Ads above the fold penalty. Should I request reinclusion?
-
HI!
My site has been losing traffic slowly for about 18 months. But it was in January 19 that was hit big time.
My site has a lot of ads, including two 300x250 above the fold ads that were very lucrative for me.
After January 19, I decided to remove only one ad of those two, but no change was reflected in the traffic.
It is obvious that I needed to remove the other ad, but I didn't do it for two reasons.
-
I still earn money from that ad and removing it would result in serious problems.
-
A webmaster friend of mine that was hit too by this penalty, removed the ads and tried all sort of stuff to regain the lost traffic with NO LUCK in several months. He has unique and excellent content. So, after seeing his experience I didn't want to touch my biggest source of income and leave it as it is.
My site has other problems that concerns Panda and maybe Penguin, and since yesterday I've been starting to fix them.
Is it a good idea to request a reinclusion to check if I was manually penalized, without being previously notified by GWMT of any problem in my site?
Thanks in advance,
Enrique
-
-
Yes, I have it all. Not sure about incoming spammy links. I did almost everything to my site (datafeeds, lots of ads, duplicate content, etc.) but never engaged in spammy links.
I will try to find some other way to show ads and see what happens.
Thanks!
-
Google DOES allow ads above the fold. As long as your are not slapping the visitors face with your ads and the visitor has zero problems finding your page content without scrolling then ads are allowed.
If Google did not allow ads above the fold then most of the content providers on the web would go bankrupt.
My best is that you have a duplicate content, a skimpy content, a thin affiliate or links problem.
-
Hi Enrique,
Google don't give manual penalties for too many ads above the fold. Their manual penalities are for blatent violations of their webmaster guidlines, so things like buying links, cloaking or hidden text.
Although they recommend not putting too many ads above the fold from a user experience perspective, it's certainly not one of their terms and conditions and wouldn't be the cause of a penalty.
If you friend tried removing his ads and saw no recovery, it could be one of several issues:
-
It might not have been the excessive ads that were causing his problem
-
If it was the ads, he may not have removed them for long enough for the Panda update to be refreshed
One very important thing though; the ads above the fold issue and the Panda issue are the same thing.
It's the same algorithm update that is focused on user experience. It is nothing manual, and the only way to recover is to fix all the issues and wait for the refresh.
If you're fixing the site then that's a great start. With a bit of luck your new site will regain the rankings with your ads still in place, and then everyone is happy
Thanks,
David
-
-
Thanks David, and yes, I've been hit by panda and I know my site's weakness (most of it!). But it is difficult to make changes when your site was built 10 years ago with a different web in mind. I'm rebuilding it again (a whole new site with THIS CURRENT web in mind).
But I was not speaking about Panda specifically, I meant the "Ads above the fold" issue.
In January 19 my site was hit very hard by that update. Very hard. That was why I thought about a penalty.
You may think I'm dumb or something. I could fix it by just removing the ads an that's it.
But as I mentioned in my first post, a webmaster I work closely with had the same problem and removing the ads didn't help him a bit.
So, that's why I was wondering if it was a manual penalty, and requesting reinclusion was a solution to confirm it.
Thanks!
Enrique
-
Hi Enrique,
Firstly, the Panda update which you mention isn't penalty, it's an algorithmic updated that Google implemented with the general aim of reducing the number of poor quality sites in the search results.
By poor quality; they mean sites that have thin or duplicate content, sites that contain excessive advertising, and sites that are poorly designed or constructed.
If it is Panda (which it sounds like it could be considering the 18 month decline), a re-inclusion request won't help. This update is refreshed periodically (roughly every 4-6 weeks), so if you had fixed the issues on your site you would see your rankings return when it was refreshed.
The main issues to fix are generally around the quality and originality of the content, however depending how excessive your advertising is this might need to be addressed to.
There are some great resources out there for finding out if it is Panda that's effecting your site, and if so how to recover. My personal favourite is here on SeoMoz by Cyrus Shepherd:
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/beat-google-panda
From speaking to many Webmasters, the one thing I have found is that the people that recover are the ones who are willing to take a critical look at their own website and really own up to it's weaknesses. For example, you say your friend tried excellent content, but by what standard was it excellent? His own standards might be very different than that of Google.
The best way to stay ahead of updates like Panda is by being your own worst critic, and constantly challenging yourself to make your website the best it can possible be.
David
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
-
When to file a Reconsideration Request
Hi all, I don't have any manual penalties from Google but do have a unnatural links message from them back in 2012. We have removed some of the spammy links over the last 2 years but we're now making a further effort and will use the disavow tool once we've done this. Will this be enough once I submit the file or should I / can I submit a Reconsideration Request as well? Do I have to have a manual penalty item in my webmaster account to be able to submit a request? Thanks everyone!
Technical SEO | | KerryK0 -
Hit by a penalty? But which one?
Hi guys, First off, thanks for reading my post! My site, www.doctorloanusa.com suffered a massive drop in Google rankings and traffic on September 27. For the past 4 years, I've ranked in spots 1-3. My main keywords are physician loans and doctor loans. I had a competitor copy almost ALL my text. In early October, I filed a DMCA takedown and had the infringing site removed from the SERPS. I also made text changes to my site. I thought this duplicate content was the problem, but I have yet to see any improvements 2 months later. My site isn't particularly deep content-wise, but it's competitive with others in my niche. I have relatively few links but others in the SERPS have very similar link profiles. I tried to clean up a few questionable links and used the disavow tool. I have used the SEOmoz on-page tools to grade my site. Typically, I receive grade A reports. I still rank for my website URL, and still rank 1 in both Yahoo and Bing. My bounce rate is 43%. If anyone could provide insight, I would be very grateful. I need to get this site ranking again, as this property is my main source of income. Is the site over-optimized? Is it my anchor text profile? Thank you very much in advance!
