Very Weird Type of Penguin Penalization
-
One of my client's sites has a bunch of bad links from blog networks with exact-match anchor text. Since Penguin, they have been completely removed from Google for that keyword.
But here's the weird part: It's only the homepage that has been removed, and only for that keyword. If I put other keywords into Google, our homepage comes up.
So the site hasn't been banned, and that page hasn't even been banned because it still comes up with all of our other keywords. It's only when you put in the keyword that has all the anchor text that the homepage doesn't come up anywhere. (I went all the way to the end).
Has this happened to anyone else, and does it warrant a re-inclusion request since the site and even that page haven't technically been banned?
-
Wow, I didn't know you could still contact domains with private registration. Now if I can just convince him to let me devote time to this, there will be hope! Thanks for all your help!
-
I apologize if I misunderstood Marisa. Normally when others mention building links to resolve the issue, they are talking about running out and performing various "link building" practices quickly, which means low quality links. If you are referring to earning links over time, that is great but it also means the site penalty will exist for a very long time. Most site owners desire to resolve a penalty as an emergency issue. A penalty has put some companies directly out of business, and severely damaged other companies.
With respect to the private WHOIS information, you can absolutely send an e-mail to that address. It will be forwarded to the domain owner's registered e-mail.
If I were in your situation I would explain to the client they made an error in judgment by hiring a bad SEO provider to build links on their behalf. Those links damaged the site and the penalty is the result. Their choices are pretty straight forward:
-
pay to have the penalty resolved...very expensive
-
try to resolve the penalty themselves....in my experience most people fail or get frustrated and quit the process.
-
abandon the domain and start over
-
abandon the pages involved which usually means losing the links for their most important keywords (i.e. the ones they paid to obtain manipulative links for)
In each case the affected site owner will pay. They either pay directly in terms of SEO penalty removal costs, directly in terms of labor for them to do it themselves, or indirectly in terms of lost ranking.
-
-
Thanks so much for your extensive response! I really appreciate it.
One thing: "To resolve the problem, you are proposing to build different manipulative links, ones designed to trick search engines into removing the penalty."
No, not at all! I just meant that over time, the natural links they acquire will not have exact match anchor text, so once they have more links without it than with it, will it be enough to crowd it out.
I have looked up all the links to the site and gone to those sites one by one and attempted to contact them. 90+ percent didn't have contact information. Out of those 90+ percent, 90+ percent of those had a private whois listing. That's why I said the removal of the bad links is never going to happen.
It's a shame because the reason the client hired that shady company to begin with is because he didn't want me to spend time building links. He's never going to consent to my spending my time in an excessive campaign to remove them.
I guess there's nothing more to say.
-
Since it's impossible to remove those links, if I acquire more links with varying anchor text will that eventually be enough to crowd the exact match out and stop triggering the penalty, or is the only option to ask for re-inclusion after the links are removed (which isn't going to happen)?
Please forgive me if I sound abrasive here. Your client is currently penalized for manipulative links. More specifically, links which were designed to manipulative how search engines view your client's site. To resolve the problem, you are proposing to build different manipulative links, ones designed to trick search engines into removing the penalty. That would be an exceptionally bad idea.
I have been directly involved in resolving this exact type of penalty for dozens of clients. What Google specifically desires is for the manipulative links to be removed. THAT is the proper process. Anything else is some form of manipulation which stands a very strong chance of severely damaging your client.
Google does not require you remove all the links. They require you make a sincere effort to do such. There are very specific requirements for the process, and most site owners and SEOs fall far short of these requirements which leads to the frustration you are feeling now. At a high level here is the process:
1. Obtain a comprehensive list of all known links to the site. You should absolutely not simply use Google's links as we know they do not share all the links to a site. A combination of Google's links, OSE, and several other sources should be used to compile a complete list.
