Manual Webspam Error by Google!

[users_engaged]

Hi,back in June 2013, our company received a notice of unnatural links which resulted in 'a manual spam action' from Google.A reconsideration request was filed a week later which received the following response from Google:_'We reviewed your site and found no manual actions by the webspam team that might affect your site's ranking in Google. There's no need to file a reconsideration request for your site, because any ranking issues you may be experiencing are not related to a manual action taken by the webspam team.'_Naturally we are confused by what seems to be an error in Google's communication.We are also left questioning whether it was necessary to remove the links Google stated were unnatural.Since the notice was received, we have struggled to recover traffic even after implementing Google best practices.  Some clarity on the issue would be greatly appreciated.My URL is: www.homefurnitureland.co.uk

[users_engaged]

Hi Jane,

to clarify, the site had been hit heavily by Panda in 2011 and again in 2012 by Penguin. Both are prior to the manual spam action, so we are aware of the impact each has had.

The purpose of the post was to see if anyone within the community has experienced a similar error in communication from Google and could recommend a course of address.

We are also aware of the backlink profile and manipulated anchors, but would like to thank you for your analysis.

Regarding the miscommunication, we have decided to approach a few individuals from the webspam team on Google + for a resolution.

Thanks again for your input : )

M.

[JaneCopland]

Hi Marek,

Very few people get anywhere with the tweet-Matt option sadly

If you received a manual penalty, this has little to do with Penguin updates - the penalty has been handed out by a member of the Webspam team rather than by the algorithm.

What concerns me about your links is firstly how many links point to the site using commercial terms rather than brand terms as anchor text. This is one of the red flags Penguin looks for, but it's also amazingly easy for a person to discover: http://i.imgur.com/INcW11X.png

No backlink profile created "naturally" (and I realise how hard it is to create a natural backlink profile) would look like that. A Googler would take a dim view of that anchor text spread.

Secondly, I'm curious about the sites that link to you using those anchors. I tried visiting them and many of them returned the exact same 500 database error: http://i.imgur.com/lQHEk3p.png + http://i.imgur.com/zpw6YC7.png

All these sites have the same IP address. The other sites hosted on this IP are all down as well: http://www.bing.com/search?q=ip%3A176.67.167.170&go=&qs=n&form=QBLH&filt=all&pq=ip%3A176.67.167.170&sc=0-3&sp=-1&sk=&cvid=fd590e3d130749f290febb6a76973ced

If links were placed on this network of sites all hosted on the same IP, this would absolutely be grounds for a penalty. The weird thing to me is not the penalty but the fact that you were later told you didn't have one.

It's also worth noting that I'd recommend removing those links, penalty warning / loss of rankings or not. There are some other low-quality pages linking to you multiple times with competitive anchors, like http://www.lanaintl.com/all-about-desks-and-its-types. This just looks ridiculously unnatural and manipulative: http://www.lanaintl.com/ - starts off talking about Albuquerque pest control, them keeps linking out to a UK furniture store

You've also got commercial links from sites with identical themes: http://www.house2homefurniture.com/lc-140-xx.html

Link removal is absolutely necessary here, I'm afraid. These bad links all have to go.

[users_engaged]

Hi Marie,

I think it depends on the level of impact and number of unnatural links.

After all, a website with 100% natural links will appear unnatural!

M.

[MarieHaynes]

In almost every case, if a site is affected by Penguin or Panda it happens right at the time of a Penguin/Panda refresh or update.  Sometimes it can be a gradual decline, but it should start on the day that the algorithm refreshed.  If you have a drop that happens at another time then there could be other issues there.

"In both cases, link removal would not have been necessary as the algorithm adjusted our rankings accordingly. "

I would disagree with this statement.  For Penguin, while it's true that the algorithm has already devalued your bad links, having them still pointing to your site is not a good thing.  Penguin tends to assign a level of trust to your site.  If Google still sees unnatural links then not only are they devalued, but your site has sort of a stigma on it as well.  You definitely want to remove or disavow any unnatural (i.e. self made) links that you have.

[users_engaged]

Hi Marie,

The site was hit by both Panda and Penguin, although not at the time of the supposed penalty.

In both cases, link removal would not have been necessary as the algorithm adjusted our rankings accordingly.

So its frustrating to be told by Google to remove links only to later discover this was not necessary.

Will try your suggested hangouts with John.

Many thanks Marie!

[users_engaged]

Hi Jane,

My clients ranking losses are correlated more closely to Panda updates, although Penguin has had some impact.

