Begged for cleanup and removal of many articles that provided unverified and often incorrect information. Depending on the queries, some of the results improved, and some ended up analogous to dinosaurs in the search engine: Reading the guidelines for validators, it's hard not to believe in Google's sincere intentions, but the quality of results (of course, according to a completely subjective assessment) has not improved in the medical industry. Some results have become downright shocking, such as the second half of the TOP in the query "vaccines.
It remains to praise the attempt to improve the Mexico WhatsApp Number List situation in the August update, but it's still too early to say that it's enough to create "great content" to be high: Linked sources: Moz, SearchEngineLand, SeroundTable, Nprofit.net, Static.Googleusercontent, CanIRank. Similar entries Short Report: Algorithmic Update on Google Search Google Speed Update - An update on the speed of loading pages on mobile devices A significant update of search engine algorithms - mainly in the medical industry The Fred update does not exist.
Algorithm changes are much more serious than you think. A free way to increase sales with Ceneo Comments FO With us, despite the long length of articles, well above the industry average, high substantive quality and, of course, full uniqueness, there were large drops. In my opinion, the age of the site itself was very important. The older the domains, the better the results. Answer Marcel I confirm FO's observations. The age of the domain was very important in this update. Young health-related domains, which in a short time (max months) gained an estimated visibility of tens of thousands, lost the most. On the old domain with good content, I have an increase of almost %, and I haven't changed anything on it for months (off-site and on-site.