Technical SEO | | Cary_Forest0 -
I'm getting duplicate content created with a random string of character added to the end of my blog post permalinks?
In an effort to clean up my blog content I noticed that I have a lot of posts getting tagged for duplicate content. It looks like ... http://carwoo.com/blog/october-sales-robust-stateside-european-outlook-poor-for-ford http://carwoo.com/blog/october-sales-robust-stateside-european-outlook-poor-for-ford/954bf0df0a0d02b700a06816f2276fa5/ Any thoughts on how and why this would be happening?
Technical SEO | | editabletext0 -
Has anyone seen direct improvement after April 23 by requesting reinclusion?
Using the open site explorer I have figured out that my former seo agency was buying name spam (mostly Asian sites)for my main keywords and did the same in a private network of blogs. I don't speak any eastern languages and seo Super Dude has left the planet. So... I don't really have much to report to the Google Webmaster folks. How much time - effort- cash do invest in removal requests vs, redo the whole darn site and hope for the best? All the best. Tom
Technical SEO | | tvw1300 -
Another 301 redirect question - penalty?
Good Morning, We have 2 sites have images and minimal text on them. The images have links that point to a 3<sup>rd</sup> site that facilitates eCommerce. Question: If we 301 redirect these sites permanently to yet a 4<sup>th</sup> site… 1) Does it violate any G’s guidelines 2) Should we delete the links embedded in the images (as they point to the 3<sup>rd</sup> site) Thanks
Technical SEO | | Prime850 -
Client's site dropped completely for all keywords, but not brand name - not manual penalty... help!
We just picked up a new search client a few weeks ago. They've been a customer (we're an automotive dealer website provider) since October of 2011. Their content was very generic (came from the previous provider), so we did a quick once-over as soon as he signed up. Beefed up his page content, made it more unique and relevant... tweaked title tags... wrote meta descriptions (he had none). In just over a week, he went from ranking on page 4 or 5 for his terms to ranking on page 2 or 3. My team was working on getting his social media set up, set up his blog, started competitor research... And then this last weekend, something happened and he dropped completely from the rankings... He still shows up if you do a site: search, or if you search his exact business name, but for everything else, he's nowhere to be found. His URL is www.ohioautowarehouse.com, business name is "Ohio Auto Warehouse" We filed a reconsideration request on Monday, and just got a reply today that there was no manual penalty. They suggested we check our content, but we know we didn't do anything spammy or blackhat. We hadn't even fully optimized his site yet - we were just finishing up his competitor research and were planning on a full site optimization next week... so we're at a complete loss as to what happened. Also, he's not ranking for any of the vehicles in his inventory. Our vehicle pages always rank on page 1 or 2, depending on how big the city is... you can always search "year make model city" and see our customers' sites (whether they're doing SEO or not). This guy's cars aren't showing up... so we know something is going on... Any help would be a lifesaver. We've been doing this for quite some time now, and we've never had a site get penalized. Since the reconsideration request didn't help, we're not sure what to do...
Technical SEO | | Greg_Gifford0 -
How to find original URLS after Hosting Company added canonical URLs, URL rewrites and duplicate content.
We recently changed hosting companies for our ecommerce website. The hosting company added some functionality such that duplicate content and/or mirrored pages appear in the search engines. To fix this problem, the hosting company created both canonical URLs and URL rewrites. Now, we have page A (which is the original page with all the link juice) and page B (which is the new page with no link juice or SEO value). Both pages have the same content, with different URLs. I understand that a canonical URL is the way to tell the search engines which page is the preferred page in cases of duplicate content and mirrored pages. I also understand that canonical URLs tell the search engine that page B is a copy of page A, but page A is the preferred page to index. The problem we now face is that the hosting company made page A a copy of page B, rather than the other way around. But page A is the original page with the seo value and link juice, while page B is the new page with no value. As a result, the search engines are now prioritizing the newly created page over the original one. I believe the solution is to reverse this and make it so that page B (the new page) is a copy of page A (the original page). Now, I would simply need to put the original URL as the canonical URL for the duplicate pages. The problem is, with all the rewrites and changes in functionality, I no longer know which URLs have the backlinks that are creating this SEO value. I figure if I can find the back links to the original page, then I can find out the original web address of the original pages. My question is, how can I search for back links on the web in such a way that I can figure out the URL that all of these back links are pointing to in order to make that URL the canonical URL for all the new, duplicate pages.
Technical SEO | | CABLES0 -
Should you worry about adding geo-targeted pages to your site?
Post-Panda, should I worry about adding a bunch of geo-targeted landing pages at once? It's a community, people have added their location on their profile pages. I'm worried if we decide to make all the locations into hyperlinks that point to new geo-targeted pages, it could get us extra traffic for those geo-specific keyword phrases but penalize the site as a whole for having so many low-quality pages. What I'm thinking is maybe to start small and turn, say, United States into a hyperlink that points to a page (that would house our community members that reside in the United States) and add extra unique content to the page. And only add a new location page when we know we'll be adding unique content to it, so it's not basically just page sorting. Thoughts? Hope that makes sense. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | poolguy0