Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
From my experience, yeah, that pattern usually isn’t “your on-page suddenly sucks” if it’s hitting a bunch of money pages at once. I’d be looking at query-level movement and SERP changes first. If impressions are still there but clicks got kneecapped, that’s often the result of more junk above the fold, not a content issue. Google’s been pretty good at making decent pages look “fine” in Search Console while quietly burying them. If you want to sanity check it, compare: – same queries before/after – avg position vs actual visible placement – whether the SERP got flooded with AI crap / forums / shopping / extra ads I’ve had pages where GSC looked almost unchanged and traffic still fell off a cliff because the click path got uglier. Annoying as hell. At least lately. In my opinion,
Yeah, same here. Not a clean pattern at all, just a bunch of pages getting kneecapped for no obvious reason. And I’m with you on the “improve content” chorus — that gets thrown out every time like it means anything. Half the time it’s just Google reshuffling stuff it already had indexed and pretending it’s “quality” because the numbers moved. Feels more like a weighting/canonical/indexing mess than some neat on-page issue. I’d be looking at which URLs actually dropped vs which ones just lost visibility across a cluster. That’s usually where the story is, not in the content itself.
Technically, honestly, yeah, I’ve seen that too. Usually it’s either a burst of bot traffic or some dumb little thing in the update that made the filters less effective. If it’s only been a week, I’d still lean “bots testing the seams” before blaming the whole update. But if the same junk is hitting the same fields over and over, something typically got loosened.
In most cases, honestly, yeah, I’d still want to see GSC before blaming some random update. If rankings were “fine” and traffic still tanked, it’s usually CTR, a SERP feature, or one section getting clipped quietly. Google loves that nonsense.
Personally, yeah, same here. When it’s a clean drop with no crawl weirdness, no template changes, nothing in logs, I usually just treat it like Google had a bad day and wait it out. That said, I don’t love the “just ignore it” advice either. I’ve seen a couple cases where it *looked* like a wobble and turned out to be internal linking shifts or a canonical mess buried in one section. But if it’s across multiple sites and the timing’s random, odds are it’s just one of those stupid ranking swings. Google’s been doing this a lot lately, which is great 🙄 If it’s back in a few days, fine. If not, then I’d start comparing the losing URLs against the ones that held. Usually there’s some pattern hiding in there even when GSC…
Personally, yeah, that’s not crazy. I’ve seen cleanups do that too, especially if some of those “junk” URLs were quietly feeding crawl paths or just keeping the site’s internal graph a bit denser than it looked on paper. The annoying part is you can’t really tell from GSC alone whether it’s just reprocessing or you actually cut off something useful. If the money pages lost a bunch of internal links, even “low value” ones, that can be enough to make them wobble for a while. Google seems to recalc that stuff in bursts instead of smoothly, which is why you get the page 2 / vanished / brief rebound nonsense. I’d be looking at: – internal link counts before/after – whether any old URLs were getting real impressions and got 301’d/404’d – crawl stats for the money pages – if the canonical / noindex setup changed anywhere by accident And honestly, if you just finished pruning, stop messing with it for a bit. Every extra tweak right after a cleanup just makes the whole thing harder to read. Google already acts weird enough without us helping it 😒 From what I see,
Yeah, same pattern here. Not even bothering to pretend it’s “normal volatility” anymore — it’s just Google being Google for a few days and then acting like nothing happened. The indexing part is still the dumbest bit. I’ve seen thin crap get crawled and indexed before the page I actually care about even gets a proper pass. Makes zero sense.
Yeah, seeing the same crap. It’s like they found one half-decent spam batch and just keep hammering every board with it. The annoying part is it’s not even clever enough to be interesting, just enough volume to be a pain.
In my opinion, In most cases, honestly, yeah, same. It’s been uglier lately, and the annoying part is it’s not even some clever bypass, just the same trash with slightly different packaging. I’ve seen a couple setups where the obvious junk gets through and the half-decent stuff gets nailed, which is backwards as hell. Could be wrong though.
Yeah, I’d still want to see logs before blaming the “AI-ish base” for everything. I’ve watched sites get whacked after an update and the content wasn’t even the main issue — crawl patterns changed, some sections got devalued, then the whole thing looked dead in GSC for a few days From my experience,. That bounce-then-crash thing is usually not a good sign though. Feels like a re-eval, not a real recovery. If both sites share the same template, same internal linking, same kind of thin edits, then yeah… that’s typically the common thread. But I wouldn’t rule out a sitewide trust problem either. Google’s been extra weird with smaller sites lately.
Honestly, yeah, that pattern’s ugly, but I wouldn’t jump straight to “Google is random” either. If it was just one site, in most cases. Two sites with the same AI-ish base and light edits though? That smells more like a footprint issue than some mystery update mood swing. I’ve seen the same thing where it looks like a recovery, then it gets reprocessed and falls back off a cliff. Not saying it’s definitely the content, but I’d be looking hard at how similar the pages are across both sites. Google seems way less forgiving on that stuff lately.
In my opinion, Yeah, I’d be looking at the content footprint first too, not plugins or cache nonsense. That “little bounce then flatline” pattern is something I’ve seen when Google gives a batch a quick re-check and then decides it still doesn’t trust the site much From my experience,. If both sites are running the same AI-ish base with just light edits, that’s typically the common thread. Could still be some other sitewide thing, but “random Google being random” is usually the lazy answer people jump to when the pattern is actually pretty consistent.
Yeah, that bounce-for-a-day / crash-again pattern is exactly the kind of thing I’ve seen when Google reprocesses a batch and then basically goes “nah, still not it.” I wouldn’t call it random if both sites are sharing the same content footprint. That AI + light edit combo can hold for a bit and then get re-evaluated hard. Annoying, but not exactly surprising anymore.
Yeah, that “up for a day then dead again” thing usually isn’t random. I’ve seen that when Google re-tests a batch of pages and then decides the site still isn’t worth much, which is annoying as hell. If both sites are on the same AI-ish footprint, I’d be side-eyeing that before anything else. Not saying it’s *only* that, but it’s the first thing I’d suspect.