2. Every linking domain needs to be visited by a trained SEO who understands Google's Guidelines and can differentiate between a manipulative link and an organic link. Once again, many site owners and SEOs fail here due to trying to keep far too many links. Almost all free link directory and free article directory links are manipulative. If you are unwilling to accept this fact, you will not be successful in removing the penalty.
3. Every site providing a manipulative link needs to be contacted. You can use any method or tactic you desire as long as you are successful in removing the link. If you fail to remove the link, you need to thoroughly document and prove to Google you took every reasonable step to resolve the issue. Some specifics I use:
a. Contact every site via the e-mail address found on the site. The e-mail is polite and respectful, and requests any links to be removed. A list of all links in question are provided. A copy of this e-mail (either text or pdf) is kept and placed on an accessible network drive. A spreadsheet is updated with all relevant info (domain, date of contact, who sent the e-mail, address sent to, response if any, etc).
b. After 3 days if no response has been received, the site's Contact Us form (if any) is used. The same e-mail sent in item 1 above is copied and pasted into the form. The same standards apply.
c. After 3 days if no response has been received, the site's WHOIS e-mail address is used IF it is different from the e-mail address used in item 1 above. The rest of the same standards apply.
If a site owner removes the link, great. You are done. If a site owner refuses to remove the link, you would then copy the response (pdf works great, otherwise text doc) and place it on a web server. A link to the document would be placed in the master spreadsheet.
If a site owner responds but requests payment, you are not required to pay but you should respond asking the link to be removed. You can inform the site owner it is in their best interest to remove the link, as linking to a penalized site can cause your site to be penalized.
Only after the above steps have been taken and completed will Google truly Reconsider the site and lift the penalty. If you try to shortcut the process, Google will repeatedly decline your request with canned responses. One person who called my office stated they had turned in 10 reconsideration requests and all 10 were declined. I encouraged him to put the effort into removing the links, not spamming Google with reconsideration requests.
There are a lot more details to the process but by following the steps above, I have removed 100% of the penalties for clients. I have seen other site owners and SEOs struggle because they are not willing to put in the massive amount of effort this task requires. I am working on an article which will be completed this weekend which covers this task in more detail.
-
Thanks for all the good answers. Since it's impossible to remove those links, if I acquire more links with varying anchor text will that eventually be enough to crowd the exact match out and stop triggering the penalty, or is the only option to ask for re-inclusion after the links are removed (which isn't going to happen)?
-
"Were most of the blog network links built from anchor text to the keyword that has dropped?"
Yes, and I'm not able to remove them. The service I used to get the links (Netfirms SEO) denies everything and says they're unable to remove them. They said I have to contact the owners of the blogs one at a time and ask them to remove them. I tried this, but they are all more or less "fake" sites, existing solely for the purpose of placing links onto to manipulate rankings. They don't have contact information.
-
I first saw this particular type of penalty as long ago as late 2010. As soon as the bad links were cleaned up, got them ranking again, but only because they had enough other positive and high quality signals.
Nowadays, it's not so easy to know if removing those links would be enough, and honestly, there could be other variables at play related to it that were the triggers and in fact may have been penguin or just as likely the other anchor text change google made in April (in the list of 52 ? 53? other changes for the month...
-
Hi Marisa,
My experience is a bit different then John's. This type of penalty is very typical of Penguin and is not unusual at all. Some refer to this issue as an "over-optimization" penalty. If you examine some sites in OpenSiteExplorer or a similar tool, you will notice the same anchor text used to link to a page. This anchor text is not natural but rather an attempt to manipulate search results.
Google can choose to penalize your site by removing your ability to rank for any keywords which you "over-optimized". The best course of action is to remove these links. If you find yourself unable to remove a signficant portion of the links, you then need to thoroughly document your efforts and submit a Reconsideration Request with Google.
There is a LOT of work involved but if you put forth sincere effort to correct the problem, the penalty will be removed and your site can rank normally again.
