This is a question about how the SQLA website works, not about SQL Anywhere.
You can read the actual question over on the StackExchange support website here: http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5039/why-does-google-return-hits-based-on-the-list-of-related-question-titles-but-n
I'm posting the link here in case someone in the SQLA audience has a clue about what's going wrong with Google searches...
...there are a lot of very smart people reading SQLA, and I need your help on this.
Is it Google's fault? ( fat chance on that :)
Is it StackExchange's fault? Have they messed up the sitemap?
Is it my fault, as SQLA administrator, for not doing something I should be doing? I have been told that it is not necessary for me to create a sitemap for Google, but I'm not so sure.
The bottom line is this: Simple searches using google.com don't work, neither do searches using the "custom search engine" (see "Search SQLA" at the top right).
And in case you haven't noticed, the official StackExchange search (in the grey link bar above) is really, truly, profoundly awful. Not sure, but it might be doing a SQL LIKE, it's that bad.
Anyway, if Google search can't be made to work, SQLA is doomed.
More discussion: I'm guessing here, but it's my impression there are two different algorithms in use by StackExchange: One algorithm matches entire questions and answers to come up with a "Related" list. That algorithm isn't very good. The list will not be missed IMO.
The other algorithm is used when you start a new Question and it matches your proposed Title with other titles to come up with the "Related Questions" list.
I think the second algorithm is wonderful... I often type in a title just to do a search, when I have no intention of actually asking a question.
To answer Volker's question in the comments, yes, I have just gone ahead with the display:none trick. It will take a very long time ( days, even :) to determine if it improves (or even affects) the Google search.
One thing I am concerned about, however: Will Google interpret the mere presence of display:none as evidence of evil-doing on my part, and stop indexing SQLA altogether. Don't laugh! It is a huge topic of debate out there in SEO land.
The good news is, display:none is the technique suggested by a high-rep person on the StackExchange meta site. Just to be sure, I have asked the question here: http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5077/will-google-interpret-displaynone-as-evidence-of-evil-doing
answered 05 Aug '10, 16:13