19 Comments

Supplemental Paranoia

June 26th, 2007 by Court

Google’s supplemental index is to webmasters and bloggers what Samara from The Ring is to 13 year olds at a sleepover. It shouldn’t be - it isn’t something to be afraid of.

What The Google Supplemental Index Is

The supplemental index is where Google places URLs (pages) they deem unimportant. There are basically three reasons why Google would place a URL in the supplemental index.

  1. Low PageRank
  2. Little or no content
  3. Duplicate content

Most of the results Google returns for keyword searches will be from their main index, but some will be from the supplemental index. It is 100% in your best interest to get as many pages as possible into Google’s main index. Click here to learn how to tell if your pages are in the supplemental index.

I have people every single week emailing me about my 358 pages that are in the supplemental index. Most of the time they offer solutions like robots.txt and the Duplicate Content Cure Plugin for Wordpress.

Almost everyone says to add ‘noindex’ to category, archive, and tag pages. These simple solutions would make it so that Google doesn’t index your category, archive, and tag pages, removing them from Google’s supplemental index. You can read where John Chow told everyone to do that exact thing here: Getting Out Of The Google Supplemental Index

Where Almost Everyone Is Missing The Boat About Google’s Supplemental Index

Google’s supplemental index isn’t a bad thing and URLs that are in the supplemental index won’t always be in the supplemental index. Panicking because you have some pages that are ’supplemental’ isn’t at all warranted, it’s straight up paranoia. It isn’t that big of a deal! Before you go axing all of your category, tag, archive pages, consider these numbers:

I have 638 total URLs in Google’s index, 358 of which are supplemental. This means that 280 of my URLs are in Google’s main index. Since I have only written 149 posts and am using 11 ‘pages’, I have 80 URLs in the main index that are category, archive, and tag pages. Is it really in my best interest to ax those URLs from Google entirely? I don’t think so. Instead of talking about how to remove URLs from the supplemental index, everyone should be talking about how to move them to the main index.

URLs can be moved from the supplemental index to the main index by increasing the PageRank of the URL (page) in question (see section below for details). If you want a real-world example of this you can have a look at all of ProBlogger’s URLs that are returned by searching for site:http://problogger.net in Google. If you look through all of ProBlogger’s URLs, you will see that all of his category pages are in Google’s main index. He doesn’t use date-based archive pages so we can’t really look at that. If you would have looked at his category pages back when he first started, do you think they would have been in Google’s main index? They wouldn’t have.

If ProBlogger would have axed those pages with a robots.txt or a fancy plugin would they be in the main index today? Nope. They would still be noindexed.

Here’s one more little factoid to consider before noindexing some of you pages. It is possible to get search engine traffic from a URL (page) that’s in the supplemental index. It isn’t possible to get search engine traffic from a URL that isn’t in either index.

Moving Pages From The Supplemental Index To The Main Index.

You will need to do three things in order to move pages from the supplemental index to the main index.

  1. Work on the PageRank of your entire site, and for the URLs that are in the supplemental index. Matt Cutts (Google spokesperson to the SEO world) said on his blog, “Having urls in the supplemental results doesn’t mean that you have some sort of penalty at all; the main determinant of whether a url is in our main web index or in the supplemental index is PageRank.” This means you should link to those pages more, and you need more inbound links to your site. Here’s an article that can help you with that: Going From PR Zero To PR Hero - Most of Problogger’s category pages are PR5s. Pages that have PR1+ will likely be moved into the main index.
  2. Add more content to the URLs (pages) in the supplemental index. Many pages are in there simply because they don’t have enough material on them. Adding content to those pages can help to get them moved out.
  3. Reduce duplicate content. Make sure that your category and archive pages show excerpts instead of entire posts. Your posts will rank better than your category pages will anyway.

When I first started this blog, almost all of my posts ended up in Google’s supplemental index, so if you’re in that boat don’t worry about it. They will come out just like mine did.