-
Hi Marisa,
That doesn't sound too weird to be honest with you. By the sounds of it those exact-match anchor text links were probably on a service like Build My Rank, which got more-or-less entirely de-indexed. So your homepage, which was probably ranking for that term because of those anchor text links, most likely dropped due to either an over-optimisation penalty (overuse of exact match anchor text), the links that were holding it in place being de-indexed (dropping it back to where it would rank for that specific phrase without those), or a combination of the two.
Were most of the blog network links built from anchor text to the keyword that has dropped?
You don't need to submit a reconsideration request, as your site hasn't been excluded from the index. There is a form you can submit if you think you've been unfairly penalised, but by your own admission (blog networks), this isn't the case so I would avoid it.
Instead, your best bet is to try to offset those links with high quality, content-driven linkbuilding and high quality on-site linbait (which will attract natural links). You could also try re-optimising the homepage for the term you're trying to rank, ensuring it's not over-used in things like page titles or anything else that could have aided to an over optimisation penalty.
You could also consider removing the blog network links, as this will improve your overall backlink profile and help you start moving back up the rankings.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Is there any benefit or negative impact to including schema for both @type WebPage and NewsArticle on the same page?
Is there any benefit or negative impact to including schema for both @type WebPage and NewsArticle on the same page? The websites I work on are editorial news sites. Our CMS automatically outputs WebPage schema to every article we publish. I want my dev to set up auto-generated NewsArticle schema. The are pretty much identical with a few different attributes. I just want to make sure I make the right choice about adding both or removing one.
Technical SEO | | DJBKBU0 -
Weird Google indexing issues with www being forced
IM working on a site which is really not indexing as it should, I have created a sitemap.xml which I thought would fix the issue but it hasn't, what seems to be happening is the Google is making www pages canonical for some of the site and without www for the rest. the site should be without www. see images attached for a visual explanation.
Technical SEO | | Donsimong
when adding pages in Google search console without www some pages cannot be indexed as Google thinks the www version is canonical, and I have no idea why, there is no canonical set up at all, what I would do if I could is to add canonical tags to each page to pint to the non www version, but the CMA does not allow for canonical. not quite sure how to proceed, how to tell google that the non www version is in fact correct, I dont have any idea why its assuming www is canonical either??? k11cGAv zOuwMxv0 -
Do you think this site has been hit by penguin?
Hi Guys, I need some opinion on a website i am working on www.colourbnners.co.uk They updated their website in August but the company they used did not take into account the URL structure and hence there's a massive loss in links in August time. They also dropped off Google for all their key terms except their brand name 'colour banners'
Technical SEO | | gezzagregz
Since then, they have implemented a 301 redirect. Some key points They have not received any manual warnings in WMT I have disavowed some poor quality links that they have built over the years I am building high quality links quite selectively/slowly There were a lot of duplicate content issues - these have been resolved now.
So my question to you SEO pros is do you think its penguin? or something that i am missing?
If it is penguin, what is the best form of attack to get it removed? regards gezzagrez0 -
Weird SERPS
Hello mozerz, I have a question regarding my SERPS that I just can't figure out, maybe one of you had this problem before or has encounter a similar problem. So I have a website on Scotland, and I have a page for each major city so the structure is scotland/city/glasgow or scotland/city/edinburgh or scotland/city/aberdeen. Now every city page is w3 validated, page speed validated, has around 1000 words of text, all with h1, h2, image alt, nice title and nice description, all have grade A on moz campaign, original content, all with canonical links, no ads or spammy links. The title , description, h1, h2 and img alt are the same only replaced Aberdeen with Edinburgh or Glasgow. or so on ... so all pages are identically just replaced the city word. In terms of link building I have done none ! and in terms of promotion I have done none... so theres no scenario where by I have done something more for one city then the other Now my problem is that all cities are doing well in SERPS, only Glasgow has come up till 14 position and then has dropped suddenly to 74, and remained there for 2 weeks now. I know this sounds like a penalty, but it can't be because I haven't done anything, I've tried all the tools possible to analyze the Glasgow page, though that it was a code problem or a broken link or that google-bot doesn't get up to this page to crawl it and classify it, but all is fine. Can anyone suggest anything that I might do. I'm 100% sure that I have no penalty, I've checked even the webmaster tools, open site explorer to see if anyone tried to link to my site with spammy links ( has happened before, I had about 1000 links about viagra from a competitor pointing to my site ) .
