Penguin Recovery Problem - Weird
-
I had an old URL and the link profile of this URL wasn't good - I had been using article syndication and Penguin threw me to the wolves.
I decided to start over with a new URL and build a new natural link profile. I specifically did NOT do a 301 redirect to the new URL and did not make any request to Google to transfer domain as I didn't want old site being associated to the new one. To redirect our old users, I put a link on the old URL index page (nofollowed) that say that we have moved.
I was very surprised to find that in GWT all the links of the old URL have now been associated to the new URL....why is that? I started over to have a clean natural profile and follow Google guidelines.Has anyone heard of this before? All I can guess is that Google itself "decided" to do its own pseudo-301, since the site was the same, page for page.This has Major implications for anyone attempting a "clean start" to recover from Penguin.
-
Nakul -
Re: "other then seeing those links in GWT, are there any other red flags that you are seeing in terms of not ranking, any penalty messages, unnatural links warning on the new?"
No - no red flags. My "new" site has only been live for about a week and is already reached page 2 or 3 of google serp for my main keywords.
But since I know those backlinks cause my old site to go from #2-3 of page 1 to past page 20, I freaked when I saw them following me.
or was there any messages on the old domain when you got penalized ?
No - I crashed on April 24 and never recovered, even though I removed all the pages that had been syndicated and asked Google for reconsideration, they said there was no manual penalty.
-
Thanks for your thoughts, Marie.
** And I think that sometimes Google gets it wrong as to who is the more authoritative.**
I am confident that they are very often wrong.
-
I personally think it is just a WMT glitch. When the link is shown in WMT it says, "Via this intermediate link..." and the intermediate link is the original page.
However, according again to Dejan SEO, if you copy a site's page and your site has a higher PageRank, you can actually outrank the original page. Here is the article on how they did this (with permission) for Rand Fishkin's blog and other pages:
http://dejanseo.com.au/hijacked/
That makes me think that it's possible that link juice is granted to the more authoritative of the two sites. And I think that sometimes Google gets it wrong as to who is the more authoritative.
While I still think that these links would not cause Penguin to affect a site, I wouldn't chance it!
-
**Basically, when Google sees a duplicate of a page they will assign the page's links to that site. **
Oh.... do you think somebody could grab an article from your website, post it on theirs and kidnap your linkjuice?
-
Those pages can still be in the cache. That was my theory as to what was going on with the previous site. When we used the url removal tool (not the disavow tool by the way) to remove them from the cache this seemed to solve the problem.
-
Considering what's done is done and the point that your old domain is penalized, can you possibly do/try any of the following ?
1. Ignore the fact that those links are appearing in your backlink profile for the new domain. See whether this new website works/ranks.
2. If it doesn't (at all), can you possibly disavow those "article marketing" links for the old domain and do nothing at all for the new domain (since those links are not really linking to your new domain).
Coming back to point 1, what I'd like to ask is, other then seeing those links in GWT, are there any other red flags that you are seeing in terms of not ranking, any penalty messages, unnatural links warning on the new or was there any messages on the old domain when you got penalized ?
-
Thanks Marie - I will try your suggestion.
I did a search using the regular operators to see if my old site was still indexed and Google returned a "we can't find it on this server-that's all we know" Sergent Shultz response, but knowing Google that does not necessarily mean pages are not still in their index.
-
I had this happen with a client I worked with. The client's previous site had a severe Penguin issue so he decided to start over. We did everything properly and did not do any redirects from the old site to the new. But we were surprised when suddenly the WMT console for the new site was showing all of the links that went to the old site!
What happened? It's complicated but it has to do with something that is described here by Dejan SEO: http://dejanseo.com.au/mind-blowing-hack/
Basically, when Google sees a duplicate of a page they will assign the page's links to that site.
What I don't know is whether those links are carrying any link juice and also any penalty with them.
What we did was go back into the WMT console for the old site and use the url removal tool to remove every single url from the index AND the cache for the old site.
It took about 2 weeks for the links to disappear from WMT for the new site.
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
-
301 redirects broken - problems - please help!
