"Via this intermediate Link" how do I stop the madness?
-
Hi,
-1- I have an old site which had a manual spam action placed against it several years ago, this is the corporate site and unfortunately has its name placed on all business cards etc, therefore I am unable to get rid of this site entirely..
-2- I created a brand new site with a new domain name for which white hat SEO marketing has been done and very little of it... everything was doing well up until last week when I dropped from bottom of page one to top of page 11 for my keyword in question.
-3- I changed the old sites ( the one with the manual spam action ) to mimic the look of the FIRST PAGE of the new domain I am using, and I have the main menu items on this first page linked to the appropriate sections within the new domain site, i.e About US etc. On this page I'm the following:
<link rel="<a class="attribute-value">canonical</a>" href="[http://www.mynewsite.com](view-source:http://www.norsteelbuildings.ca/)" /> and am linking as such:
<li><a href="http://www.mynewsite.com/about/" class="" rel="<a class="attribute-value">nofollow</a>">ABOUT USa>li>
using this approach I was hoping that I was doing the correct and not passing along any link juice good or bad however when I view the "Webmaster Tools->Links to your site" I find 1000+ links from my old site and then when I click on it I see all the spammy links that my old site got banned for pointing to my old site and accompanied by a header "Via this imtermediate Link>myoldSite.com". Can someone please sehd some light on what I should e doing or if even these link are effecting my new site, something is telling me there are but how do I resolve this issue.. Thanks in advance.. ```
-
There are possible approaches around this that I can see. The first might be to get rid of your new web site from the web after which absolutely noindex your antique site (blocking through robots.Txt may not do it - I've attempted.) You can then use the URL of office chair elimination tool to do away with the old web site absolutely from the index.
-
Hi,
It reverted back to my listing my new sites name instead of my old sites name a day later, no change in SEO position, just the name of the Site listed changed.
Anyway how are your tests going? do you think I can safely do a 301 or should I just leave it the way it currently is...
thanks,
-
Hopefully in the next couple of weeks I should have some information on my tests on ways to safely redirect penalized sites. I'm reluctant to give advice until then. On one hand, you could say that because your penalty is removed you could just go ahead and institute a 301 redirect now. However, I would not recommend this. The reason for that is that even though you've had a manual penalty removed, there is still a possibility that there are links out there that could harm your sites in the eyes of Penguin. I would not want to redirect any of the bad links to the new site.
When I do have my tests done I'll post here. In the meantime, if others have ideas, it would be awesome to hear of their experiences.
-
Hi! You do need to type in the nickname of the user when you click Private Message this User. I know it's not very intuitive, but you'll want to type in MarieHaynes to send a message to Marie.
-
Hi,
Thank you, upon
-1- changing the content ( of the OLDSites main page ), which was almost an exact copy of the newsites main page and
-2- also removing the noindex on the oldsites main page and then
-3- doing the good fetch, submit ( on both OldSite and New Site ) and then
-4- resubmitting my NewSite sitemap.Viola just checked and both sites main pages are now back in the google index. what I have noticed so is this.. The OldSite Url which now currently only has a main page to is is ranking #6 for my main kw, and the NewSites main page even thought its in the index doing a site: isn't ranking at the moment..
Ideally I would like to just do a permanent redirect on the OldSite to the NewSite, but as said before I had never done that because of a manual link penality which was placed against the OldSites main page, the penailtiy has since been removed and I have also tried to clean up and spammy links using disavow. Do you think it is safe to do a redirect or should I wait a bit...
I guess it was like you had said google had automatically thought that my new sites main page was actually a redirect from my old sites page because as the two pages were 99% the same., and as such ranked my newsite well using I think some push from my oldsite. The fact that this is no longer occuring and my oldsite is ranking well makes me think that it might be safe to manually do the redirect as we thought google was doing for us..
Please let me know what you think?
Thanks,
-
Sorry I haven't been able to respond again by email. I'm at Mozcon right now and typing from the airport. It's been a crazy, busy, fun week. I'll respond here though rather than by email as it may help others.