Technical SEO | | asmedia0 -
Penality issues
Hi there, I'm working on site that has been badly hit by penguin. The reasons are clear, exact match blog network links and tons of spammy exact match links such as comment spam, low quality directories, the usual junk. The spammy links were mainly to 2 pages, they were targetting keyword 1 and keyword 2. I'd like to remove these two pages from google, as they dont even rank in google now and create one high quality page that targets both the keywords, as they are similar. The dilemma I have is these spammy pages still get traffic from bing and yahoo and it's profitable traffic. Is there a safe way to remove the pages from google and leave them for bing and yahoo? Peter
Technical SEO | | PeterM220 -
Penalities in a brand new site, Sandbox Time or rather a problem of the site?
Hi guys, 4 weeks ago we launched a site www.adsl-test.it. We just make some article marketing and developed a lots of functionalities to test and share the result of the speed tests runned throug the site. We have been for weeks in 9th google serp page then suddendly for a day (the 29 of february) in the second page next day the website home is disappeared even to brand search like adsl-test. The actual situalion is: it looks like we are not banned (site:www.adsl-test.it is still listed) GWT doesn't show any suggestion and everything looks good for it we are quite high on bing.it and yahoo.it (4th place in the first page) for adsl test search Anybody could help us to understand? Another think that I thought is that we create a single ID for each test that we are running and these test are indexed by google Ex: <cite>www.adsl-test.it/speedtest/w08ZMPKl3R or</cite> <cite>www.adsl-test.it/speedtest/P87t7Z7cd9</cite> Actually the content of these urls are quite different (because the speed measured is different) but, being a badge the other contents in the page are pretty the same. Could be a possible reason? I mean google just think we are creating duplicate content also if they are not effectively duplicated content but just the result of a speed test?
Technical SEO | | codicemigrazione0 -
Weird links in OSE, wondering if NSEO ?
I was looking through our links since the last OSE update and was surprised to found several links which I have no idead how they got there. What made me suspicious is that the anchor text is relevant, but when i'm checking the page I don't see the link anymore (or can't access it, like in the first example). Some of those links : http://www.samsung.com/global/business/telecomm/product/download/SMT-G3210_opensrc_v2.01.tbz?diskuse=1&reakce=116246&clanek_id=11555 http://www.nyse.com/sspexternal/widget/nyse_dna.gg?location1=1&id=31866&sl2=1?id=28523&ncid=12930 http://www.census.gov/housing/povmeas/pov00/povpu00.sas7bdat?acad=20&dpt=10&niv_scol=CM2&annee=2010&form_action=resultat http://www.aarp.org/espanol/estados/texas.html/privmsg.php?mode=post&u=23 http://www.census.gov/procur/www/2010dris/web-briefing/cust-satisfaction-internal-dmd.wpd?p=9836 http://www.ups.com/asia/cn/chsindex.html/board27-das-wohnzimmer/board31-die-couch/search/Environmental_health/Food_safety__illness_and_contamination.aspx http://my.so-net.net.tw/hvgo2000/web/images/03?faq&page=4392 http://www.familytreemaker.com/users/c/l/a/index.html?replyto=104201 I don't even know if those links are real since I can't access many of those pages...
Technical SEO | | Aeronet0 -
Google Penalize?
Hello, I read an statement somewhere which stated: "2 identical URLs linked to 2 different popular key phrases next to each other (on the same website/domain) will lead to a Google penalize. Google knows, that both terms are popular. This means, Google will ignore the links to your site (you'll not have any benefit) and the site you have your links on loses authority." What are your thoughts on this statement? Thank you.
Technical SEO | | micfo0