Is Google's reinclusion request process flawed?
-
We have been having a bit of a nightmare with a Google penalty (please see http://www.browsermedia.co.uk/2012/04/25/negative-seo-or-google-just-getting-it-painfully-wrong/ or http://econsultancy.com/uk/blog/10093-why-google-needs-to-be-less-kafkaesque for background information - any thoughts on why we have been penalised would be very, very welcome!) which has highlighted a slightly alarming aspect of Google's reinclusion process.
As far as I can see (using Google Analytics), supporting material prepared as part of a reinclusion request is basically ignored. I have just written an open letter to the search quality team at http://www.browsermedia.co.uk/2012/06/19/dear-matt-cutts/ which gives more detail but the short story is that the supporting evidence that we prepared as part of a request was NOT viewed by anyone at Google.
Has anyone monitored this before and experienced the same thing? Does anyone have any suggestions regarding how to navigate the treacherous waters of resolving a penalty?
This no doubt sounds like a sob story for us, but I do think that this is a potentially big issue and one that I would love to explore more.
If anyone could contribute from the search quality team, we would love to hear your thoughts!
Cheers,
Joe
-
Thank you for your thoughts.
I agree that they must be swamped and most of the 'complaints' you can see on the Google forums fully deserve to be penalised in my humble opinion, but I think that the total lack of communication is more damaging than helpful.
If they want to improve the web, why do they not give more details about what is causing the problem? By being more transparent and helping webmasters to eradicate spammy techniques, everyone will be forced into improving their sites for all the right reasons.
If they don't have the resource to handle the reinclusion requests, then they shouldn't have it as an option.
I still feel that it is very poor not to even look at the files that were prepared - that shows a lack of respect.
I agree that it is likely to be something simple. The 'spike' theory is still the strongest contender for me, due to the timings of events, but that is alarming if it proves to be true as we were effectively penalised for doing exactly what Google encourages (creating good content that will naturally attract links).
Another possible cause is the fact that we have got a number of directory links over the years. Whilst I have never considered these to be high quality links, I have never seen Google saying that you shouldn't submit your site to them (indeed, they used to actively suggest that submitting to Yahoo! was a good idea) and it is a way for Google to outsource some human assessment of sites (assuming that the directories do check your sites).
If it is the directories, then the door for negative SEO is so wide open that it is alarming. As many have said, completely ignoring such links would be better than penalising you.
We are still no closer to understanding what we have done wrong, despite every effort to adhere to the guidelines and a lot of work trying to audit / document our link profile. With very little faith in the reinclusion process, where can we possibly turn to now?
We will see. There were multiple views of the open letter from Google, so somebody somewhere has seen it and I just hope that there is some form of response.
The irony is that we spend most of our life defending Google and encouraging clients to improve what they are doing online. On this occasion, I really find it hard to defend them. I appreciate that we are a drop in a mighty ocean, but the principle is one that I think is an important one and one that I will pursue.
Thanks again for your contribution,
Joe
-
Not sticking up for them but you have to appreciate the amount of people that would probably try to send them all sorts of viruses anyway they can, also they probably don;t have or want to take the time looking at everyone so closely, basically they will just see if the offending stuff is still there, if it is they won't give you any love.
Honestly, it's probably something so simple you have overlooked it. Keyword ratio's above 6% can be taken as spam depending on content amount, non relevent link coming in/going out, links from already penalzed sites, anything unnatural is now what google has been focusing on, not just backlinks, so go through your site, obviously the HP is the first point to start at, if you are really sure there is nothing going on in the way of spaminess or over optimization, comb through your other pages. It will usually be a problem one your best ranked pages. Or, ex best ranked pages if you have been hit with a penguin slap.
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
-
Moved brand's shop to a new domain. will our organic traffic recuperate?
Hello, We are a healthcare company with a strong domain authority and several thousand pages of service related content at brand.com. We've been operating an ancillary ecommerce store that sells related 3rd party products at brand.com/shop for a little over a year. We recently invested in a platform upgrade and moved our site to a new domain, brandshop.com. We implemented page-level 301 redirects including all category pages, product detail pages, canonical and non-canonical URLs, etc.. which the understanding that there would not be any loss in page rank. What we're seeing over the last 2 months is an initial dive in organic traffic, followed by a ramp-up period of if impressions (but not position) in the following weeks, another drop and we've steady at this low for the last 2 weeks. Another area that might have hurt us, the 301 redirects were implemented correctly immediately post launch (on a wednesday), but it was discovered on the following Monday that our .htaccess file had reverted to an old version without the redirect rules. For 3-4 days, all traffic was being redirected from brand.com/shop/url to brandshop.com/badurl. Can we expect to recover our organic traffic giving the launch screw up with the .htaccess file, or is it more of an issue with us separating from the brand.com domain? Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | eugene_p
Eugene0 -
Canonical's, Social Signals and Multi-Regional website.