I am fairly certain that the problem here is all because your new site has the exact same content on the homepage as the old site does. As the old page was the one that Google first saw with that content, the new page is automatically being canonicalized to the old (even though you have the correct canonical on the new.) What I think is happening is that when you noindexed the old page, because of the invisible canonical, the new page got noindexed as well.
I remember Matt Cutts or John Mueller saying something before about how you should not point a rel canonical at a noindexed page because it can confuse Google. You didn't point the canonical there, but Google has probably assigned it because it was a duplication of the old page.
If this is true, then here are the possible solutions that I can think of:
-Create new content on the new page (which you have already done.) I would then use fetch as googlebot to get google to refetch that page. If I'm right, it should be back in the index quickly.
-If that doesn't work, consider removing the noindex from the old page until you see the new page pop back in the index. You'll likely also have to remove any robots.txt block of the old page so that Google can see that you want it indexed again. Then, once you see the new page is back in the index, and that the new content on your new page is in the cache, you can go back and reapply the noindex on the old page.
Hopefully that's not too confusing.
I want to hold off for now on answering your question about how to redirect users from the old site to the new without passing along a penalty. The reason is that no one knows for sure which methods work safely to do this and be guaranteed that you're not passing along link juice from unnatural links. Does link equity travel through a meta refresh? I'm guessing no, but I can't say for sure. I want to say that you can 301 the old page to an intermediary page that is blocked by robots.txt and then redirect it back to the new page, but I have to do some more tests before I am comfortable saying this with certainty. There are other solutions that may work as well.
I currently have some tests going on that will help me determine which method is safe for redirecting without passing on a penalty and I'll post something to my site once I've got the tests complete enough.
Perhaps someone with more experience in doing this type of thing will see your question and respond too...I'm open to suggestions!
-
An Update!!
I have just noticed something else interesting.. within my GWT sitemap section (new Site ) it shows 9 URLs being submitted yet only 8 URL being indexed, the one missing from the indexing is my homepage. I have updated the last modified date of the sitemap as they were in the past and have resubmitted the index, I have also resubmitted the one main page itself using the "Fetch as Google" -> Submit to Index Option.
I have also changed the contents of the main page on my newsite so thats its now less of a duplicate then that of the oldsite's new mainpage.
BTW its to bad that when Submitted pages to the index are not indexed via the sitemap that google doesn't give you the reason. According to google there are no errors in my sitemap..
-
Hello,
Thank you, you are correct, and thank you for the response, for which I have responded back, not sure if you have received it..
Anyway its really strange, within a week after I added the to the oldsite then the new sites main page also disappeared... I would really like to get this new sites main page back in the google index...
-
Interesting. I see you've reached me via my contact form. I've flagged your question so that the Moz staff can look into it and see if there is an issue with private messaging.
-
Hi,
thank you so much for offering to look at the site, I tried to send you a private message via moz, and it doesn't work, it can't find you even thought I'm on your profile page and click on "Private Message this User".
-
This is really odd. I can't see any real reason for Google to noindex your current site.
I wouldn't remove the tag from the old site. It doesn't make sense that this would affect your new site.
Would you be interested in sharing your url with me? This case really interests me and I'd love to help you sort it out. Feel free to contact me via my Moz profile. I'm currently at MozCon right now, so I might not be able to reply right away but I'd like to sort this out as it is an odd case.
-
Hello,
Thank you for your reply,
-1- Yes it appears as if both sites main pages have disappeared from the google index, if I do a site:mynewsite the main page is nowhere to be found, however I'm able to see the other pages from the newsite there.
-2- I have checked and actually my newsite doesn't even contain a robots.txt and I have also verified the contents of my newsite main page tomain sure that it doesn't contain a
-3- Hi, no url removal of either site, I did however disavow some links a couple of weeks back, but I have once again looked through my disavow list that I uploaded and made sure that I hadn't disavowed anything from either of the main sites, which woun;t have but just wanted to double check.
-4- I have asked Google to fetch my newsites main page via webmaster tools,
Should I remove the from my oldsite main page and perhaps do a Google fetch on this page also, just incase something is carrying over?
thanks once again for all your time and great advice..
