Big hit to traffic a while ago, and slow recovery. Is there anything we've missed?
-
We took a big hit to our organic traffic when we implemented an HTML form which included a list of every country in the world, twice.
This rolled out onto every page on our website. And it got indexed by Google (webmaster tools showed our content keywords as being those from the form occurring 9000+ times on the site)
We've fixed this and the content keywords are back to normal, however our traffic has not yet fully recovered.
Is there anything on our site that you think could be sending spam signals to Google, or could be impeding our organic traffic growth?
-
Amy,
I'm sorry you have to deal with a snafu like this.
I noticed that the content most relevant to the keyword on the page tends to be pushed down below what reads like "SEO copy". For example, on the page about moving from the UK to Adelaide, Australia the entire first screen's worth of content is general info about Adelaide, and you have to scroll down pretty far to get to anything specifically about the UK. Another example is on the country-level pages (e.g. /spain, /thailand) the "Top Cities" with their score-bar and relevant links are pushed down below several long paragraphs about the country. Perhaps your users are already aware of the basic information about the country if they want to move there, and the more visually-appealing and helpful "Top Cities" area should be moved above? If you're worried about the SEO ramifications of moving the text content down you could just try this out as a test on a few country landing pages.
Let's think about the visitor for a minute. If I searched for "Moving to Dallas from the UK" and landed on this page I would not be happy: http://www.movehub.com/usa/dallas/move-to-dallas-from-uk . I would be looking for information on how to move to Dallas from the UK, things like visa requirements, good Vs bad neighborhoods, cost of living, job market, etc... Instead, all I see on my screen is a lot of fluff copy about how Texas isn't all about oil production anymore, and sidebar links to content about international container shipping costs, and moving to cities in Australia and Canada. The site needs a more intelligent way to show relevant content and links on a per-page basis. Some examples: Instead of showing links to Adelaide, Brisbane, Perth, Sydney, Toronto... on that page, show the cities closest to Dallas, like San Antonio, Austin, Houston... Instead of showing the general "about Texas" type content at the top, move it down or get rid of it alltogether and show the content that was once hidden below the fold up top: Moving To Dallas from the UK, and Comparing Dallas Vs London. Put in some links to pages about things like visa requirements from the UK to the US, and some job-search assistance (top employers in Dallas?) and you'll have a much more useful page.
More specific to the problem you experienced, however, if the content is no longer on the page it may just take Google some time to recrawl all of the old URLs again and see the updated content without all of the "keyword stuffing" they may have misunderstood. My advise would be to refresh your XML sitmap with new lastmod dates and resubmit it to entice Google to recrawl the pages again and see that the excessive keyword use has been fixed.
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
-
Why isn't the canonical tag on my client's Magento site working?
The reason for this mights be obvious to the right observer, but somehow I'm not able to spot the reason why. The situation:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Inevo
I'm doing an SEO-audit for a client. When I'm checking if the rel=canonical tag is in place correctly, it seems like it: view-source:http://quickplay.no/fotball-mal.html?limit=15) (line nr 15) Anyone seing something wrong with this canonical? When I perform a site:http://quickplay.no/ search, I find that there's many url's indexed that ought to have been picked up by the canonical-tag: (see picture) ..this for example view-source:http://quickplay.no/fotball-mal.html?limit=15 I really can't see why this page is getting indexed, when the canonical-tag is in place. Anybody who can? Sincerely 🙂 GMdWg0K0 -
Rankings drop - we've added user reviews, are they causing over optimisation on page?
Hello Hopefully can get a few opinions on this. We've added some user reviews to our website for key products. We added these approximately 3-4 weeks ago. In the last week we've seen keyword rankings drop on the pages they've been added to. For example see: http://www.naturalworldsafaris.com/wildlife/primates.aspx This page ranked well for both gorilla safari and gorilla safaris but both terms have dropped considerably (12 to 20 checking Google UK on the Moz rank checker). Due to the formatting required for the Rich Snippets (and we have the user review stars in the SERPS) the term "Gorilla safari" is perhaps becoming a bit spammy on the page. Another example would be "Borneo holidays" (up and down in the SERPS between 12-18) on this page: http://www.naturalworldsafaris.com/destinations/far-east/borneo.aspx Do you feel that these fluctuations in keyword ranking could be to do with this? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KateWaite0 -
Traffic dropped suddenly
-In early January 2013, we had to switch servers after many years with the same one. We were highly ranked and getting about 8500 unique visitors per month. -We didn't notice the traffic falling because we were focussed on a major site redesign and addition that we launched in April 2013. Visits continued to fall, this time also because the company that launched it didn't double check their work and had some dead links etc. Those were all fixed by approximately June 2013.- early January 2014 we switched servers again because we were afraid the new server we moved to was perhaps ranked poorly or was possibly a spamming site before. Currently, nothing has changed. What was about 8500 unique visitors per month 18 months ago, is now about 1,000 and no leads are coming in at all.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HasitR0 -
Doubts with URL's structure
Hi guys i have some doubts with the correct URL structure for a new site. The question is about how show the city, the district and also the filters. I would do that: www.domain.com/category/city/disctict but maybe is better do that: **www.domain.com/category/city-district ** I also have 3 filters that are "individual/colective" "indoor/outdoor" and "young/adult" but that are not really interesting for the querys so where and how i put this filtters? At the end of the url showing these: **www.domain.com/cateogry/city/district#adult#outdoor#colective ** ? Well really i don't know what to do with the filters. Check if you could help me with that please. I also have a lof of interest in knowing if maybe is better use this combination **www.domain.com/category-city or domain.com/category/city **and know about the diference. Thank you very much!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | omarmoscatt0 -
Google's Exact Match Algorithm Reduced Our Traffic!
