Google Webmaster Tools: MESSAGE
-
Dear site owner or webmaster of http://www.enakliyat.com.tr/,
Some of your site's pages may be using techniques that do not comply with Google's Webmaster Guidelines.
On your site, in particular, does not provide an adequate level of innovation in low-quality unique content or set of pages. Examples of this type of thin affiliate pages, pages, bridge pages, it will automatically be created or copied content. For more information about the unique and interesting content, visit http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=66361.
We recommend you to make the necessary changes to your site to fit your site's quality guidelines. After making these changes, please submit your site for reconsideration in Google's search results.
If you have questions about how to resolve this problem, please see our Webmaster Help Forum for support.
Sincerely,
Google Search Quality Team**After this massege ve find our low quality pages and we added this urls on Robots.txt. Other than that, what can we do? **
**Our site is a home to home moving listing portal. Consumers who wants to move his home fills a form so that moving companies can cote prices. We were generating listing page URL’s by using the title submitted by customer. **
-
Generally, if you've been hit by a penalty, blocking with robots.txt isn't enough. You generally either have to remove or improve those pages entirely.
As you can see, most of these pages are still in the index.
When looking at your site, I found many pages like this:
http://www.enakliyat.com.tr/hata.aspx?aspxerrorpath=/manisa-evden-eve-nakliyat-fiyatlari-37
And also "thin" pages without much unique content. If these pages are valuable to your customer, you should consider updating them with fresh, unique content, then file a reconsideration request with Google to lift the penalty.
-
we all learned about google's guidelines but we really have no idea where is the problem or what cause the problem if you went to our website we have been destroyed all of our duplicate page content and problem's that google ask's us to and now we all think that alright thats all its fixed but when we ask to google to come and check our website again google keep sending us the same and the same message.
-
If you just want to block them from the index then best practice is usually considered to do it with a robots meta tag rather than the robots.txt file. See here for a better run down of the options and why one is better than the other for various situations: http://moz.com/learn/seo/robotstxt and also a good post here on duplicate/thin content: http://moz.com/blog/fat-pandas-and-thin-content
I would think that in your case you might be able to get enough unique content on those pages (at least the company pages) to make them more acceptable to google. Thinking off the top of my head you could:
- Add information to the page meta and title tags so that the companies location is included, and your brand is also mentioned
- Force the companies to add a proper profile!
- Add some of your own unique content about the company, the areas they service, their specialties etc etc
- once you have better content then encourage users to leave comments/ratings etc
There are not THAT many company pages in your robots.txt so with a bit of brainstorming on the best way to phrase things and to increase unique content on those pages you should be able to come up with a strategy that will allow you with a bit of effort to comply with the google guidelines and also make the pages more user friendly and more informative generally.
-
You either have to comply to their guidelines or use a different method to grow your business such as using social media.
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
-
Webmaster tools showing 200 page load ok - all other testing tools show a 301
hey, on https://www.xxx.co we've setup a 301 redirect to xxx.us - > BUT in webmaster tools its still showing a 200 load ok, whereas on all other testing tools its showing a 301 redirect (screamingfrog etc) even https://dns.google.com/query?name=www.xxx.co is showing that its 301 redirected. Any ideas? as we want to trigger the change of address tool in WMT and its saying it cant as it loads the homepage still....
Technical SEO | | RobertN-London0 -
Sitemap error in Webmaster tools - 409 error (conflict)
Hey guys, I'm getting this weird error when I submit my sitemap to Google. It says I'm getting a 409 error in my post-sitemap.xml file (https://cleargear.com/post-sitemap.xml). But when I check it, it looks totally fine. I am using YoastSEO to generate the sitemap.xml file. Has anyone else experienced this? Is this a big deal? If so, Does anyone know how to fix? Thanks EwTswL4
Technical SEO | | Extima-Christian0 -
Paid Links - How does Google classify them?
Greetings All, I have a question regarding "Paid Links." My company creates custom websites for other small businesses across the country. We always have backlinks to our primary website from our "Dealer Sites." Would Google and other search engines consider links from our "dealer sites" to be "paid links?" Example:
Technical SEO | | CFSSEO
http://www.atlanticautoinc.com/ is the "dealer site." Would Google consider the links from Atlantic Auto to be a "paid link," and therefor have less of an impact for page rankings, due to it not being organic? Any insight on this matter would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!!!0 -
Help Understanding GWT Message
Brief background: A few months ago, our firm exchanged blog posts with another law firm in Pennsylvania with followed links. Though we did exchange links, the posts weren't spammy. They wrote "A Floridian's Guide To A Car Accident In Pennyslvania" and we wrote one for Pennsylvanians in Florida. (The reason for this is that Personal Injury law varies drastically from state-to-state, and Florida has a ton of people who move back and forth). My question: His firm got a message from google saying our link to him violated googles' guidelines. I went and removed the link, BUT I didn't get any message saying his link to our site was a violation. Shouldn't we both have gotten messages? Perhaps, mine is "in the mail" so to speak, but I would think both would go out at the same time, so I'm wondering if there is another possible reason? Thanks, Ruben
Technical SEO | | KempRugeLawGroup0 -
Odd Google Indexing Issue
I have encountered something odd with Google indexing. According to the Google cache my site was last updated on April 6. I had been making a series of changes on April 7th and none of them show up in the cached version of the site (naturally). Then, on the 8th, my rankings seem to have dropped about 6 places and the main SERP is showing a text that isn't even on the Web site. The cached version has the correct page title from the page that was indexed on the 6th. How do I learn where Google is picking this up from? There is a clean page title tag on my Web site. I've checked the server, etc to see what's going on. The text isn't completely unrelated, but it definitely impacted my ranking. Does Google ever have these hiccups when indexing?
Technical SEO | | VERBInteractive0 -
Is google all over the place tonight?
Is it me or is google all over the place tonight? Whilst checking my rankings I came across a site with a page authority of 29 and 23 links from 5 domains ranking at number 6 for a competitive keyword! This site came from nowhere and I'm getting different results every time I search! Weird....
Technical SEO | | SamCUK0 -
Should we block URL param in Webmaster tools after URL migration?
Hi, We have just released a new version of our website that now has a human readable nice URL's. Our old ugly URL's are still accessible and cannot be blocked/redirected. These old URL's use a URL param that has an xpath like expression language to define the location in our catalog. We have about 2 million pages indexed with this old URL param in it while we have approximately 70k nice URL's after the migration. This high number of old URL's is due to facetting that was done using this URL param. I wonder if we should now completely block this URL param from Google Webmaster tools so that these ugly URL's will be removed from the Google index. Or will this harm our position in Google? Thanks, Chris
Technical SEO | | eCommerceSEO0 -
Is this against google rules
Hi i am wanting to know if this is against google rules. I am building a website which will have lots of different sections and i wanted to know if you were allowed to have a new domain name pointing to a section of the site. so for example if i had a site with a domain name of manchester and then i wanted a section of the site to be called www.manchester.com/complimentary health I want to know if to help with traffic to the site and to have a better domain name, if it was allowed to have a new domain name pointing to that section of the site which could be called www.complimentaryhealth.com and have that pointing to the section. would love to hear your thoughts on this
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-1848860