-
Hmmmm....that's odd that your homepage is out of the index. Some things to check:
-are you absolutely sure that the homepage is gone? If you do a site:search does the homepage exist anywhere?
-Check you haven't accidentally blocked your home page with robots.txt or accidentally noindexed it instead of the old site.
-Are you absolutely sure you haven't done a url removal for the new site by mistake?
You could also ask Google to fetch that page via webmaster tools and that may help it reappear quicker.
-
Hi,
It appears as if the oldsite is no longer in google's index and that the has done wonders as far as that is concerned. However it now also appears as if my newsites main page is also no longer in googles index.. my newsites subpages are still in the index but its main page is no longer. I'm hoping that this might just be a temporary problem in googles index while they are doing a refresh or something... , I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
Any suggestions should I just wait it out and see if it comes back or is there something I should manually be doing to get my newsites main page back in googles index.
-
Thank you very much for the lengthy great explanation. I am doing what you have suggested and I will report back shortly..
Thank you..
-
I think that the main problem here is that no one knows for sure what kind of things can pass on a link related penalty. So, from what I know of your situation, here's what I'd say:
-Change your home page content on the new page so that it is significantly different from the old page. The reason for this is that Google seems to be able to recognize that the links that used to point to that exact content should now be pointing at the new page. If the new page changes then the "via this intermediate link" should really go.
-Remove any canonical tags that point from the old site to the new
-Most likely having a nofollowed link saying "we've moved" and pointing at the new site would be safe. I can't say that 100% for sure though.
-I actually would not block the old site by robots.txt UNTIL you have noindexed the page and have seen that it is no longer in the Google results. So, add to the page and then use the url removal tool found in Webmaster Tools to ask Google to completely remove that page from the index and the cache. (You'll get a choice of just the index or index+cache - Choose the latter.) That should result in the page leaving the index within 24 hours. You'll know if it is in the index if you do a site:yoursite.com search and see "no results". Once that has happened, then you can add the robots.txt directive to disallow the home page (or really, all of the site).
The reason why you want to do it in this order is that if you add the robots.txt block right now then Google won't be able to recrawl the page to recognize that you've changed the canonical and the noindex status.
I did this for one other site and the "via this intermediate" link notices disappeared in about 2 weeks.
I would love if you could update this thread with what happens.
-
I think this is the right time to use "nofollow, noindex" what i will do is change the content of the page where your visitors visits the most and want to redirect to the new one. Change it contents and warn visitors that you will be redirected to a new site and then do a meta refresh (do not use domain forwarding as some hosting converts it to 301, do not use canonical as well) meta refresh it for 5 seconds or more enough for your users to read the content just not shorter than 5 seconds (just to be safe) do not place a link on the content (just to be safe again) just remember to use "nofollow, noindex" on all the pages of your old site and disallow on your robots.txt
hope this helps
-
Hi,
Thank you for your reply, I'm sorry for complicating things..
Is there a way to safely forward users from oldsite to newsite without passing juice from oldsite to newsite and getting rid of the "via intermediate site" warnings?
I've also added the page to the robots.txt file, hopefully doing this will accomplish what I want..
i.e.
User-Agent: *
Disallow: /index.html -
Seriously why complicate things? The problem was the old site and you know it thats the very reason why you created a new site. Just like MarieHaynes said "It sounds like a complicated situation though so I don't think we can give you a complete answer without having a deeper look at your site" maybe wait for few weeks and let google find your site again and if you have corrected your site, google will eventually correct its data too.
Best of luck.
-
Hi,
thank you for the reply, I am probably not explaining my situation correctly..
I have one following:
-1- two completed different sites, oldsite.com, newsite..com
-2- I don't care about losing any of the link juice from the oldsite.com, I just don't want to risk any of the bad links from the oldsite.com transferring over to the newsite.com
-3- I have created a duplicate landing page for the oldsite.com which looks like the newsite.com landing page, and buttons that get clicked on the oldsite.com landing page point to the appropriate page within the newsite.com. I am using nofollow links. and I also have canonical set between the oldsite.com and newsite.com landing page.