Hi, I have a bit of an issue... Around a year ago we launched a new company. This company was launched out of a trading style of another company owned by our parent group (the trading style no longer exists). We used a lot of the content from the old trading style website, carefully mapping page-to-page 301 redirects, using the change of address tool in webmaster tools and generally did a good job of it. The reason I know we did a good job is that although we lost some traffic in the month we rebranded, we didn't lose rankings. We have since gained traffic exponentially and have managed to increase our organic traffic by over 200% over the last year. All well and good. However, a mistake has recently occurred whereby the old trading style website domain was deleted from the server for a period of around 2-3 weeks. It has since been reinstated. Since then, although we haven't lost rankings for the keywords we track I can see in webmaster tools that a number of our pages have been deindexed (around 100+). It has been suggested that we put the old homepage back up, and include a link to the XML sitemap to get Google to recrawl the old URLs and reinstate our 301 redirects. I'm OK with this (up to a point - personally I don't think it's an elegant solution) however I always thought you didn't need a link to the xml sitemap from the website and that the crawlers should just find it? Our current plan is not to put the homepage up exactly as it was (I don't believe this would make good business sense given that the company no longer exists), but to make it live with an explanation that the website has moved to a different domain with a big old button pointing to the new site. I'm wondering if we also need a button to the xml sitemap or not? I know I can put a sitemap link in the robots file, but I wonder if that would be enough for Google to find it? Any insights would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Amelia
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CommT0 -
Content Transfer for Penguin Induced Domain Switch
One of my customers has a mature site that performs very well in ranking and traffic for major keywords, prosun.com. A few years ago we started welproma.com because they were changing their name and branding. We built up welproma.com as an eventual replacement and ramped up to 30% of the Prosun.com traffic. Penguin hit a bit in 2012 but very bad May 24, 2013 and it keeps getting worse. Now they are backing out of the name change, reverting back to prosun.com as the main website. Unfortunately the Welproma.com content is far better in quantity and quality so we would prefer not to waste it. Does anyone think it is a problem to take essentially the exact content from the newer, penalized site and move it to the older well performing site. We will use no links whatsoever between the two sites and take down the new one once we switch.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | phogan0 -
Penguin 2.0 Recovery - Penguin Update Rerun yet or not
I have been hit by the penguin 2.0 update some five months back. I believe that I have an algorythmic penalty applied to my sites. While the work to cleanup etc has been done, there is certainly no recovery. I also notice a lack of recovery stories. In fact I think anyone affected cannot recover because a recalculation has not happened? Does anyone think that a recalculation of the penguin 2.0 penalties has happened? If so why do they think that.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jurnii0 -
Google penguin penalty(s), please help
Hi MozFans, I have got a question out of the field about www.coloringpagesabc.com.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MaartenvandenBos
Question is why the rankings and traffic are going down down down the last 4 months. Costumer thinks he got hit by google penguin update(s). The site has about 600 page’s/posts al ‘optimized’ for old seo:
- Almost all posts are superb optimized for one keyword combination (like … coloring pages) there is a high keyword density on the keyword titles and descriptions are all the same like: <keyword>and this is the rest of my title, This is my description <keyword>and i like it internal linking is all with a ‘perfect’ keyword anchor text there is a ok backlink profile, not much links to inner pages
- there are social signals the content quality is low The site to me looks like a seo over optimized content farm Competition:
When I look at the competition. The most coloring pages websites don’t offer a lot of content (text) on there page. The offer a small text and the coloring pages (What it is about :-)) How to get the rankings back:
What I was thinking to do. rewrite the content to a smaller text. Low keyword density on the keyword and put the coloring pages up front. rewrite all titles and descriptions to unique titles and descriptions Make some internal links to related posts with a other anchor text. get linkbuilding going on inner pages get more social signals Am I on the right track? I can use some advise what to do, and where to start. Thanks!!</keyword></keyword> Maarten0 -
Website design agency - Penguin update could effect us?
Hi Guys, Just wanted to pick your brains here - I have a client who I have just taken on who is a small website design agency, all their clients they have built websites for over the years have the anchor text; 'website design' Will the website be effected by the new Penguin update due to the face they have thousands of links on clients websites they have built all witht he same anchor text? One idea I thought about is to build links into different pages of the website on future client websites? Any help or guidance would be much appreciated ! thank you Thanks Gareth
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GAZ090 -
Is Affiliate masking a problem for Google?
Does Google consider affiliate masking as unethical? I have a offer website that has 1000's of affiliate links that are masked. I feel google does not like masking URL's which is why my ranking started dropping. Can any one explain the context of affiliate masking please?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SEOMad0 -
Problem with 404 and 500 Status code pages
Dear SeoMozzers, I have a question related to one of the sites I have recently changed the URL, going from http:example.com to http://www.example.com I did 301 redirects, as I was recommended to do. In the past month I have noticed an incredible drop in Google's rankings for many keywords and checking the crawling errors appearing in the SEO Crawling Report I have witnessed mayhem with Canonical/301 redirect types of errors. Now, things seem a little better. I have noticed a reduction in the number of 301 and Canonical type or errors (by the way, I still do not get the Canonical issue :-)). My little questions are the following: Will I ever go back to the positions I used to occupy before I redesigned the site's URL structure? I have now noticed that the SeoMoz Crawling report show "404 Staus" errors and one "505 Status" error. Can somebody please tell me how to fix the 404 Status Errors? Can I fix them by myself, or maybe I can ask the guys at the web hosting company, since I am really bad at taking care of technical issues? Thank you for the time you took to clarify my doubts. Ad maiora, Sal
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | salvyy0 -
Nuanced duplicate content problem.
Hi guys, I am working on a recently rebuilt website, which has some duplicate content issues that are more nuanced than usual. I have a plan of action (which I will describe further), so please let me know if it's a valid plan or if I am missing something. Situation: The client is targeting two types of users: business leads (Type A) and potential employees (Type B), so for each of their 22 locations, they have 2 pages - one speaking to Type A and another to Type B. Type A location page contains a description of the location. In terms of importance, Type A location pages are secondary because to the Type A user, locations are not of primary importance. Type B location page contains the same description of the location plus additional lifestyle description. These pages carry more importance, since they are attempting to attract applicants to work in specific places. So I am planning to rank these pages eventually for a combination of Location Name + Keyword. Plan: New content is not an option at this point, so I am planning to set up canonical tags on both location Types and make Type B, the canonical URL, since it carries more importance and more SEO potential. The main nuance is that while Type A and Type B location pages contain some of the same content (about 75%-80%), they are not exactly the same. That is why I am not 100% sure that I should canonicalize them, but still most of the wording on the page is identical, so... Any professional opinion would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | naymark.biz0