Related Posts:
Plugin Upgrade - SEO Title Tag Replaced By All In One SEO
I've been considering replacing my SEO Title Tag plugin with the All-In-One SEO Pack for a few weeks...
Some Bloggers Are Just Silly (Google Linking Issues)
I've been reading a lot of posts lately about the issues related to Google's smackdown on paid links...
How Difficult Are Your Keywords?
Good websites and blogs target a main set of keywords. With most of my sites, I will target 3-5 keyw...
Common SEO Problems In WordPress Themes
I spent 2 hours today evaluating WordPress themes. I was trying to find SEO friendly themes that I c...
Smart Farmers Don’t Plant One Seed at a Time (and Neither Do Smart Internet Marketers)
My ecommerce site is doing well. It's about two years old now and it's on pace to do $80,000 to $100...
The 7 ‘Must Have’ WordPress Plugins
For those of you that are using WordPress as a publishing platform, well done, you have made a wise ...

RSS feed | Trackback URI

19 comments! »

Comment by Michael Subscribed to comments via email
MyAvatars 0.2

June 26th, 2007 at 4:08 pm

Great article Court! This is very useful information. Thanks.

Comment by Court
MyAvatars 0.2

June 26th, 2007 at 8:22 pm

Thanks Mike! You’ve been getting your site up really quickly, well done!

Comment by Michael Subscribed to comments via email
MyAvatars 0.2

June 26th, 2007 at 9:05 pm

Thanks! It’s really rough around the edges so far but its starting to come together. What do you think of it so far? Any suggestions?

 
 
 
Comment by Angela Subscribed to comments via email
MyAvatars 0.2

June 26th, 2007 at 4:42 pm

Court,

Thanks for the time and effort you put into digging into all these little details. I’m a novice blogger and this is something I had no clue was an issue to other bloggers.

Thanks for the heads up!

Comment by Court
MyAvatars 0.2

June 26th, 2007 at 8:23 pm

You’re welcome Angela. Let me know if you have any questions at all, I would love to help!

 
 
Comment by Mark Subscribed to comments via email
MyAvatars 0.2

June 26th, 2007 at 7:01 pm

Court -

A little off topic maybe, but I was over at affiliatewatcher and Don has an interesting take on blogs vs static html sites. His stance is that static sites will be better, lower maintenance money-makers in the long run. Maybe it would be worth commenting or posting on…I’d be interested to hear your perspective.

Comment by Court
MyAvatars 0.2

June 27th, 2007 at 11:17 am

I think I’ll come up with a post about the subject. I respect Don and he has some good points - I think I can add to that discussion.

 
 
Comment by Martin Subscribed to comments via email
MyAvatars 0.2

June 27th, 2007 at 1:56 am

Hi Court,
One of the points you have not mentioned is if you get all of your URL’s into the main index how does Google pick the right one to use?

Also if you get your 3 URL’s or however many into the main index, when Google picks what it considers the right article to use does the fact that other duplicate articles exist dilute the ranking potential of the article it’s picked?

I would be interested in your opinion on this as there is alot of conflicting advice on the supplemental index issue. Personally I think it’s better to have Google just index one article then you don’t have the potential issues as described above.

Comment by Court
MyAvatars 0.2

June 27th, 2007 at 11:34 am

They pick the one that best lines up with what people search for. Each of the URLs will have different HTML titles and content. The post will probably have its title as the HTML title and the category would have its name as the HTML title.

If a person searched for ’supplemental index search engine optimization’ Google would probably return my category page because that URL is a better match. (It has ’search engine optimization’ in it)

If a person searched for ‘what is the Google supplemental index’ they would probably find the post, because ’supplemental’ is in the title of the post, which makes it appear in the HTML title of the URL and in the URL itself.

If you follow what the post says you won’t have 3 URLs with the same article. You’ll have 1 URL with the right article and 2 URLs with a small piece of the article. Matt Cutts says that it’s easy for Google to tell which one is the correct one in this case because the 2 incorrect ones link to the correct one.

I you think about it, your category page will be more relevant for some searches though, since it has different relevance. Have you considered that a person might search for something that appears in 2 different posts?

Someone found my site today by searching for ‘viral chain linking search engine traffic’ in Google. My post on viral chain linking comes up #1 and my category page for link building comes up #2. If there was a duplicate content issue here I wouldn’t have come up at all.