-4- GWT is showing me lots of "via intermediate site: spammy links from oldsite.com on the newsites GWT.What can I do to reverse this? should I just start a massive disavow process from oldsite.com links or is there a way for me to better construct the transition from the user landing on oldsite.com and clicking on a navigation button which takes them to newsite.com
-
If you've removed the canonical tag AND there are no duplicate pages on the new site from the old site then I'd think that the via this intermediate link messages should go within 2-3 weeks.
It sounds like a complicated situation though so I don't think we can give you a complete answer without having a deeper look at your site which is something that probably goes beyond the scope of a forum question.
Regarding your manual penalty most likely it has expired. More info here: http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2345875/Did-Your-Manual-Penalty-Disappear-It-Probably-Expired
-
Hello,
Thank you for the detailed response.. The new site is completely different in all aspects then the old site. I have also just replaced the old site with ONE page and all pages from the old site being redirected to that ONE Page on the old site.
The oldsite's main page contains several buttons at the top, i.e. About us, Gallery etc, each one of these buttons is linked to the appropriate subdirectory of the new site: using a nofollow,
Can you recommend the best approach , I'm not even sure if this is the reason for the SEO drop, but if it isn't I'm sure it will be shortly so I figured I would address it..
I made a change on the new site several weeks back via iis where I just redirected all mynewsite.com traffic to www.mynewsite.com
I also just logged into GWT->Search Traffic->Manual Actions and am presented with the message "No manual webspam actions found." on both sites, which I find strange on the old site because back in 2012 when I contacted google they told me a manual penality had been invoked due to unnatural link patterns. Does this Manual Actions work?
-
Awesome tip about transferring with the same content here. Completely noindexing the old site sounds like a good option. I'm going to have to keep this trick under my hat for a rainy day, thanks!
-
If your content is the same on the new site as the old then believe it or not, you don't even need a canonical tag for Google to recognize that this is the same site and apply your old links to your new site.
Here's more info on this: http://www.seroundtable.com/google-penalty-site-move-18163.html
There are two possible ways around this that I can see. The first would be to remove your new site from the web and then completely noindex your old site (blocking by robots.txt won't do it - I've tried.) You can then use the url removal tool to remove the old site completely from the index. It's important that the noindex tags are in place otherwise they may pop up again at some point. Once the old site is completely removed then you can add the new site. I've done this with another site and the "via this intermediate" links have not come back.
If you have pages on your old site that have good links and you want to 301 them to the new site you could keep them live, noindex the page and then do a redirect that goes through an intermediate page that's blocked by robots.txt. BUT, know that this passes all link juice to the page. If there are bad links then there's nothing you can do to just pass the good juice along. I haven't done this and it's complicated. There's more information on that here: http://www.hiswebmarketing.com/can-you-recover-from-penguin-by-301-redirecting-your-homepage/.
Ideally the best way to ensure that you are not causing Google to see a canonical is to create brand new pages with new content.
Moving a penalized site is tricky!
-
Hi,
I don't care about transferring any of link juice over to the new site, whether good or bad, I just can't create yet another site using another newdomain name. I need to stay with the newsitedomain name that I am currently using. what would you recommend:
-1- removing the canonical name and also doing a disavow of the bad links from the old site?
-2- leave the canonical name and just do the disavow on the old site domain name
-3- something else?
thanks,
-
If you're trying to transfer the good SEO juice, but leave the manual action on the old site, that might not be possible. Google has been cracking down on that, and if you try to move over the good stuff, the bad will follow.
It looks like you have two options:
-
You can 301 the old site, disavow all the bad links, and hope for the best. This way you aren't completely starting from scratch, but the amount of ranks you'll recover won't be clear until a few weeks after you do complete this strategy. Different sites have different results doing this. It depends on the penalty, how well you clean up the links, etc.
-
Start from scratch. New content, new domain, new everything, so there's no relation to the penalized site. This might be what you want to do if the manual action is severe. It'll take a bit more analysis than seeing one keyword drop to know the extent of the penalty you're experiencing.
