No reply from Google despite reconsideration and hard work!
-
Hi everyone,
I hope someone can help.
The site www.danbro.co.uk suffered a manually penalty in April.
It had a number of poor quality sitewide blog links and the link profile looked (and still does despite a massive improvement) unnatural.
The work to over turn the penalty
Since then 80% of the spammy blog links have been taken down. the other 20% of sites simply do no respond to requests (these sites were documented).
The webmaster also has started building up more natural links as 95% of the anchor text could be classed as 'money keywords'.A low % of links included the brand name at all.
A number of requests have been sent ( i told the site manager this should have been avoided but hay-ho). The last request of which i assisted them with was sent last week. The reconsideration was extremely detailed and documented all link removals and links that were still live yet poor quality.
some questions
-
Its been a few months since the penalty - should a brand new site be launched?
-
If option '1' was to be implemented, is a 302 re-direct a feasible option as the site's content is vast? will this pass on the penalty?
-
in your opinion Is the websites link profile the root of this penalty?
-
If point '3' is true would you a) start a fresh site or b) continue working on balancing the link profile?
Any help or case studies would be tremendous
thanks in advance
-
-
Steve, sorry, I completely misread that original question, if it is a manual penalty, things are somewhat worse and recovery, in my experience is a whole lot harder. You will have to be absolutely fastidious in your approach and get rid of everything manipulative or start over.
Sorry buddy, skim reading whilst stuffing my face at lunch time!
-
Hey Steve, it is difficult, especially if you inherit these problems with a new client and there is just not a great deal of case study data out there.
You just need to be brutal in your clean up and attempt to remove anything that is obviously manipulative and as Robert mentioned above, if you have links from other sites that are clearly spam honeypots for Google then get them removed.
Best of luck
Marcus -
Hi Marcus,
thanks for your answer.
with regards to the 24th - The site was actually hit on the 12th April.
The link profile is deffinately alot better than 3 months ago however it still looks unnatural.
The only issue is where to allocate resources and time...
should time be spent making a more natural looking profile (google may not even respond or take notice) or is it easier 'burining the house down' and starting a fresh.
it is a difficult one.
thanks for your time - much appreciated
-
Arghh, looks worse than I thought. OpenSiteExplorer won't expand the linking sites for me at the moment but if it is this rotten, then a clean up is just not always practical let alone possible.
This is the client needs to be transparent and if they can't be, then you need to dig through the link profile to guide your hand.
If they are doing .edu and .gov link building then this is a true case of manipulation and as Robert says above, fixing it will likely be pretty difficult.
-
Steve,
I feel your pain, but....
Thinking about your situation, I went to the site and used OSE to see what your links look like. The first red flags I see came within 5 seconds of opening OSE and clicking on linking domains. You sell accounting software for contractors and, while that can be rather broad, the first couple of domains that stand out are links from NASA and the University of TX.
There were so many links from the NASA blog I did not bother looking for yours and assumed a lot of BS was there. For UT, I started scratching my head as the blog post was around a UT student visiting Germany. For your comment a "student" named Alex is gushing about Germany being efficient but, the name is actually a link to your home page.
So, what is Google seeing?
My guess is that if I can hit two really questionable links, one a .gov the other a .edu in the first few seconds and Google is really digging, you are going to have to work very hard to fix this. Otherwise you are going to have to reform your site by doing as you state above and rebuild.
My only incredulousness comes from you stating that Google does not respond. I would have thought they would have sent you the does not meet Google Quality Guidelines.....resubmit request for reconsideration... email.
Good Luck,
-
If you have done a lot of work and have a manual penalty then play it out a while longer and see what happens. If you simply don't get a response or the link profile is just too rotten to repair then it may be time to burn the house down and start again.
I have had a quick look at the link profile and have seen a lot worse. You have two main keywords targeted with thousands of links from only a handful of sites so if you have got rid of a lot of sitewides, it may be a lot more balanced. That is not taking
Your questions.
1. If it was on the 24th then the link profile is highly likely
2. I have to admit I am not sure about this one. In theory, it should not, but I would really want to cut all ties with the previous site so you may need to deindex all that content first. In reality, the 302 redirect is for content that has been moved temporarily and not for redirects that are temporary so this is not really the correct usage of the redirection.
Possibly a custom 404 with some links to the new site and a change of URL in webmaster tools may be a better option but I am unsure of any best practice here and you may have to ride out a bit of turbulence when first moving.
3. Yep, the date alone tells us that to a degree of certainty and it's further compounded by the use of the sitewides etc.
4. That's not a five minute answer and really depends on whether there are any natural and quality links or is it 99% junk? If the latter, then with the rumoured update to penguin getting more aggressive, then it could be time to move on.
What i would do is compare against other people in your niche. Look at some market leaders, figure out what a normal link profile looks like and determine how close you are to that.
