Dropped ranking - Penguin penalty or duplicate content issue?
-
Just this weekend a page that had been ranking well for a competitive term fell completely out of the rankings. There are two possible causes and I'm trying to figure out which it is, so I can take action.
I found out that I had accidentally put a canonical on another page that was for the same page as the one that dropped out of the rankings. If there are two pages with the same canonical tag with different content, will google drop both of them from the index?
The other possibility is that this is a result of the recent Penguin update. The page that dropped has a high amount of exact anchor text. As far as I can tell, there were no other pages with any penalties from the Penguin update.
One last question: The page completely dropped from the search index. If this were a Penguin issue, would it have dropped out completely,or just been penalized with a drop in position?
If this is a result of the conflicting canonical tags, should I just wait for it to reindex, or should I request a reconsideration of the page?
-
Yes I think it was a Penguin drop. There is one other thing about the page that dropped. It is using a 301 re-direct. I had updated the page url a while ago, but nearly all of the links to the page are to the old page. So this penalty might be a combination of signals that collectively have tagged that page.
I'm working on cleaning up the link profile right now. I think that Penguin is a very imperfect animal. But I cant change the beast, so I will just have to make some changes here.
-
It's unlikely the canonical is to blame here, if I'm understanding it correctly. If you tried to canonicalize Page B to Page A, and they were clearly different, one of two things should happen:
(1) Google will just ignore it.
(2) Google will follow it anyway, and drop Page B from the index.
Now, it's theoretically possible that, if Google thought you were using the canonical tag inappropriately to benefit Page A, they could punish Page A, but I've honestly never seen that happen (I've seen it with 301-redirects). Typically, Page B would also have to have a lot of links that you were trying to "clean" (think money laundering). Since Page B is new, this seems very unlikely.
If you're hitting exact-match (or close to it) anchor text hard on Page A, it's certainly possible Penguin came into play, especially if Page A is pushing keywords a bit too hard. It's been tough to confirm Penguin cases, but most of the verified ones I've seen are sudden drops. It's not a subtle, gradual impact.
You could wait for the next Penguin data update, but I suspect you may have to do some link clean up. If there's anything that's not only exact-match anchor text but is sitewide (especially footer links), I'd start there. They seem to be major targets of Penguin. Truthfully, though, we're still collecting data on it.
-
Thanks for the reply!
What happened was that I added a new page and accidentally used the canonical for the page that was ranking well for search terms on that new page.
So to state it a different way - I added a new Page B to the site, but instead of using the canonical for that page, I accidentally used the canonical for Page A. Page A is the page that previously had ranked well for search terms. On Saturday night or Sunday, Page A dropped out of all of the search terms that it ranks for. However, I did a little more research and Page A is still in the index, it just doesnt rank for any of the search terms it used to. Page B is also in the index, but since it is a new page, it does not really rank for any terms. Obviously, I have fixed the canonical on Page B and Google already has the new page in its cache.
As far as over-optimization penalties, Page A has nearly all the inbound links with anchor text that is only a slight variation of the search term. It is the page on the site that I would have expected to have got hit by Penguin. There are some other pages that have lost a little bit of ranking, but nothing drastic.
I am just surprised that if it is a Penguin penalty, it would completely lose ranking on the terms in a single day, rather than moving down the rankings to maybe the third or fourth page. Do you find that Penguin penalties usually result in a lower ranking, or completely losing rankings?
Either way, I'm going to go in and clean up the link profile, but it would be nice to know how aggressive I should be to try to recover that page.
-
I've seen some reports of sites being hit by the Penguin data update ("Penguin 1.1") on Friday night, but I'm not clear on the severity. If it's just one page, though, and it was completely de-indexed, that's pretty unlikely.
It is definitely possible for a bad canonical tag to drop a page from the index. I'm a little confused on what you're saying about the two pages. Are they both canonical'ed to a third page, or to each other? Could you give an example (maybe show us two tags that are similar to what you have, but with the exact details changed)?