-
-
Hi,
if that's the case then what should I do as I don't want those spammy links to effect me, bringing down my new sites SEO position? do I just remove the canoncal and let the main page be seen as a duplicate content to the main page of my new site or slightly change the content of the old site that is linking to the newsite using "nofollow"
in addition should I be submitting a exclusion list of the spammy urls?
thanks,
-
History is showing us that canonical tags are very powerful, and do pass pagerank. Canonical tags and 301 redirects pass roughly the same authority, so even if your physical links are nofollow, those canonical tags are still being interpreted by bots as a link-like entity.
So, by cananocalizing your old domain to your new one, you effectively moved all those links to your new domain, just like they would have with a 301.
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
-
JavaScript encoded links on an AngularJS framework...bad idea for Google?
Hi Guys, I have a site where we're currently deploying code in AngularJS. As part of this, on the page we sometimes have links to 3rd party websites. We do not want to have followed links on the site to the 3rd party sites as we may be perceived as a link farm since we have more than 1 million pages and a lot of these have external 3rd party links. My question is, if we've got javascript to fire off the link to the 3rd party, is that enough to prevent Google from seeing that link? We do not have a NOFOLLOW on that currently. The link anchor text simply says "Visit website" and the link is fired using JavaScript. Here's a snapshot of the code we're using: Visit website Does anyone have any experience with anything like this on their own site or customer site that we can learn from just to ensure that we avoid any chances of being flagged for being a link farm? Thank you 🙂
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | AU-SEO0 -
Clean-up Question after a wordpress site Hack added pages with external links from a massive link wheel?
Hey All, Thought I would throw this out to ensure I am dotting my "i's" and crossing my "t's"..... Client WordPress site was hacked injected 3-4 pages that cross linked to hundreds (affiliate junk spam link wheel). Pages were removed, 3rd party cleared all malware/viruses. Heavy duty firewall and security monitoring are in place. Hacked pages are now showing as 404. No penalties, ranking issues....If anything there was a temporary BOOST in rankings due to the large link-wheel type net that the pages were receiving....That has since leveled out rankings. I guess my question is, in your opinion is it best to let those pages 404, I am noticing a large amount of links going to them from all over the world from this large link net that was built. I find the temptation to 301 re-direct deleted pages to the homepage difficult...lol..{the temptation is REAL}. Is there anything I am missing? Any other steps that YOU would take? I am assuming letting those pages 404 would be the best bet, as in time they will roll off index.... Thank you in advance, I appreciate any feedback or opinions....
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Anthony_Howard0 -
Linking C blocks strategy - Which hat is this tactic?
This related to a previous question I had about satellite sites. I questioned the white-hativity of their strategy. Basically to increase the number of linking C blocks they created 100+ websites on different C blocks that link back to our main domain. The issue I see is that- the sites are 98% exactly the same in appearance and content. Only small paragraph is different on the homepage. the sites only have outbound links to our main domain, no in-bound links Is this a legit? I am not an SEO expert, but have receive awesome advice here. So thank you in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Buddys0 -
What are some of the worst links that you have come across?
I'm talking the least relevant and incredibly spammy. We've all done site audits and stumbled across some ridiculous ones. The funnier the better. I'm compiling a list of hilarious links that sites have gotten. Any input would be great!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | KevinBloom0 -
Competitor using "unatural inbound links" not penalized??!
Since Google's latest updates, I think it would be safe to say that building links is harder. But i also read that Google applies their latest guidelines retro-actively. In other words, if you have built your ilnking profile on a lot of unnatural links, with spammy anchor text, you will get noticed and penalized. In the past, I used to use SEO friendly directories and "suggest URL's" to build back links, with keyword/phrase anchor text. But I thought that this technique was frowned upon by Google these days. So, what is safe to do? Why is Google not penalizing the competitor? And bottom line what is considered to be "unnatural link building" ?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | bjs20101 -
Seo back linking proposal review
Hi guys, below is a proposal i received from someone on freelancer.com for some seo building. Is this really all it takes? Obviously done overtime but basically is this it aside from the usual basics onsite keywords, urls, artciles, content etc. This is a the proposal for $250 (some are cheaper but almost the same details as below). This is one of the top seo people on freelancers.com and they all have good reviews. Is this basically it? Shell out $100 bucks or more a month to someone who will just post stuff all over the internet. It just seems all very simple, what is $100 bucks a month to stay at #1. Is there any real questions i should ask to make sure i am not just throwing my money away? I would like to recommend the following services for attaining better search results for the website. 1)Press Release Submissions
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | topclass
2)Social bookmarking submissions
3)Drip Feed Article Links - 100 Article submissions everyday for 25 days
4)Article directory submissions
5)Link directory submissions
6)Blog Post Submissions(All Blogs have PR1 to PR6)
7)Wiki Page Submissions(.EDU and .GOV Sites Included) PR of the directories, social bookmarking websites, Blogs, wiki pages and Article directories are from PR0 to PR8.
