- •Releasing Tasks
- •Introduction to Page Quality Rating
- •Understanding Webpages and Websites
- •Important Definitions
- •What is the Purpose of a Webpage?
- •Your Money or Your Life (ymyl) Pages
- •Understanding Webpage Content
- •2.4.1 Identifying the Main Content (mc)
- •2.4.2 Identifying the Supplementary Content (sc)
- •2.4.3 Identifying Advertisements/Monetization (Ads)
- •2.4.4 Summary of the Parts of the Page
- •Understanding the Website
- •2.5.1 Finding the Homepage
- •2.5.2 Finding Who is Responsible for the Website and Who Created the Content on the Page
- •2.5.3 Finding About Us, Contact Information, and Customer Service Information
- •Website Maintenance
- •Website Reputation
- •2.7.1 Reputation Research
- •2.7.2 Sources of Reputation Information
- •2.7.3 Customer Reviews of Stores/Businesses
- •2.7.4 How to Search for Reputation Information
- •2.7.5 What to Do When You Find No Reputation Information
- •Overall Page Quality Rating Scale
- •High Quality Pages
- •Characteristics of High Quality Pages
- •A Satisfying Amount of High Quality Main Content
- •A High Level of Expertise/Authoritativeness/Trustworthiness (e-a-t)
- •Positive Reputation
- •Helpful Supplementary Content
- •Functional Page Design
- •A Satisfying Amount of Website Information
- •A Well Cared For and Maintained Website
- •Examples of High Quality Pages
- •Highest Quality Pages
- •Very High Quality mc
- •Very High Level of e-a-t
- •Very Positive Reputation
- •Examples of Highest Quality Pages
- •6.0 Low Quality Pages
- •Low Quality Main Content
- •Unsatisfying Amount of Main Content
- •Lacking Expertise, Authoritativeness, or Trustworthiness (e-a-t)
- •Negative Reputation
- •Characteristics Which May Be Evidence of Low Quality
- •6.5.1 Unhelpful or Distracting Supplementary Content
- •6.5.2 Lacking Supplementary Content
- •6.5.3 Poor Page Design
- •6.5.4 Lacking Care and Maintenance
- •Unsatisfying Amount of Information about the Website
- •Examples of Low Quality Pages
- •7.0 Lowest Quality Pages
- •Harmful or Malicious Pages
- •Lack of Purpose Pages
- •Deceptive Pages
- •7.3.1 Deceptive Page Purpose
- •7.3.2 Deceptive Page Design
- •7.3.3 Sneaky Redirects
- •Lowest Quality Main Content
- •7.4.1 No Main Content
- •7.4.2 “Keyword Stuffed” Main Content
- •7.4.3 Gibberish or Meaningless Main Content
- •7.4.4 Automatically-Generated Main Content
- •7.4.5 Copied Main Content
- •7.4.6 More About Copied Content
- •7.4.7 How to Determine if Content is Copied
- •No Website Information
- •Highly Untrustworthy, Unreliable, Unauthoritative, Inaccurate, or Misleading
- •Abandoned Websites or Spammed Pages on a Website
- •Extremely Negative or Malicious Reputation
- •Examples of Lowest Quality Pages
- •8.0 Medium Quality Pages
- •Examples of Medium Quality Pages
- •9.0 Page Quality Rating: Important Considerations
- •Instructions for Rating Page Quality Tasks
- •The Top Three pq Considerations
- •Page Quality Considerations for Specific Types of Pages
- •Ratings for Encyclopedia Pages
- •Ratings for Pages with Error Messages or No mc
- •Ratings for Forums and q&a pages
- •Page Quality Rating faQs
- •Understanding Mobile Users, Mobile Queries, and Mobile Results
- •Important Rating Definitions and Ideas
- •Understanding the Query
- •Task Location (Locale) and User Location
- •Queries with an Explicit Location
- •Queries with Multiple Meanings
- •Query Meanings Can Change Over Time
- •Understanding User Intent
- •Know and Know Simple Queries
- •Do and Device Action Queries
- •Website Queries
- •Visit-in-Person Queries and User Location
- •Queries with Multiple User Intents
- •Understanding Result Blocks
- •Web Search Result Block Examples
- •Special Content Result Block Examples
- •Device Action Result Block Examples
- •How Device Action Results are Displayed in Rating Tasks
- •Rating on Your Phone Issues
- •Rating Using the Needs Met Scale
- •Rating Result Blocks: Block Content and Landing Pages
- •Fully Meets (FullyM)
- •Examples of Fully Meets (FullyM) Result Blocks
- •Examples of Result Blocks that Cannot be Fully Meets
- •Highly Meets (hm)
- •Examples of Highly Meets (hm) Result Blocks
- •Moderately Meets (mm)
- •Examples of Moderately Meets (mm) Result Blocks
- •Slightly Meets (sm)
- •Examples of Slightly Meets (sm) Result Blocks
- •Fails to Meet (FailsM)
- •Examples of Fails to Meet (FailsM) Result Blocks
- •14.0 Rating Porn, Foreign Language, Didn’t Load, and Hard to Use Results
- •Porn Flag
- •Needs Met Rating for Porn Results
- •Needs Met Rating for Clear Non-Porn Intent Queries
- •Needs Met Rating for Possible Porn Intent Queries
- •Needs Met Rating for Clear Porn Intent Queries
- •Reporting Illegal Images
- •Foreign Language Flag
- •14.4.1 Using the Foreign Language Flag
- •14.4.2 Needs Met Ratings for Foreign Language Results
- •14.4.3 English Language Results
- •Didn’t Load Flag
- •14.5.1 Using the Didn’t Load Flag
- •14.5.2 Needs Met Rating for Didn’t Load Results
- •Hard to Use Flag
- •14.6.1 Using the Hard to Use Flag
- •The Relationship between e-a-t and Needs Met
- •Rating Queries with Multiple Interpretations and Intents
- •Rating Queries with Both Website and Visit-in-Person Intent
- •Specificity of Queries and Landing Pages
- •Needs Met Rating and Freshness
- •Misspelled and Mistyped Queries and Results
- •Misspelled and Mistyped Queries
- •19.2 Name Queries
- •19.3 Spelling Suggestion Result Blocks
- •21.0 Product Queries: Action (Do) vs. Information (Know) Intent
- •22.0 Rating Visit-in-Person Intent Queries
- •26.0 Needs Met Task Page Screenshot
- •27.0 Notes about Using the Needs Met Rating Interface
- •28.0 Using the “Report a Problem / Release this Task” Button
- •29.0 Reporting Results with Duplicate Landing Pages
- •Rater-Identified Duplicates
Unsatisfying Amount of Information about the Website
We expect some form of website information for many or most websites. However, the amount of website information needed depends on the purpose of the website. For personal websites, an email address alone may be sufficient.