Hi all, I have a website that is setup to target different countries by using subfolders. Example /aus/, /us/, /nz/. The homepage itself is just a landing page redirect to whichever country the user belongs to. Example somebody accesses https://domain/ and will be redirected to one of the country specific sub folders. The default subfolder is /us/, so all users will be redirected to it if their country has not been setup on the website. The content is mostly the same on each country site apart from localisation and in some case content specific to that country. I have set up each country sub folder as a separate site in Search Console and targeted /aus/ to AU users and /nz/ to NZ users. I've also left the /us/ version un-targeted to any specific geographical region. In addition to this I've also setup hreflang tags for each page on the site which links to the same content on the other country subfolder. I've target /aus/ and /nz/ to en-au and en-nz respectively and targeted /us/ to en-us and x-default as per various articles around the web. We generally advertise our links without a country code prefix, and the system will automatically redirect the user to the correct country when they hit that url. Example, somebody accesses https://domain/blog/my-post/, a 302 will be issues for https://domain/aus/blog/my-post/ or https://domain/us/blog/my-post/ etc.. The country-less links are advertised on Facebook and in all our marketing campaigns Overall, I feel our website is ranking quite poorly and I'm wondering if poor social signals are a part of it? We have a decent social following on Facebook (65k) and post regular blog posts to our Facebook page that tend to peek quite a bit of interest. I would have expected that this would contribute to our ranking at least somewhat? I am wondering whether the country-less link we advertise on Facebook would be causing Googlebot to ignore it as a social signal for the country specific pages on our website. Example Googlebot indexes https://domain/us/blog/my-post/ and looks for social signals for https://domain/us/blog/my-post/ specifically, however, it doesn't pick up anything because the campaign url we use is https://domain/blog/my-post/. If that is the case, I am wondering how I would fix that, to receive the appropriate social signals /us/blog/my-post/, /aus/blog/my-post/ & /nz/blog/my-post/. I am wondering if changing the canonical url to the country-less url of each page would improve my social signals and performance in the search engines overall. I would be interested to hear your feedback. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | destinyrescue0 -
Weird behavior with site's rankings
I have a problem with my site's rankings.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Mcurius
I rank for higher difficulty (but lower search volume) keywords , but my site gets pushed back for lower difficulty, higher volume keywords, which literally pisses me off. I thought very seriously to start new with a new domain name, cause what ever i do seems that is not working. I will admit that in past (2-3 years ago) i used some of those "seo packages" i had found, but those links which were like no more than 50, are all deleted now, and the domains are disavowed.
The only thing i can think of, is that some how my site got flagged as suspicious or something like that in google. Like 1 month ago, i wrote an article about a topic related with my niche, around a keyword that has difficulty 41%. The search term in 1st page has high authority domains, including a wikipedia page, and i currently rank in the 3rd place. In the other had, i would expect to rank easily for a keyword difficulty of 30-35% but is happening the exact opposite.The pages i try to rank, are not spammy, are checked with moz tools, and also with canirank spam filters. All is good and green. Plus the content of those pages i try to rank have a Content Relevancy Score which varies from 98% to 100%... Your opinion would be very helpful, thank you.0 -
- Truth ? ''link building isn't considered a suitable way of promotion as per recent search engine updates''
I need SEO. A SEO consultant said: ''link building isn't considered a suitable way of promotion as per recent search engine updates'' they mention: ''Therefore we would be undertaking a range of promotional exercises such as blog postings, social book marking, press release, etc that are more effective for ensuring best possible rankings for the website.'' Do you agree? Thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BigBlaze2051 -
Does hiding responsive design elements on smaller media types impact Google's mobile crawler?
I have a responsive site and we hide elements on smaller media types. For example, we have an extensive sitemap in the footer on desktop, but when you shrink the viewport to mobile we don't show the footer. Does this practice make Google's mobile bot crawler much less efficient and therefore impact our mobile search rankings?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jcgoodrich1 -
Why did this website disappear from Google's SERPs?
For the first several months this website, WEBSITE, ranked well in Google for several local search terms like, "Columbia MO spinal decompression" and "Columbia, MO car accident therapy." Recently the website has completely disappeared from Google's SEPRs. It does not even exist when I copy and paste full paragraphs into Google's search bar. The website still ranks fine in Bing and Yahoo, but something happened that caused it to be removed from Google. Beside for optimizing the meta data, adding headers, alt tags, and all of the typical on-page SEO stuff, we did create a guest post for a relevant, local blog. Here is the post: Guest Post. The post's content is 100% unique. I realize the post has way to many internal/external links, which we definitely did not recommend, but can anyone find a reason why this website was removed from Google's SERPs? And possibly how we should go about getting it back into Google's SERPs? Thanks in advance for any help.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | VentaMarketing0 -
Google isn't displaying the www. for my site in the SERPS
I noticed that every other site url in the serps for my main keywords has a www. on their display url except mine. I have the site set to display the www. Can this potentially hurt my SEO and what can I do to fix this? Thanks Aaron. www.png
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | afranklin0