 
 
Comment by JoLynn Braley
MyAvatars 0.2

June 27th, 2007 at 9:43 am

Thanks for the positive look at the supp index, Court.

I especially like your point re: Problogger’s categories — that they are now in the main index — good reason to Not prevent your categories from being indexed (with robots.txt).

Comment by Court
MyAvatars 0.2

June 27th, 2007 at 11:36 am

Many of my category pages are also in the main index JoLynn - it was a more valid point to use ProBlogger though because all of his are in the main index.

Comment by JoLynn Braley
MyAvatars 0.2

June 27th, 2007 at 2:05 pm

Well that’s even better, good job! :)

 
 
 
MyAvatars 0.2

June 27th, 2007 at 7:00 pm

Good post Court!

While I don’t consider myself “paranoid” about G Supps, I believe if there is a quicker way of getting your pages into the main index, then do it.

I probably spend way to much time thinking about this (remember, I’m not paranoid :))it seems G has other trigger points that decide which pages automatically go into Supps and which don’t. I’m looking to find what these trigger points are. I don’t believe it’s just about an article being “good enough” or “popular enough”. I’d say we all have good popular pages in Supps.

To some extent, dupe content plays a role. I found out that on one of my other websites where I changed the copyright and diclaimer, it brought out several of my pages. (static html site)

What I’m working on is trying to eliminate as many of these “trigger points” as possible so my pages have the least amount of problems entering the main index. (remember, I’m still not paranoid or nothing like that)

Don

Comment by Court
MyAvatars 0.2

June 28th, 2007 at 2:57 pm

I’m with you where you say if there’s a quicker way, do it. There are definitely things that can be done to help that don’t require removing a bunch of pages from both indexes.

Duplicate content can play a role, in your case did you have your copyright and disclaimer on every page? If so it would take a lot more unique content to not trigger duplicated content.

With enough link weight you could get away with it even with say 30% duplicate content.

It doesn’t sound like you’re paranoid at all, you didn’t say anything about axing a bunch of pages just to save some others.

Well said!

 
 
Comment by Tay
MyAvatars 0.2

June 27th, 2007 at 11:39 pm

Thanks for the helpful information, Court! I’ll definitely work harder on getting better PR for my posts and getting my site’s content out of the supplemental index.

Comment by Court
MyAvatars 0.2

June 28th, 2007 at 2:58 pm

You’re welcome Tay! If you do it will definitely make a big difference. ;)

 
 
Comment by Dan
MyAvatars 0.2

June 28th, 2007 at 12:41 pm

One of the funny things about SEO is that people do tend to make very drastic changes when they see a small thing that they THINK they should be concerned with. The thing to realize is that things are always changing, but in huge ways that we have to always be concerned. Keep a long term look at it and keep trucking along. Good analogy with ProBlogger.net, I think with that one analogy you really did hit the nail on the head!

Comment by Court
MyAvatars 0.2

June 28th, 2007 at 3:02 pm

So true Dan! In all reality they should be concerned with pages in the supplemental index - it just isn’t as big a deal as most people think.

You made a great point about keeping a ‘long-term’ point of view. Those pages will come out as long as you keep working on building links (some pages might need additional content) while staying away from doing things that are reckless.

 
 
Comment by Kirk M Subscribed to comments via email
MyAvatars 0.2

August 3rd, 2007 at 6:23 pm

Hi Court,

One of the hardest things I’ve had to learn is SEO. Although I’m quite knowledgeable in the matters of maintaining my Wordpress install, my blog is a fairly popular personal type blog that I find is the hardest type to pin down as far as SEO is concerned. I’m trying out the All-In-One SEO plugin in hopes I can feel like I have a modicum of control in this area.

Now it’s moving some of the pages out of the supplemental index and I’m missing one essential (you gotta’ be kidding me) item in your list.

You see, it’s always the simplest things that get by me (I’d solve the Cold Fusion conundrum if it wasn’t for overlooking a blown fuse) so perhaps you could help a guy out…

How the heck to do you make sure the archives and category pages show only excerpts?

Sorry for the newbie type question but I’m old…er…I mean I’m having one of those blank moments here. :P

 

What do you think? Join the discussion...

Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
Website
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)