Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thank you for your answer Ryan. I read the article which is very helpful for correcting information that one has access to. However, I can't change the IMBA information and technically that info is correct, it is just not relevant to who Garrison Wynn has been for the past decade. It is as if they showed Ronald Reagan as an Actor from the same source instead of president. ( Maybe that is a bit extreme of an example.) But not to Garrison.

So am I correct in saying that Google has NO particular source they will use first such as a Google BUSINESS (not personal) page? For the Brian Carter example Google did use his Wikapedia entry which makes sense; however, no where on his Wikipedia page does it say he is a football player. I dont believe Brian was ever a football player ( Sorry Brian if I'm missing something huge from your past)

I'd like to see if anyone else has experience with the same issue and how if at all they were able to correct it? Thanks again for your help!

Today it looks as if Google has assembled some information about my client keynote speaker Garrison Wynn and made an info box for him on the right of the results. The information is outdated and incorrect as I see it is for several people I looked up. I have a Google + Profile for him that is linked to his site. But Google seems to be ignoring that information and selecting information from various sources that are outdated. (Garrison has not been an ACTOR for over 13 years and the internet is full of relevant sources that give his title as a keynote speaker.  How do I show Google the correct information to use. Do I need to create a BUSINESS Google + for him? The search term I used is Garrison Wynn. They have our buddy and fellow PRO MOZ user, social media expert Brian Carter listed as a football player..LOL.

c0oUi0F.png eWWX1tg.png

I meant to use the word "penalized" not banned

Here is an update of my efforts so far to find out out what happened and how to fix two of my banned money sites. I used various tools, some public and some private to find a list of the following:

**Some notes: **

• My sites that were heavily linked were penalized at the same time. My sites that were not linked together as much were not.
• The entire site was not penalized, only the very important key phrases, the type one might spend money on.

**I ran tools to find: **

• Banned links
• Not indexed links
• Use of keyword anchor text as a percentage of overall anchor text

After I "married" those lists..I began a process of link removal request especially for the overuse of the same three keyphrases which resulted, frankly, from not monitoring the efforts of one of one of subcontracted partners.

I created different link removal email request templates for the different kind of links after a few really angry replys. The email templates were for:

• Blog comments
• Private article sites
• Mass release articles sites
• Regular old links

Note: I sorted these by IP. When i found tons of links for the same IP I often offered money to rid myself of the links.

Two months later I have had 175 of about 500 bad links removed. I have not had the penalty lifted nor have i submitted it to Google. I dont plan to. Some mistakes were made, I am making huge efforts to take away the bad (these sites are from 1996 to 2008 .. SO..somethings can no be undone.

My current strategy is to make more good to dilute the bad. Like creative cooking.

Also, ofcourse I have started a new dish for dinner that might end up being what is served. No telling how long the others have to sit on the stove before its eatable

The concept of relevancy is being drilled into my head on an almost daily basis by my  current mentor. I am supposed to cringe, hiss and run like a vampire exposed to light at the concept of linking any of my sites to non relevant sites. After the recent penalties, I would be very cautious about how you link sites together, especially in unnatural looking groups and definitely not with side-wide links if that is the offer. All my sites are currently in the process of separation if not outright divorce

Exactly..when reviewing our site about a keynote speaker a few years ago we realized we didnt have much info that was helpful to people hiring a keynote speaker..so we added that..our own ideas on the subject..probably why we passed through the last Google updates so well. We have tons of original helpful content..however; I've learned we have to be better than that. There is soooo much our company has to offer that we need to get out there for our industry. We have been at the top 1%  of it for awhile now in terms of dollars, experience etc. So once again, its time to revisit, refine, etc. but what this thread is about is removing links! And thats what i want to talk about here

Thats what I thought from remembering issues back in "the day". Thanks for clarifying. Hmmm...seems like there is a career opportunity for people right now who want to go into the hunting down website owners business I'd certainly pay a nice penny at this point.

Thanks Ryan,

Yes I'm using whois and a variety of other services to discover contact information but more often than not, I'm getting returned mail (address not valid). Some of the networks, especially those banned from Google have hidden themselves VERY well. One of my hit sites is 16 years old and I'm not embarrassed to say what seemed very ok years ago is now an issue along with what appears to be content scrapping along with a link to my site. I'm thinking it might be best to remove the "you can use this article as long as you give a link" statement that was popular in the past..RIGHT? .. I'll keep digging into the whois info..along with other search techniques but I was hoping someone had some luck with hosting services replying to this issue.

Has anyone had any luck with contacting the hosting company; Specifically for 3 or more links from a "network" of sites from the same C class IP with absolutely NO contact information what so ever. If so, can you provide an example of the letter you sent? Thanks you guys