<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Give Google feedback on &#8220;noresults&#8221; pages</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/empty-review-sites/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/empty-review-sites/</link>
	<description>neat fun stuff</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:35:07 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: MicrophoneOn123</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/empty-review-sites/#comment-394437</link>
		<dc:creator>MicrophoneOn123</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2009 12:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=1880#comment-394437</guid>
		<description>When I type Afghanistan war in google, it gives me an empty page (except for 1 line) and I have to scroll down a ways to get the regular results? And when I type in Lindsay Lohan for example, the results show at the top of the page like usual? Is this politically motivated? Or just a glitch?

Any comments would be helpful.

Regards,</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When I type Afghanistan war in google, it gives me an empty page (except for 1 line) and I have to scroll down a ways to get the regular results? And when I type in Lindsay Lohan for example, the results show at the top of the page like usual? Is this politically motivated? Or just a glitch?</p>
<p>Any comments would be helpful.</p>
<p>Regards,</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Suzanne</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/empty-review-sites/#comment-392694</link>
		<dc:creator>Suzanne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 11:05:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=1880#comment-392694</guid>
		<description>Hi Matt,
Going back to the question of reviews. I noticed today that some sites are getting review links in their search results http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;q=barnacles+temple+bar+house
Just wondering how this works with the little stars? I couldn&#039;t find any info anywhere on how to make the reviews crawler friendly?
Thanks,
Suzanne</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Matt,<br />
Going back to the question of reviews. I noticed today that some sites are getting review links in their search results <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;q=barnacles+temple+bar+house" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&amp;q=barnacles+temple+bar+house</a><br />
Just wondering how this works with the little stars? I couldn&#8217;t find any info anywhere on how to make the reviews crawler friendly?<br />
Thanks,<br />
Suzanne</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh Beckhusen</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/empty-review-sites/#comment-339573</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh Beckhusen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 22:00:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=1880#comment-339573</guid>
		<description>Just wanted to offer a suggestion for those that hate the useless comparison sites that always popup in the top results:
givemebackmygoogle.com
It helps filter out most of those sites by including a long -() string with the site names so you get generally cleaner search results. It&#039;s not for everybody, since some people find those sites useful. It would be nice if google provided an option to include a filter like this as an option or make it easy to exclude a long list of them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just wanted to offer a suggestion for those that hate the useless comparison sites that always popup in the top results:<br />
givemebackmygoogle.com<br />
It helps filter out most of those sites by including a long -() string with the site names so you get generally cleaner search results. It&#8217;s not for everybody, since some people find those sites useful. It would be nice if google provided an option to include a filter like this as an option or make it easy to exclude a long list of them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/empty-review-sites/#comment-335319</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2009 15:33:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=1880#comment-335319</guid>
		<description>OK, that last comment got munged.
It should contain a whole pile of &lt;noun&gt; and &lt;adjective&gt;
View the source for info...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, that last comment got munged.<br />
It should contain a whole pile of &lt;noun&gt; and &lt;adjective&gt;<br />
View the source for info&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/empty-review-sites/#comment-335316</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2009 15:31:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=1880#comment-335316</guid>
		<description>Hi Matt,

I just saw your post and the answer seems to be write there.

