced WoWWiki, you've just copied it. Right now 99% (I'm guessing) of Wowpedia content is the same as WoWWiki. At best Wowpedia is looking like a mirror site, of minor interest to the search engine's index. At worst you're looking like a rip-off site, and are being largely ignored. The fact that WoWWiki is still beating you to the name of your site, is revealing. This problem will slowly start to rectify itself as (1) you write substantial amounts of unique content and (2) many other respectable sites link to you. But I suspect you're in for a long haul: In search-engine logic, you've trashed 5 years of goodwill on terms that are contested with many other large websites. --Timski (talk) 19:21, 30 October 2010 (UTC)


 * It is already improving, albiet slowly. Yesterday, while the ads were paused, I found we were at the top of page 10 of 'wowpedia'.  We advanced later in the day to the bottom half of page 9.  Slowly, but surely, we are making our way toward the top.  Some things that could help though would be making it easier for google to recognize the site layout.  We need  to be in the header of each page, or something like that, so that google realizes which page is our homepage.  Right now it is getting a bit confused. Ddcorkum (talk) 19:29, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

We did it! When searching for "wowpedia" on google.ca, we now appear on page one! We follow the Wikipedia and WoWWiki pages on the discussion. Also, a search "wow pre-cataclysm event" puts on page 17. WoWWiki is only on page 9, for a comparison.Ddcorkum (talk) 04:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)


 * It will take at least a few months after Cataclysm comes out before Wowpedia will make any big search engine impact, I'm guessing, but it will happen. Remember, WoWWiki has been around for 5 years and that is an eternity in internet time. However, after Cataclysm comes out, I doubt the remaining WoWWiki community can keep up with Wowpedia, so that's when Wowpedia will start to take over. Remember, Wikia's push was for readers largely at the expense of contributors. Contributors grow content, while readers just consume it. --[[Image:gengar orange 22x22.png]] Fandyllic (talk &middot; contribs) 3:14 PM PST 7 Nov 2010


 * We are already starting to creep up. We are at the top of the search results for "wow elemental unrest" now, and we are on page two for "wow tripping the rifts". Ddcorkum (talk) 22:19, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Low priority, maybe, but the admins should consider signing up for Google's webmaster tools. Those provide detailed analysis on search index rankings, as well as alerting you to any specific problems with content/links. --Timski (talk) 10:23, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It's been done already; things are going fine on that front. Some ramp-up time is expected for brand new domains to appear in search results, so there's nothing out of the ordinary going on there. Generally, don't worry about our placement in google results -- that problem will fix itself. It's a far better use of everyone's time to worry about the quality of post-4.0 content. :) &mdash; foxlit (talk) 12:58, 9 November 2010 (UTC)