In both cases, link removal would not have been necessary as the algorithm adjusted rankings accordingly.

So to then be asked by Google to remove links, only to be told later that this wasn't necessary, has been both frustrating and damaging for the business.

Question is, how do we raise this with Google? Tweet Matt Cutts directly?!

[MarieHaynes]

Hi Marek,

I have a few thoughts.  It's odd that you received a message and then when you filed for reconsideration you were told there was no penalty.  Back in June of 2013 any site could file for reconsideration.  But, now, you can only do so if you actually have a manual penalty.  Otherwise, no "request review" button is visible.

John Mueller recently said in a hangout that if the manual spam actions viewer shows no penalty then you can be certain that there is no manual penalty.  So, it's unlikely that there is still a manual penalty there and you just don't have access to see it.  Still, one thing you could do is contact John Mueller through Google+ and ask if he could have the webspam team take a look.  You may not get a reply, but if there has been some kind of error then it should come to light.

My guess though is that you are probably suffering under EITHER the Penguin or the Panda algorithm or possibly both.  You've definitely got unnatural links such as this one: http://www.house2homefurniture.com/ which make Penguin a possibility.  A lot of e-commerce sites were affected by Panda.  A quick site:search shows a large number of pages in the Google index.  Are they all adding unique, quality content?

It's probably a good idea to go through your organi bc traffic and see if you can pinpoint the day of your drop and see if it coincides with the date of a known Penguin or Panda refresh.  http://moz.com/google-algorithm-change

[users_engaged]

William,

there are two place you can look for notices and webspam actions in WMT:

1. 'Site Messages'

2. 'Search Traffic > Manual Actions'

The 'webspam action' and 'reconsideration request' was received in 'Site Messages'. As was the subsequent message stating no webspam action was taken and a reconsideration request wasn't necessary. Clearly there's been miscommunication from Google resulting in links being removed and lost unnecessarily.

How do we take this up with Google? Tweet Matt Cutts directly?!

[WilliamKammer]

How did you know you received a manual action if there's no message about it in Webmasters? If there was a message there and now it's gone, then congratulations! You got it removed, and they had poor communication while informing you of such.

Also, just because a MANUAL action no longer exists doesn't mean you are free and clear. You could still be penalized for spammy links, just not manually.

Link cleanup is a good thing, with or without a manual action. Clean up your stuff, so you can  know where you stand on that front. Then if you are still suffering, look into other areas.

[users_engaged]

Guys,

let me rephrase.

The issue is, Google said they implemented a manual spam action and then later said they didn't.

So we were made to remove links for no apparent reason!

If I check Webmaster Tools > Search Traffic > Manual Actions, there are 'no manual webspam actions found'!

M.

[JaneCopland]

Hi Marek,

Agree with William that doing the reconsideration request in the same week is too soon, barring exceptional circumstances. By that, I mean that if you had been actively removing bad links in the weeks / months leading up to receiving the spam action notice / penalty, you could submit a reconsideration request and cite this. However, in general Google does like to see significant effort on a webmaster's part to get rid of bad links before asking for reconsideration. What this means is that your request should show the activity you've engaged in to try and remove links: how many emails you have sent to the websites hosting the bad links, how many replies you've had, how many of those links were removed as the results of your efforts and how man you feel you cannot remove due to inaction on the part of the webmaster or your inability to find a real person to contact.

It's confusing that you received a message saying that you did not in fact have manual action against your site if you were previously told that you did - this could just be a glitch, but if that first message coincided with a ranking problem that is persisting, I would say that it is necessary to remove the poor quality links pointing to the site, including those from low-quality sites, and those with overly-optimised anchor text.

Cheers,

Jane

[Kingof5]

From a quick glance at OSE, looks like you do have some backlinks to clean up. Your anchor text is heavily weighted towards money terms - primarily [oak furniture], [solid oak furniture], and [oak office furniture]. Plus sites like http://www.lanaintl.com/basic-info-about-real-estate-agents (which you have a backlink from) are clearly spammy.

[WilliamKammer]

I'm assuming you submitted a disavow report? If so, it must have been within a week of the reconsideration request, which is too short in my opinion. I like to give disavows longer than that to be recognized by Google.

Google wants to see you put a lot of work into link clean up, multiple contacts to the webmasters asking for removal and such.

Google is a slow moving machine and its tough to be patient. It's possible you were too fast for Google. I would recommend trying again. Update your disavow report, force crawl, wait 2 weeks, explain everything in a new reconsideration request.