Hope this helps
Marcus
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
-
Google Is Indexing my 301 Redirects to Other sites
Long story but now i have a few links from my site 301 redirecting to youtube videos or eCommerce stores. They carry a considerable amount of traffic that i benefit from so i can't take them down, and that traffic is people from other websites, so basically i have backlinks from places that i don't own, to my redirect urls (Ex. http://example.com/redirect) My problem is that google is indexing them and doesn't let them go, i have tried blocking that url from robots.txt but google is still indexing it uncrawled, i have also tried allowing google to crawl it and adding noindex from robots.txt, i have tried removing it from GWT but it pops back again after a few days. Any ideas? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cuarto7150 -
Is WordPress a Blog in the eyes of Google?
Hi, My online Shop is based on WordPress with the WooCommerce plugin. Now, I have met a SEO guy who told me that's bad in the eyes of Google: Because Google apparently sees my website as a blog and not as a E-Commerce site. Wow, this statement really confused my, since I am working so hard on content and good rankings. Any opinions on this would be appreciated. Best, Robin
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | soralsokal0 -
Can links indexed by google "link:" be bad? or this is like a good example by google
Can links indexed by google "link:" be bad? Or this is like a good example shown by google. We are cleaning our links from Penguin and dont know what to do with these ones. Some of them does not look quality.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bele0 -
Google News URL Structure
Hi there folks I am looking for some guidance on Google News URLs. We are restructuring the site. A main traffic driver will be the traffic we get from Google News. Most large publishers use: www.site.com/news/12345/this-is-the-title/ Others use www.example.com/news/celebrity/12345/this-is-the-title/ etc. www.example.com/news/celebrity-news/12345/this-is-the-title/ www.example.com/celebrity-news/12345/this-is-the-title/ (Celebrity is a channel on Google News so should we try and follow that format?) www.example.com/news/celebrity-news/this-is-the-title/12345/ www.example.com/news/celebrity-news/this-is-the-title-12345/ (unique ID no at the end and part of the title URL) www.example.com/news/celebrity-news/celebrity-name/this-is-the-title-12345/ Others include the date. So as you can see there are so many combinations and there doesnt seem to be any unity across news sites for this format. Have you any advice on how to structure these URLs? Particularly if we want to been seen as an authority on the following topics: fashion, hair, beauty, and celebrity news - in particular "celebrity name" So should the celebrity news section be www.example.com/news/celebrity-news/celebrity-name/this-is-the-title-12345/ or what? This is for a completely new site build. Thanks Barry
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Deepti_C0 -
Who is beating you on Google (after Penguin)?
Hi,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rayvensoft
After about a month of Penguin and 1 update, I am starting to notice an annoying pattern as to who is beating me in the rankings on google. I was wondering if anybody else has noticed this.
The sites who are beating me - almost without exception - fall into these 2 categories. 1) Super sites that have little or nothing to do with the service I am offering. Now it is not the homepages that are beating me. In almost all cases they are simply pages hidden in their forums where somebody in passing mentioned something relating to what I do. 2) Nobodies. Sites that have absolutely no links back to them, and look like they were made by a 5 year old. Has anybody else noticed this? I am just wondering if what I see only apply to my sites or if this is a pattern across the web. Does this mean that for small sites to rank, it is now all about on-page SEO? If it all about on-page, well that is great... much easier than link building. But I want to make sure others see the same thing before dedicating a lot of time to overhaul my sites and create new content.| Thanks!0 -
My brand is not ranking on Android Google SERPs
In the new blog post here, she links to mobilemoxie, a site which allows you to do searches on various different smartphones. I tried a search for my brand, "ixl.com" on an iPhone 4 and a Android phone, the Motorola Droid X. On the iPhone, our brand appears in #1 like normal, but on the Android phone, our result doesn't appear on the first page. Any ideas as to why this would be the case? We're currently developing a mobile version of our site but we don't have one yet. Could that be the issue?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | john4math0 -
Google +1 and Yslow
After adding Google's +1 script and call to our site (loading asynchronously), we noticed Yslow is giving us a D for not having expire headers for the following scripts: https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GKLA
https://www.google-analytics.com/ga.js
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com... 1. Is their a workaround for this issue, so expire headers are added to to plusone and GA script? Or, are we being to nit-picky about this issue?0 -
Site: on Google
Hello, people. I have a quick question regarding search in Google. I use search operator [site:url] to see indexing stauts of my site. Today, I was checking indexing status and I found that Google shows different numbers of indexed pages depends on search setting. 1. At default setting (set as 10 search result shows) > I get about 150 pages indexed by Google. 2. I set 100 results shows per page and tried again. > I get about 52 pages indexed by Google. Of course I used same page URL. I really want to know which data is accurate. Please help people!!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Artience0