Stores and websites which process financial transactions require a high level of user trust. If a store or financial transaction website has just an email address and physical address, it may be difficult to get help if there are issues with the transaction. Likewise, many other types of YMYL websites also require a high degree of user trust. Just an email address and a physical address may not give users enough information to feel the website can be trusted.
Important: For YMYL pages and other pages which require a high level of user trust, an unsatisfying amount of any of the following is a reason to give a page a Low quality rating: customer service information, contact information, or information about who is responsible for the website. For other types of websites, use your judgment.
Examples of Low Quality Pages
|
Type of Webpage/Content |
|
Low Quality Characteristics of the Page |
|
Explanation |
|
||
|
Low: Informational 1 |
|
• |
Low quality MC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This page and website have many of characteristics |
|
||
|
40th birthday party food |
|
• |
Poor page design |
|
|
||
|
|
• |
The website may be abandoned |
|
of Low quality pages. Close observation shows MC |
|
||
|
ideas |
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
which contains mostly commonly known information |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and poor quality writing. The MC is broken up by |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
large Ads. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proprietary and Confidential – Copyright 2015 37
|
Type of Webpage/Content |
|
Low Quality Characteristics of the Page |
|
Explanation |
|
|||
|
Low: Informational 2 |
|
• |
Unsatisfying amount of MC for the |
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some websites rely on users to create virtually all of |
|
||
|
Q&A unanswered question |
|
|
purpose of the page |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
their MC. In this case, the MC is the user’s |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
question. If there are no answers, the amount of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MC on the page is unsatisfying. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Low: Article 1 |
|
|
|
|
This content has many problems: poor spelling and |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
• |
Low or lowest quality MC |
|
grammar, complete lack of editing, inaccurate |
|
|
Article with tips for dressing |
|
• |
Poor page design |
|
information. The poor quality of the MC is a reason |
|
||
|
for the office |
|
|
|
|
for the Lowest+ to Low rating. |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition, the popover ads (the words that are |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
double underlined in blue) can make the main |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
content difficult to read, resulting in a poor user |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
experience. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Low: Article 2 |
|
• |
Low or Lowest quality MC |
|
|
|
||
|
Using ginger for your health |
|
• |
Poor page design |
|
This article is so poorly written that it is difficult to |
|
||
|
|
• |
Lacking E-A-T |
|
|
||||
|
|
|
understand. There is no evidence of expertise or |
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
even accuracy. In addition, a large amount of SC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and popover Ads interrupt the MC. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Low: News |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Article about the 2010 |
|
• |
Low quality MC |
|
|
|
||
|
Forbes list of the most |
|
|
Due to lack of care in the creation of this content, |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
powerful women in the |
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
the page does not warrant a rating higher than Low. |
|
|||
|
world |
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
For example, there are multiple misspellings (Bracak |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obama, Hilary Clinton). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This page and website have many of characteristics |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Low quality pages. The MC is low quality and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lacks important information. For example, it gives |
|
|
|
|
|
|
• |
Low quality MC |
|
no indication of how to make a crust and doesn’t list |
|
|
Low: Recipes 1 |
|
|
a pre-made crust as an ingredient. |
|
||||
|
|
• |
Lacking SC |
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Apple pie recipe |
|
• |
Poor page design |
|
This page is lacking the kind of helpful SC we |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect in recipe pages, such as user reviews or |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
comments. Without such information, it’s hard to tell |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if the recipe is any good. There is mild keyword |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
stuffing (in pink text) at the top: “best homemade |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
apple pie recipe, easy apple pie recipe, apple pie |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
filling recipe, moms apple pie.” This small pink text |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
is not helpful for users, and is included to manipulate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
search engine ranking. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proprietary and Confidential – Copyright 2015 38
|
Type of Webpage/Content |
|
Low Quality Characteristics of the Page |
|
Explanation |
|
||
|
Low: Recipes 2 |
|
• |
Very distracting and unhelpful SC |
|
|
|
|
|
Gluten-free New York |
|
|
This is an example of poor page design. There are |
|
|||
|
|
• |
Poor page design |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
large Ads in the main column pushing down the MC. |
|
||||
|
cheesecake recipe |
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
On the side are highly distracting SC that are |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