Couldn&#039;t Google simply scan for &quot;0 reviews&quot; and use this to mark &quot;review&quot; as not being included in the page. Similarly &quot;0  reviews&quot; would cover your specific example. Even better, it would be broadly applicable to &quot;0 s&quot; or &quot;0  s&quot; or even &quot;no s&quot; to indicate that the particular  is not a search term for the page. It would make it easy for honest web developers to have guidelines to follow as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Matt,</p>
<p>I just saw your post and the answer seems to be write there.</p>
<p>Couldn&#8217;t Google simply scan for &#8220;0 reviews&#8221; and use this to mark &#8220;review&#8221; as not being included in the page. Similarly &#8220;0  reviews&#8221; would cover your specific example. Even better, it would be broadly applicable to &#8220;0 s&#8221; or &#8220;0  s&#8221; or even &#8220;no s&#8221; to indicate that the particular  is not a search term for the page. It would make it easy for honest web developers to have guidelines to follow as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/empty-review-sites/#comment-330002</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 00:53:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=1880#comment-330002</guid>
		<description>Hi Matt,
It&#039;s probably too late to comment on this article, but I have just one little issue.
If Google cares about user experience (which I don&#039;t doubt) and wants to provide the best possible results, then, how come it completely ignores content of the page it serves to users in SERPS? How is it possible that the algorythm suddenly goes around what users actually want, read content?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Matt,<br />
It&#8217;s probably too late to comment on this article, but I have just one little issue.<br />
If Google cares about user experience (which I don&#8217;t doubt) and wants to provide the best possible results, then, how come it completely ignores content of the page it serves to users in SERPS? How is it possible that the algorythm suddenly goes around what users actually want, read content?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Piter Jasiulewicz</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/empty-review-sites/#comment-256360</link>
		<dc:creator>Piter Jasiulewicz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:06:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=1880#comment-256360</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d like to enforce the web spam team&#039;s efforts on removing spammy search results, but I have an issue with sitemap building/submitting. 

My site has about 8 million indexed url&#039;s in Google SERP and about the half of the sites are submitted via sitemaps. 
My question is how to manage such a large structure. Review sites many times become outdated the minut they are submitted to Google what produces all the empty pages. Rebuilding sitemaps of this size takes time, effort and kills my databases :-/ . 

How can I proceed to make everyone happy? Will Google enforce the effort like the webmasters do?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d like to enforce the web spam team&#8217;s efforts on removing spammy search results, but I have an issue with sitemap building/submitting. </p>
<p>My site has about 8 million indexed url&#8217;s in Google SERP and about the half of the sites are submitted via sitemaps.<br />
My question is how to manage such a large structure. Review sites many times become outdated the minut they are submitted to Google what produces all the empty pages. Rebuilding sitemaps of this size takes time, effort and kills my databases :-/ . </p>
<p>How can I proceed to make everyone happy? Will Google enforce the effort like the webmasters do?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ankur</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/empty-review-sites/#comment-255449</link>
		<dc:creator>Ankur</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 23:34:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=1880#comment-255449</guid>
		<description>How about sites that just take reviews from other review sites? 

That annoys me.  I&#039;ve seen my own reviews on Yelp end up on other sites.     Of course, there&#039;s nothing I can do .</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How about sites that just take reviews from other review sites? </p>
<p>That annoys me.  I&#8217;ve seen my own reviews on Yelp end up on other sites.     Of course, there&#8217;s nothing I can do .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Alvarez</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/empty-review-sites/#comment-255219</link>
		<dc:creator>William Alvarez</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 17:30:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=1880#comment-255219</guid>
		<description>Matt, it seems the servive is unavailable:

https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/spamreport?hl=en
It says: 
&quot;This service is unavailable. Please check back later.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Matt, it seems the servive is unavailable:</p>
<p><a href="https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/spamreport?hl=en" rel="nofollow">https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/spamreport?hl=en</a><br />
It says:<br />
&#8220;This service is unavailable. Please check back later.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Saunders</title>
		<link>http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/empty-review-sites/#comment-255188</link>
		<dc:creator>David Saunders</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 16:27:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/?p=1880#comment-255188</guid>
		<description>Latecomer here I think...

Besides the non reviews or blatantly fake ones I cannot take the Local fake listings - this is terrible.

I did apply for the &quot;feet on the street&quot; situation that was floated a year or so ago and felt that would be a solution to flag all the fake businesses addresses.

David</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Latecomer here I think&#8230;</p>
<p>Besides the non reviews or blatantly fake ones I cannot take the Local fake listings &#8211; this is terrible.</p>
<p>I did apply for the &#8220;feet on the street&#8221; situation that was floated a year or so ago and felt that would be a solution to flag all the fake businesses addresses.</p>
<p>David</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