Most of them are in the range of PR1 to PR4. If you are interested in the above services then these are the details about those services. 1)Press release Submissions - We will write 3 press release and submit them to 25 press release websites.
Submitting press release gets the news to Google news, Yahoo news etc..
Please note we even submit to Paid press release websites like PRBuzz, SBWire, pressdoc etc.. 2)Social Bookmarking submissions - I will also submit your website to 150 social bookmarking websites.
Here are the example of social bookmarking websites.
www.digg.com
www.furl.net
After we finish submitting to social bookmarking websites we will then create rss feeds with approved link URL's and ping them so that links get indexed. 3)Drip Feed Article submissions - We will be writing one article.
Everyday we will submitting the article to 100 different websites.
We will be submitting for 25 days.
100 submissions x 25 days = 2500 submissions.
In each article submissions we can use 2 links to the website. 4)Article directory submissions - We will write 5 articles.
Each article will be around 500 words.
Then we will submit them to 300 different article directories. That means 5 articles x 300 article directories = 1500 article submissions.
In each article we can use 2 links to the website.
1500 x 2 Links.
I have experience in submitting articles to article directories.
Till now i have submitted more than 1000 articles to article directories.
I will also create separate accounts with article directories wherever possible. 5)Link directory submissions - I have a list of 1300 directories.
I will submit your website to these directories.
I have experience in submitting to link directories.
Till now i have submitted more than 2500 websites.
All the submission work is done manually.
All these directories provide one way links. 6)Blog Post Submissions(700 PR1 to PR6 Blogs) - We will write 1 article.
we spin and post to 700 PR1 to PR5 blogs.
We can spin the article, title of article and links
You will be given a confirmation when complete, and a code to search backlinks in the search engines.
They are hosted on 650 different C Class IPs! 7)Wiki Page Submissions - Get 200+ wiki site contextual backlinks (3 per posted article) from a range of PR 0 to 8 wiki sites including over 30 US .EDU and US .GOV sites.
I will also ping Them.0 -
Blogger Reviews w/ Links - Considered a Paid Link?
As part of my daily routine, I checked out inbound.org and stumbled upon an article about Grey Hat SEO techniques. One of the techniques mentioned was sending product to a blogger for review. My question is whether these types of links are really considered paid links. Why shouldn't an e-commerce company evangelize its product by sending to bloggers whose readership is the demographic the company is trying to target? In pre e-commerce marketing, it was very typical for a start-up company to send samples for review. Additionally, as far as flow of commerce is concerned, it makes sense for a product review to direct the reader to the company, whether by including a contact phone number, a mailing address, or in today's e-commerce world, a link to their website. I understand the gaming potential here (as with most SEO techniques, black-hat is usually an extreme implementation), but backlinks from honest product reviews shouldn't have a tinge of black, thus keeping it white-hat. Am I wrong here? Are these types of links really grey? Any help or insight is much appreciated!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | b40040400 -
Sitewide logo footer link - what's the risk?
Hi, an incredibly popular website, with several thousand pages, has offered me a site-wide footer logo link. The site this popular website would backlink to has 50 high quality backlinks (and low volumes of traffic - it's a new site). I am tempted to say no, because of the risk of penalty, but then I started wondering whether a logo link posed the same penalty risk as a text link.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | McTaggart0