labeled “Top Posts & Pages.” It is unclear whether |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
these are SC or Ads. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Low: Q&A1 |
|
• |
Lacking expertise; not very trustworthy or |
|
|
|
|
|
Page about Native |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
authoritative for the purpose of the page |
|
There are 94 answers to this question with a few |
|
||
|
American customs |
|
|
|
|
results that seem helpful. Many of the posts are |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
deliberately incorrect or misleading, including the top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
answer, which is labled the “best answer.” |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please read the MC (areas with red boxes around |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it), including the completely unhelpful "answer." |
|
|
Low: Q&A 2 |
|
|
|
|
This answer is so unhelpful, we can consider this |
|
|
|
|
• |
Misleading page design |
|
question to be unanswered. This page has an |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Page about a 2002 Volvo |
|
• |
Unsatisfying amount of MC for the |
|
unsatisfying amount of MC. |
|
|
|
|
|
purpose of the page |
|
|
|
||
|
part |
|
|
|
In addition to a very unhelpful “answer,” the page |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
design makes it difficult to distinguish the MC from |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ads. For example, below the answer, we see a |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"sponsored answer," which has the same format as |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the real answer, but is actually an Ad and not an |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
answer to the question. This page design is |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
somewhat misleading or mildly deceptive. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a page from a Q&A site with an unanswered |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
question. Q&A pages exist to answer user |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
questions. Pages with unanswered questions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
should generally be rated Low because they have |
|
|
|
|
|
• |
Misleading or potentially deceptive page |
|
little MC (just a question and no answer) and don’t |
|
|
Low: Q&A 3 |
|
|
achieve their purpose well. |
|
|||
|
|
|
design |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page about water and soil |
|
• |
Unsatisfying amount of MC for the |
|
Misleading or potentially deceptive design makes it |
|
|
|
|
|
purpose of the page |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
hard to tell that there’s no answer, making this page |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a poor user experience. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition to having no answer, this page has Ads |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and links to other questions (misleadingly labeled as |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
“Relevant answers”) displayed prominently, which |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
users may mistake for answers to the question. It |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
takes a moment to notice that this page actually has |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no answer. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proprietary and Confidential – Copyright 2015 39
|
Type of Webpage/Content |
|
Low Quality Characteristics of the Page |
|
Explanation |
|
|
|
Low: Financial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page with advice on picking |
|
• |
Lacking expertise; not very trustworthy or |
|
This is a page on a website which allows anyone to |
|
|
a quality stock for |
|
|
authoritative for the purpose of the page |
|
write about anything. There is no evidence that the |
|
|
investment (YMYL) |
|
|
|
|
author(s) have financial expertise. The article has |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
grammar, spelling, capitalization, and punctuation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
errors. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Low: Medical |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page with information about |
|
• |
Lacking expertise; not very trustworthy or |
|
|
|
|
how long the flu lasts |
|
|
authoritative for the purpose of the page |
|
There is no evidence that the author has medical |
|
|
(YMYL) |
|
|
|
|
expertise. Because this is a YMYL medical article, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lacking expertise is a reason for a Low rating. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a YMYL topic. However, the steps listed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
here are merely commonly-known information which |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
would be of little benefit to someone interested in |
|
|
Low: Article 3 |
|
• |
Low quality MC (commonly known |
|
adopting a child from Iraq. |
|
|
|
|
information only) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For example, step 1 says “Choose an adoption |
|
|
|
How to adopt children from |
|
• |
Lacking E-A-T |
|
|
|
|
|
• |
Lacking SC |
|
agency” and suggests looking in a phone book. |
|
|
|
Iraq (YMYL) |
|
|
|
|||
|
|
• |
Poor page design |
|
There is almost no information specific to Iraq. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is no evidence of expertise on adoption from |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the description about the author. In addition, there |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
is little helpful SC. Finally, there are a large number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Ads on this page, many of which interrupt the MC. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some Ads have the same format as links to other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
articles on this website. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
