Google Glitch Or SEO Hack Of the #1 Result?

[Phoenix]

Found this odd result this morning while doing some research for a client. The #1 result (screenshot below) displays an "according to" link and a "more resources" link where the cache or similiar pages should be. It also displays a larger font size description than normal. It looks pretty bad in my opinion. I wanted to see if anyone had any idea how this site accomplished this or whether it was just an odd blip? I was talking with Barry and Chris earlier about it and it doesn't appear to be a OneBox result or some kind of sitelink. The "According to:" seems to be the key to why this is happening. I vaguely remember seeing this somewhere else, but can't remember when or of what.

To see the odd results do a search in Google for "dating services sites" no quotes.

[dyn4mik3]

Isn't this just Google's QA feature?

From Google:

Q&A

Want to know the population of Japan? What currency is used in Algeria? The birthplace of Bono? Hit us with a fact-based question or query (like "population of Japan") by typing it into the Google search box. We'll search the web and display the answer at the top of your search results page. We also link to our source for this information so that you can learn even more.

[Phoenix]

Yeah your right. But how does this search for "dating services sites" answer any question?

[dyn4mik3]

No idea - Google probably needs to keep tweaking this one.

Check the result for "Religious Dating Sites". Google QA gives you a result from a site that is all supplemental. The site can't even rank for it's own name. But it gets a #1 ranking through Google QA.

Anyone have a list of known Google QA inclusion factors?

[Phoenix]

Well its appears this was a glitch I found.

Matt Cutts checked this out and commented on SEroundtable with the following:

I checked into this, and it was an issue in the Onebox extractor code. I think it's fixed now; thanks for mentioning this.

If you check the results now for "dating services sites" its back to normal and looks quite a bit different.

[rustybrick]

So a bug in the code or was this some sort of loophole a smart SEO discovered?

I just found what appears to be another example of a OneBox hack. Details and screenshot on my blog ilya123.blogspot.com