Google's first Panda de-valued our Web store, www.audiobooksonline.com, and our traffic went from 2500 - 3000 (mostly organic referrals) per month to 800 - 1000. Google's under-valuing of our Web store continued to reduce our traffic to 400-500 for the past few months. From 4/5/2013 to 4/6/2013 our traffic dropped 50% more, because (I believe) of Google's "exact domain match" algorithm implementation. We were, even after Panda and up to 4/5/2013 getting a significant amount of organic traffic for search terms such as "audiobooks online," "audio books online," and "online audiobooks." We no longer get traffic for these generic keywords. What I don't understand is why a UK company, www.audiobooksonline.co.uk/, with a very similar domain name, ranks #5 for "audio books online" and #4 for "audiobooks online" while we've almost disappeared from Google rankings. By any measurement I am aware of, our site should rank higher than audiobooksonline.co.uk. Market Samurai reports for "audio books online" and "audiobooks online" shows that our Web store is significantly "stronger" than audiobooksonline.co.uk but they show up on Google's first page and we are down several pages. I also checked a few titles on audiobooksonline.co.uk and confirmed they are using the same publisher descriptions we and many other online book / audiobook merchants do = duplicate content. We have never received notice that our Web store was being penalized. Why would audiobooksonline.co.uk rank so much higher than audiobooksonline.com? Does Google treat non-USA sites different than USA sites?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lbohen0 -
Our quilting site was hit by Panda/Penguin...should we start a second "traffic" site?
I built a website for my wife who is a quilter called LearnHowToMakeQuilts.com. However, it has been hit by Panda or Penguin (I’m not quite sure) and am scared to tell her to go ahead and keep building the site up. She really wants to post on her blog on Learnhowtomakequilts.com, but I’m afraid it will be in vain for Google’s search engine. Yahoo and Bing still rank well. I don’t want her to produce good content that will never rank well if the whole site is penalized in some way. I’ve overly optimized in linking strongly to the keywords “how to make a quilt” for our main keyword, mainly to the home page and I think that is one of the main reasons we are incurring some kind of penalty. First main question: From looking at the attached Google Analytics image, does anyone know if it was Panda or Penguin that we were “hit” by? And, what can be done about it? (We originally wanted to build a nice content website, but were lured in by a get rich quick personality to rather make a “squeeze page” for the Home page and force all your people through that page to get to the really good content. Thus, our avenge time on site per person is terrible and Pages per Visit is low at: 1.2. We really want to try to improve it some day. She has a local business website, Customcarequilts.com that did not get hit. Second question: Should we start a second site rather than invest the time in trying to repair the damage from my bad link building and article marketing? We do need to keep the site up and running because it has her online quilting course for beginner quilters to learn how to quilt their first quilt. We host the videos through Amazon S3 and were selling at least one course every other day. But now that the Google drop has hit, we are lucky to sell one quilting course per month. So, if we start a second site we can use that to build as a big content site that we can use to introduce people to learnhowtomakequilts.com that has Martha’s quilting course. So, should we go ahead and start a new fresh site rather than to repair the damage done by my bad over optimizing? (We’ve already picked out a great website name that would work really well with her personal facebook page.) Or, here’s a second option, which is to use her local business website: customcarequilts.com. She created it in 2003 and has had it ever since. It is only PR 1. Would this be an option? Anyway I’m looking for guidance on whether we should pursue repairing the damage and whether we should start a second fresh site or use an existing site to create new content (for getting new quilters to eventually purchase her course). Brad & Martha Novacek rnUXcWd
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BradNovi0 -
Pagination Question: Google's 'rel=prev & rel=next' vs Javascript Re-fresh
We currently have all content on one URL and use # and Javascript refresh to paginate pages, and we are wondering if we transition to the Google's recommended pagination if we will see an improvement in traffic. Has anyone gone though a similar transition? What was the result? Did you see an improvement in traffic?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline0 -
When you provide traffic estimates, do you factor in CTR?
There are several studies that show CTR based on position. When a client asks for traffic estimates do you multiply CTR by estimated search volume? Why or why not?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline0