What is the dreaded "sandbox?"

[corneo]

I've been told I may have a site that is "sandboxed". OK, where do I go to find out if that is the case. Oh and BTW what is sandbox?

I search the term and every place I go more or less tells me the same thing. "It's a term pull out of somebodies "arse". (if you know what I mean)

Right now, if anybody tells me your site (or) that site is sandbox that is the first flag that tells me "you have no clue what you are saying"

Am I wrong on this?

Come on, 3ncryptabl3_lick. Help me out on this one.

[Boogle]

OK as far as I know, sandbox it's a term Google use(d) for sites that were placed in a 'sandbox' before they determined whether or not that site would be released into their natural algorithms.

Was this site just recently launched?

If so, check it's definitly been spidered using Google Webmaster tools or simply check the latest cached version. If so you need to then check that it's naturally listed. That bits up to you, i.e. the term that would definitly get your site among the top pages to see if it's coming up in natural searches.

You might be referring to a different sandbox though!

HTH's

Boog's

[corneo]

A site is sandboxed when it is new and does not rank for keyword phrases that are not incredibly competitive (such as a unique company name) in Google after making the page "search engine friendly" and after being indexed.

Some are mistaken that a sandboxed site is a site that has not been indexed by Google. That is wrong. Sandboxed sites are very much so indexed by Google, but have a hard time ranking for keyword phrases, no matter how competitive they are.

Read the whole article here: http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/001963.html

Another article on this matter: http://www.searchengineguide.com/dav...es-sandbox.php

So to put it more simply:
If you are index by google and your site keywords have no value then you may be "sandboxed"
If your site is not index then google may be "aging" your site.

[abercrombie]

actually, sandbox is more of a term that webmasters created which google won't admit to. google has only hinted of an aging filter but webmasters use the term sandbox. basically, it's in reference to the aging filter few new sites to gain some level of trust. if you google webmaster aging filter vs. webmaster sandbox on google, you'll find more hits under sandbox so i think it's more mainstream terminology. don't know if it's ok to post a competing URL, but digital point forums have a whole sub-section on sandbox and definitions.

[lindaadams]

how do you get out of the sandbox?

[wdillsmith]

The sandbox does not exist. Your site will not show up in google until you get some backlinks from quality, trusted sites. This usually takes a few months, so most people have decided there must be an aging requirement and webmasters dubbed it the sandbox.

I registered a brand new URL just last month and got a backlink from a PR7 site the same week. I was showing up on the first page of google's search results (for the backlink term) within 2 days of the getting the backlink to my site.

[Boogle]

Originally Posted by wdillsmith

The sandbox does not exist. Your site will not show up in google until you get some backlinks from quality, trusted sites...

I believe that to be incorrect as when I launched a site back in february- just one week later it was listed in Google's organic results for it's optimised search term and it had no back-linking from any trusted sites. I would believe Google to implement some kind of safety filter for newly released sites.

Boog's

[wdillsmith]

Originally Posted by Boogle

I believe that to be incorrect as when I launched a site back in february- just one week later it was listed in Google's organic results for it's optimised search term and it had no back-linking from any trusted sites. I would believe Google to implement some kind of safety filter for newly released sites.

Boog's

Did it have backlinks from any sites at all? The only way google finds new sites is by following links from existing ones, unless you count "submitting" you site to Google, which I'm pretty sure is useless. If you had backlinks from other sites, my guess is those sites do have trust (as defined by Google and not actually known outside their company).

[Boogle]

No it had none, I submitted my site, which does do something! Google are pretty much geared towards us people as Internet users; they're a friendly group of folk! They wouldn't put a tool out there for submitting links if it wasn't to work. Backlinks are not the only way to get put into Search Results. Sure I think it has a good effect on your Google Rank, especially if that website is in the same genre that you are.

Boog's

[corneo]

Originally Posted by Boogle

I believe that to be incorrect as when I launched a site back in february- just one week later it was listed in Google's organic results for it's optimised search term and it had no back-linking from any trusted sites. I would believe Google to implement some kind of safety filter for newly released sites.

Boog's

I agree. I have 2 site with no back links nor will they ever have any and Google put them up within weeks. No I didn't submit them because I had no intention of them being index at all. (that reminds me, I need to block google from one site.)

[water2filter]

I know some of it. But I also know it is complicated.