 sj |
||
|
||
Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research
|
|
|
Subject: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: John M. Date: 09 May 05 - 02:31 PM I have been thinking that the current design of the Mudcat forum should be made so that people who are using Google to search the threads get a chance to see ALL of the content in the forum. As things currently are, once a thread drops off the main listing it is impossible to get to the thread without using a FORM. The need to use a form to find threads prevents search bots from finding all of the relevant threads, hence Google does not index and cache all of the forum...never has and never will. Until there is a way to follow a *link* to each of the threads, all search engines will miss relevant info in the forum. Since there is really good content here, it would be best to have the forum setup so that there are links to each of the 80,000 threads so that it is completely indexed by search engines. As things are, mudcat content is underutilised because much of it can't be found by outside search engines like google. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: GUEST,Allen Date: 09 May 05 - 02:52 PM I dunno, I've come across old threads through google. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: John M. Date: 09 May 05 - 03:04 PM Yes *some* of the old threads are found by google but it is obvious that not everything is index. Try searching Google for the phrase "gathering in Battleground this weekend". Nothing is there. Do a mudcat "supersearch" and one thread is listed: See here. The question is how much is left *out* of search engines? How can we improved mudcat's "footprint" in search engines? |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: GUEST,Allen Date: 09 May 05 - 03:37 PM The Mudcat search itself ought to be improved first. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: John M. Date: 09 May 05 - 03:45 PM There would be no need for a "mudcat" specific search if everything was indexed by google. Another example of search engines not indexing everything is the arabic word: "Stanishwiya". This word is used the bawdy song "King Faruk" and it can be found in one mudcat thread but this thread is not found in google. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Blackcatter Date: 09 May 05 - 03:53 PM One thing that might help would be to put the "Google Site Search" on the Mudcat. I don't mean the one that's already there - that sends you out all over the Internet. The Site Search only searches the site you're on. While Mudcat already has a search function on it's own and the Google search isn't really needed, I believe that the search results get's tied back to the main Google search engine. I know on my website, once I added the Google Site search, my visits per page jumped up 25% in a couple weeks and most of them were coming directly from Google searches (general ones). |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Clinton Hammond Date: 09 May 05 - 04:02 PM That is a BRILLIANT idea BC! How much ya wanna bet it NEVER happens? |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: John M. Date: 09 May 05 - 09:52 PM Here are links to all of MudCat's forum threads linked from my site. We need these links on www.mudcat.org permanently so that all forum threads will be indexed by google.
|
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Stilly River Sage Date: 09 May 05 - 10:17 PM John, You've been busy! My university, like many large, spread out organizations, is set up so you can search inward on just our site or outward to the entire world wide web. A radio button lets you choose where it searches. Is this what you're asking about? Considering how diverse (read--unorganized) some of our discussions are, I don't know if I WANT the entire world to easily light on them. If they discover that Mudcat is here through a Google search then see that we have our own search facility, that satisfies my need for the world to know we're here. Considering the slowness of the site, with so many additional hits, it will slow things down more. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Lin in Kansas Date: 09 May 05 - 10:22 PM John, You might PM Max before you go too much further with this. As I recall, he and Dick Greenhaus had several very good reasons for NOT wanting the 'Cat easily searchable by Googlers. I'm sure he'd share those reasons with you if asked. And after all, this IS Max's site. Lin |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: GUEST Date: 09 May 05 - 10:24 PM "We" need these links? And by the way, your link to "Mudcat" goes to your site. A bit of spoofing, I think. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: John M. Date: 09 May 05 - 10:35 PM As I say: Here are links to all of MudCat's forum threads linked from my site.Emphasis added. I am disturbed that when the website goes down as it did on Sunday, I can't search the forum using Google. I like having Google as a "backup" for a website. When other sites do down, I can often retreive the content I need from the Google cache. Why not the MudCat forum? |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: JohnInKansas Date: 10 May 05 - 03:01 AM John - There have been numerous threads here on ways to improve your search success using Google and other search engines. Many of those threads, and hundreds you can find by using Google to look for them, give descriptions of how Google decides what to index and what comes up when you search. The bottom line is that a site can affect the likelihood that Google will index it and include it in results, but it's Google's decision, and there is NO WAY to force them to index your own site. The principal way in which Google decides to index something is by looking at how many other sites - especially popular ones - have links to the site. Nothing you can do on the mudcat site will affect whether Google indexes mudcat as much as having links to the site from a few active porn pages, or at some popular "chat" site. WE DO NOT WANT THAT KIND IF EXPOSURE. Mudcat pages that are occasionally indexed by Google result mainly from links posted elsewhere, when a subject that appears on the 'cat is discussed at some "pop" page. EVERY TIME one of these "index hits" appears, we get about three months of brain dead requests for "I need the words and music and chords and all that stuff for some tune I don't remember the title by rapper ...." The other thing we get is a "burst" of spammers and "Guest flamers." Mudcat is a special purpose research library. Search facilities on this site are generally adquate for those interested enough to learn to use them. If the library is closed, come back later. It will be available. YOU are not so important that the 'cat needs to be "exposed" via Google, and past experience here indicates that there is no particular advantage to mudcat in being indexed by Google. There are lots of disadvantages. Your extensive list of links posted above will have no effect on whether Google indexes anything. The appearance of those links on your page might result in a listing, but only if sufficient other pages link to yours. The listing is probably pretty useless here, since I suspect that all of those threads will be included in the result for anyone who clicks on your name in any thread you've participated in on this site. If you sincerely believe that mudcat should be more accessible via general search engines, then you need to do some serious consulting with the ones who own and