Does google use the wayback machine to determine the age of a site?
-
I have a site that I had removed from the wayback machine because I didn't want old versions to show. However I noticed that in many seo tools the site now always shows a domain age of zero instead of 6 years ago when I registered it.
My question is what do the actual search engines use to determine age when they factor it into the ranking algorithm? By having it removed from the wayback machine, does that make the search engines think the site is brand new?
Thanks
-
hopefully that is correct. I would hate to get knocked down just because I took myself out of the wayback machine. I have had the domain registered in my name since 2006 so I should be ok then.
-
Google uses WHOIS to determine the age of the domain under a current ownership, however if the WHOIS data changes and at the same time the content of the site changes dramatically, Google may reset the domain age of the site in their opinion.
I'm not sure but I would imagine Google have their own records on domain age outside of WHOIS registration.
-
Using Wayback would be strange.It's just a quick WHOIS lookup to determine age.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Moving site from html to Wordpress site: Should I port all old pages and redirect?
Any help would be appreciated. I am porting an old legacy .html site, which has about 500,000 visitors/month and over 10,000 pages to a new custom Wordpress site with a responsive design (long overdue, of course) that has been written and only needs a few finishing touches, and which includes many database features to generate new pages that did not previously exist. My questions are: Should I bother to port over older pages that are "thin" and have no incoming links, such that reworking them would take time away from the need to port quickly? I will be restructuring the legacy URLs to be lean and clean, so 301 redirects will be necessary. I know that there will be link juice loss, but how long does it usually take for the redirects to "take hold?" I will be moving to https at the same time to avoid yet another porting issue. Many thanks for any advice and opinions as I embark on this massive data entry project.
Technical SEO | | gheh20130 -
Site Not Being Indexed
Hey Everyone - I have a site that is being treated strangely by google (at least strange to me) The site has 24 pages in the sitemap - submitted to WMT'S over 30 days ago I've manually triggered google to crawl the homepage and all connecting links as well and submitted a couple individually. Google has been parked the indexing at 14 of the 24 pages. None of the unindexed URL's have Noindex or follow tags on them - they are clearly and easily linked to from other places on the site. The site is a brand new domain, has no manual penalty history and in my research has no reason to be considered spammy. 100% unique handwritten content I cannot figure out why google isn't indexing these pages. Has anyone encountered this before? Know any solutions? Thanks in advance.
Technical SEO | | CRO_first0 -
Is using part of a meta description already on your site for another product considered duplicate?
I'm writing meta descriptions for this site, trying to keep them different, however, for two product types, I want to add the same info I added in the other likeminded product's meta descriptions. Is this ok as long as it's not the whole sentence or am I really to rewrite the same info another way, which is hard for " quick shipping available for x amount of colors ". Any Advice?
Technical SEO | | Deacyde0 -
Meta data & xml sitemaps for mobile sites when using rel="canonical"/rel="alternate" annotations
When using rel="canonical" and rel="alternate" annotations between mobile and desktop sites (rel="canonical" on mobile, pointing to desktop, and rel="alternate" on desktop pointing to mobile), what are everyone's thoughts on using meta data on the mobile site? Is it necessary? And also, what is the common consensus on using a separate mobile xml sitemap?
Technical SEO | | 4Ps0 -
Google site: operator showing only 30 results for whatever website you may like, omitting the rest
site:wikipedia.org site:seomoz.org site:nytimes.com site:WHATEVER YOU PUT HERE 🙂 is currently always showing just 3 SERP pages and the well known ugly message: In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 30 already displayed.
Technical SEO | | j.royal
If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included. Any idea what's going on?!!? Ongoing update?0 -
Searching in Google using the Site:www.example.com specification - is it in an order?
Hi Gurus, Just a quick searching question. If you do a Google search using the site: specification eg. site:www.example.com Is the list returned by Google in an order of something similar to 'Page Authority' or some other order eg. page first seen date etc. Because you are looking at your single site, is Google listing your pages back to you in it's perceived order of current 'popularity'? Thanks, Brad
Technical SEO | | BM70 -
How do you know what version of your site of Google is in their index?
This is going to sound like a strange question, but I am trying to understand which version of our site is in the index. You might think this is an obvious question, but here is why I am asking: 1. Today I searched for a specific keyword and found the listing. 2. I liked on the right arrow next to the listing and checked the cache date. It says 6/28 and shows the site as of 6/28. 3. I expected to see that we were just indexed as we jumped several pages since yesterday and I had just checked two days ago and we hadn't moved at all. It seems like Google may have taken the changes we made on 7/2 but since it is showing 6/28, I am note sure. Since this is confusing, here is the chronology: 1. Made changes 6/20. 2. Site appeared to be indexed on 6/28. 3. Made changes on 7/2. 4. Checked the site on 7/2 and we were in position 60. Checked the site on 7/4 and we were in position 61. 5.. Checked the site today (7/6) and see we are in position 8. The cache date shows as 6/28. I suspect that Google just indexed us yesterday and is reflecting the changes I made on 7/2. But the fact that it says it was cached on 6/28 seems to sugges otherwise. I want to be sure I know which version got us the good rankings - is there any way to be sure? Thanks!!
Technical SEO | | trophycentraltrophiesandawards0 -
Used SEOMOZ top 100 Directories, my site ranking lowered, what can we do to fix this?
We have made a big mistake.... So what can we do to fix this? A trainee member of staff has used the seomoz 100 top directories and added to sites from PR10 to PR6 approx about 25 sites, using keywords were possible instead of using the website URL "which i now was stupid!. Our website ranking have been lowered big time for all keywords used!, eg from 1st to 10th and even disappeared from the top 100 We are contacting all directories asking for the Title link to be changed to the URL instead of a keyword.. Will this help? I understand that Google give sites a penalty for this!!, but what can i do to put this right and how long would this penalty last for? Any advice would be highly appreciated... Thanks Dean
Technical SEO | | deanpallatt0