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
-
Content Strategy/Duplicate Content Issue, rel=canonical question
Hi Mozzers: We have a client who regularly pays to have high-quality content produced for their company blog. When I say 'high quality' I mean 1000 - 2000 word posts written to a technical audience by a lawyer. We recently found out that, prior to the content going on their blog, they're shipping it off to two syndication sites, both of which slap rel=canonical on them. By the time the content makes it to the blog, it has probably appeared in two other places. What are some thoughts about how 'awful' a practice this is? Of course, I'm arguing to them that the ranking of the content on their blog is bound to be suffering and that, at least, they should post to their own site first and, if at all, only post to other sites several weeks out. Does anyone have deeper thinking about this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Daaveey0 -
Ranking dropped after changing title tag
I recently changed my company's site homepage title tag to make it start with our target keyword. The page was originally at page #7 or #8 and dropped to page #17 directly after I changed the page title. Is this normal? Is it's a temporary drop or should I change it back to the previous title.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ForumOne0 -
How would you handle this duplicate content - noindex or canonical?
Hello Just trying look at how best to deal with this duplicated content. On our Canada holidays page we have a number of holidays listed (PAGE A)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KateWaite
http://www.naturalworldsafaris.com/destinations/north-america/canada/suggested-holidays.aspx We also have a more specific Arctic Canada holidays page with different listings (PAGE B)
http://www.naturalworldsafaris.com/destinations/arctic-and-antarctica/arctic-canada/suggested-holidays.aspx Of the two, the Arctic Canada page (PAGE B) receives a far higher number of visitors from organic search. From a user perspective, people expect to see all holidays in Canada (PAGE A), including the Arctic based ones. We can tag these to appear on both, however it will mean that the PAGE B content will be duplicated on PAGE A. Would it be the best idea to set up a canonical link tag to stop this duplicate content causing an issue. Alternatively would it be best to no index PAGE A? Interested to see others thoughts. I've used this (Jan 2011 so quite old) article for reference in case anyone else enters this topic in search of information on a similar thing: Duplicate Content: Block, Redirect or Canonical - SEO Tips0 -
Duplicate content when changing a site's URL due to algorithm penalty
Greetings A client was hit by penguin 2.1, my guess is that this was due to linkbuilding using directories. Google webmaster tools has detected about 117 links to the site and they are all from directories. Furthermore, the anchor texts are a bit too "perfect" to be natural, so I guess this two factors have earned the client's site an algorithm penalty (no manual penalty warning has been received in GWT). I have started to clean some of the backlinks, on Oct the 11th. Some of the webmasters I asked complied with my request to eliminate backlinks, some didn´t, I disavowed the links from the later. I saw some improvements on mid october for the most important KW (see graph) but ever since then the rankings have been falling steadily. I'm thinking about giving up on the domain name and just migrating the site to a new URL. So FINALLY MY QUESTION IS: if I migrate this 6-page site to a new URL, should I change the content completely ? I mean, if I just copy paste the content of the curent site into a new URL I will incur in dpolicate content, correct?. Is there some of the content I can copy ? or should I just start from scratch? Cheers hRggeNE
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Masoko-T0 -
Duplicate keyphrases in page titles = penalty?
Hello Mozzers - just looking at a website which has duplicate keyphrases in its page titles... So you have [keyphrase 1] | [exact match Keyphrase 1] Now I happen to know this particular site has suffered a dramatic fall in traffic - the SEO agency working on the site had advised the client to duplicate keyphrases. Hard to believe, huh! What I'm wondering is whether this extensive exact match keyphrase duplication might've been enough to attract a penalty? Your thoughts would be welcome.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Does having a page that ends with ? cause duplicate content?
I am working on a site that has lots of dynamic parameters. So lets say we have www.example.com/page?parameter=1 When the page has no parameters you can still end up at www.example.com/page? Should I redirect this to www.example.com/page/ ? Im not sure if Google ignores this, or if these pages need to be dealt with. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MarloSchneider0 -
Subdomains - duplicate content - robots.txt
Our corporate site provides MLS data to users, with the end goal of generating leads. Each registered lead is assigned to an agent, essentially in a round robin fashion. However we also give each agent a domain of their choosing that points to our corporate website. The domain can be whatever they want, but upon loading it is immediately directed to a subdomain. For example, www.agentsmith.com would be redirected to agentsmith.corporatedomain.com. Finally, any leads generated from agentsmith.easystreetrealty-indy.com are always assigned to Agent Smith instead of the agent pool (by parsing the current host name). In order to avoid being penalized for duplicate content, any page that is viewed on one of the agent subdomains always has a canonical link pointing to the corporate host name (www.corporatedomain.com). The only content difference between our corporate site and an agent subdomain is the phone number and contact email address where applicable. Two questions: Can/should we use robots.txt or robot meta tags to tell crawlers to ignore these subdomains, but obviously not the corporate domain? If question 1 is yes, would it be better for SEO to do that, or leave it how it is?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EasyStreet0 -
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