administer this site to find out whether they agree with your concept of "what's good for mudcat." I think that you will find that mudcat does not particular wish to be exposed in that way. Assuming that you do find some agreement on enhancing the appearance of mudcat in search engine results, you need to do some serious research on what does and does not affect appearances in search engine results, before your little "posty finger" gets too far up your butt and you cause a lot of trouble for all of us. Do some REAL RESEARCH on search engines, before you proceed. John |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: GUEST,Jon Date: 10 May 05 - 04:13 AM I would assume the policy is reflected by the instructions to the search engines. The source of this page has META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="INDEX,NOFOLLOW" This is telling a robot it is OK to index this page but not to follow links from it. The index page (www.mudcat.org) has no instructions to robots (ie they can index and follow) and there is nothing in robots.txt to tell them not to look at the forum. Although it would seem OK from that, I'm not convinced it is a good idea. Mudcat is flakey enough as it is without ensuring search engines have 80,000 threads to index - many of which wont even contain musical information. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: GUEST Date: 10 May 05 - 04:48 AM Your extensive list of links posted above will have no effect on whether Google indexes anything. The appearance of those links on your page might result in a listing, but only if sufficient other pages link to yours. As far as I know, as long as it obeys the rules, Google will index on just one link from an already indexed site and even from no links if the URL is submitted to google or certain other search engines. I think the number of links only affects the page ranking. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: GUEST,Jon Date: 10 May 05 - 04:51 AM see here |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Clinton Hammond Date: 10 May 05 - 11:54 AM "had several very good reasons for NOT wanting the 'Cat easily searchable by Googlers" Ya... they probably don't want the world to see what a JOKE the coding of this place really is... |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Joe Offer Date: 10 May 05 - 02:05 PM Oh, Clinton, you're so sweet. John Mehlberg's idea does have some merit. I have sometimes wondered why songs from "Yet Another Digital Tradition" are more likely to turn up on Google than songs from the original source [here] (and it really bugs me when Mudcatters link there for lyrics, although I admit that it's handy to have the "Yet Another" tune formats). In many ways, I'm not sure we need to do anything to make ourselves more visible. In the worldwide folk community, we seem to be well-known as a resource for lyrics, although people sometimes rightly criticize the quality and accuracy of some of the lyrics included here - we've been working for years to resolve that, and to document sources of lyrics; and I think we're making pretty good headway. I wonder sometimes when we get a large influx of pop song requests, tied with the usual teeny-booper idiocy. Is it Google that brings them in? I'd hate to get more of that. I can't see that Mudcat would be improved by an influx of kids demanding pop lyrics. I'll ask Jeff to take a look at this thread and see if he would like to incorporate any of the ideas expressed. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Bill D Date: 10 May 05 - 02:28 PM Jeff is a very clever & wise programmer and he and Max have had **9 YEARS** to work out what they want indexed, searched...etc... A few suggestions are fine, but PLEASE don't do stuff to change the status without permission. As you may know, the hardware and connectivity are not what they were when the site was supported by Max's business. As has been said, it is is probably best for MOST of us if Google does not reach into all the corners. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: pavane Date: 11 May 05 - 03:52 AM Actually, if Google did have the whole site indexed, wouldn't that possibly REDUCE the load on this site - you would be searching Google's indexes instead? Or isn't that how Google works? |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Blackcatter Date: 11 May 05 - 09:14 AM That is how Google works. That's how I have it set up on my TV theme lyrics website, but that being said, I don't have an independent search program set up like Mudcat. You put in a word or a phrase in the Google box on the my website and then choose to search my site or the whole web (defualts to the site). It works really well, but I've only got 1000 or so pages and nearly all just have lyrics so are short. I have no idea if it's be good for Mudcat. Presumably Jeff & Max know about it. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: GUEST Date: 11 May 05 - 11:21 AM "we seem to be well-known as a resource for lyrics" Do you really think? Seems to me there are more 'folk' places on the net that don't list Mudcat in their 'links' sections, than those who do. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Rain Dog Date: 11 May 05 - 12:59 PM You can use Google to search specific web sites. I sometimes use that method when I am searching for song titles on various sites |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: GUEST Date: 11 May 05 - 01:03 PM google for 'folk music' and the mudcat is in the top 20; google for 'folk music lyrics' and it is the top site. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Clinton Hammond Date: 11 May 05 - 01:08 PM That doesn't mean squat... If I google my own name, mine is the top site... so what... |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: GUEST Date: 11 May 05 - 01:16 PM apples and oranges CH. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Blackcatter Date: 11 May 05 - 01:21 PM Come on Clinton that's just about the most innane statement. Feel free to Google my name and see where I come up. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Blackcatter Date: 11 May 05 - 01:23 PM That's "Thomas Cook", by the way - an actual reference to me takes many pages to surface. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Clinton Hammond Date: 11 May 05 - 01:23 PM Then what's your point 'guest'? |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: GUEST Date: 11 May 05 - 01:49 PM google listings are based on relevance |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Clinton Hammond Date: 11 May 05 - 02:08 PM relevance to what? I'm not trying to be thick here, I honestly do not see your point... Unless it's that google looks for what you tell it to look for... d'uh.... |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Jim Dixon Date: 11 May 05 - 02:55 PM Joe, I see your point about not wanting to attract the wrong kind of attention from the public. It would help if only the music threads were indexed and not the BS threads, but I don't see any way to accomplish that without some very fancy programming. |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Clinton Hammond Date: 11 May 05 - 03:14 PM Easy... put the BS cr@p on its own seperate page... There's nothing fancy or difficult about that at all... |
|
Subject: RE: Mudcat Forum, Google & Song Research From: Wilfried Schaum Date: 12 May 05 - 11:01 AM Never had difficulties to find an item in the DT or the forum. Naturally I start my searches with mudcat, ingeb.org and robokopp. |
| Share Thread: |