Google Reconsideration - Denied for the Third Time
-
I have been in the process of trying to get past a "link scheme" penalty for just over a year. I took on the client in April 2012, they had received their penalty in February of 2012 before i started.
Since then we have been trying to manually remove links, contact webmasters for link removal, blocking over 40 different domains via the disavow tool and requesting reconsideration multiple times. All i get in return "Site violates Google's quality guidelines."
So we regrouped and did some more research to find that about 90% of the offending spam links pointed to only 3 pages of the website so we decided to just delete the pages, display a 404 error in their place and create new pages with new URLs. At first everything was looking good, the new pages were ranking and receiving page authority and the old pages were gone from the indexes. So we resubmitted for reconsideration for the third time and we got the same exact response!
I don't know what else to do? I did everything i could think of with the exception of deleting the whole site.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Regards - Kyle
-
Kyle, interesting... I knew that is not possible. Do you have a lot of high quality backlinks left or did you start building new ones?
-
Hi Traian - i would have to disagree.
With the advice mentioned above from both Cyrus and Marie i was able to get the penalty lifted and whether it was normal or not my rankings and traffic have bounced back to exactly where they were if not higher than before the penalty.
-
when you removed those backlinks, you don't get to rank as before the penalty. those bad links were keeping you up and now you need to work your way up again, only that this time way, way more carefully than before...
-
Good job Kyle! I would take things one step further though. It is likely not enough to just disavow the domains. If you haven't already done so, make sure that you make efforts to manually get these links removed and then communicate this to Google.
-
Wow, thank you so much for all your guys help!
I just spent all day digging through the full link profile (combined from GWT and OSE) and i have more than doubled my domains in my disavow list. I have been surprised by the amount of domains that have simply expired over the course of this project.
Also, thank you for the pointer on hosting the process files on Google docs for the reconsideration, i was wondering where i would keep that!
I'll keep you all up-to-date as well as contribute to a blog post if you guys would like too.
Thanks again - Kyle
-
Hi Kyle,
First of all, I can't wait for Marie's book! I don't want to recover any ground that she's already gone over, so I'll just share a few thoughts.
1. Has Google verified it's a link penalty? "Site violates Google's quality guidelines" could also refer to on-site issues like hidden text or doorway pages. Given the information you provided, it's most likely a link based penalty, but you never know.
2. Not sure from your description, but I almost always disavow entire domains using the domain: command instead of individual URLs. I've seen requests rejected because they disavowed not enough URLs when they should have blocked the entire domain.
3. I agree with Marie. If you've been penalized, it's generally safer to error on the side of disavowing too many domains than not enough. This isn't to say you should disavow known good links, but if links are questionable, why take a chance.
4. Also agree with Marie on submitting documentation about your removal efforts. Wrote a post about it here: http://cyrusshepard.com/penalty-lifted/
(they tend to like everything in Google Docs files. Cuts down the risk of spam)
5. Minor point, but Google likes everything formatted in a UTF-8 encoded .txt file. I've never seen one rejected because of this, but I hear it happens.
6. I'm turning into a fan of Link Detox for toxic link discovery. Instead of running it in standard mode, upload a file of your complete backlink profile from Webmaster Tools and have Link Detox check those links. Sort the final list by hand - this means check each link! For hints, read Paddy Moogan's post about low quality links: http://www.stateofsearch.com/step-by-step-guide-finding-low-quality-links/
Damn, we should turn this into a blog post!
Hope this helps!
-
You know what Cyrus? I kid you not...this afternoon I suddenly got this thought that I should send you a copy once I got it finished. I know you have been involved in unnatural links cleanup. I'll be in touch!
-
Hi Marie,
Please let us all know when you finish the book!
-
Hey Marie - thanks for the details, i will let you know what else i find!
-
Yes, definitely. These need to be removed if possible and disavowed.
-
I generally create a Google Doc spreadsheet with my links and then have columns where I enter email addresses found on site, whois addresses and url of contact form. Then, I have columns next to those for reference numbers. Those reference numbers refer to a separate document in which I include the original source code of each email sent as well as a document with screenshots of contact forms submitted. It's a pain to do all of this but I have been successful in every single attempt at reconsideration using this method.
If you're interested, I am 95% finished writing a book on the process that I use to get rid of unnatural links penalties. You can contact me via my profile and I can send you my almost finished book at a discounted price. It does include a link to an example of the spreadsheet that I use.
-
Do you think this type of microblogging URL would be considered spam:
http://olcine.com/index.php/steffcolbere
Should i disavow these sites as well?
-
Marie, thanks for the tip on the total disavowed, i am currently in the process of downloading my link profiles from OSE and GWT to look over it again.
As for communicating i haven't submitted a document saying who i have contacted, how would you suggest documenting that? Do you have an example document to share?
-
Nick, what did your request look like when you got approved? An specifics you can share?
-
Thanks for the pointers on # of links in GWT, I will dig in deeper and see the trends over the last few months. As for the reconsideration request, do you have an examples of what people submitted that got approved?
-
Hi Kyle. The process is frustrating, isn't it?
I have a few thoughts for you. You mentioned that you disavowed over 40 different domains. That doesn't sound like many. Many sites that I have worked on have had hundreds and hundreds of domains that needed disavowing. It's possible that you haven't identified enough links as unnatural. In other words, it may be that Google wants you to address some links that you think could be natural but actually do go against the quality guidelines.
I've also seen sites fail at reconsideration because the disavow file was not properly formatted.
How well did you communicate your attempts at link removal to Google? If you have contacted webmasters and failed to get links removed then you need to document that well to Google.
-
I also agree with highland, you have to submit a file that shows all your work.
-
We have recovered from a manual link spam penalty about 2 weeks ago after 5 months of cleaning up stuff. I have cleaned about 85% of the links and submitted a recon. and 3 days later i got a message that said the MANUAL penalty was revoked.
Even though it s been 2 weeks we still have not seen any improvement on the rankings. We are now working on getting quality links .
I felt the same way back in January but kept at it. So clean up more if you can and give it another shot.
good luck I feel your pain.
Nick
-
Make it a point to check Google WMT to see if number of external links is declining. If the number is rising or staying constant, i would check the disavow file to make sure you are indeed capturing all spam domains.
I have found that a great reinclusion request can do the trick. The request should note what your wrongdoings where, what was your remediation, time spent and percentage of success. You should also apologize and your promise to be good.
-
Hmm. Well, the only other thing I could recommend would be reading this post on the matter. To summarize a bit, Google wants to see what you've done to fix the problem. Document what you've done and plead your case.
-
Highland, yes we have utilized it quite heavily with submitting over 40 different FULL domains not just urls.
-
Have you tried the disavow links tool? I know many people who have fought manual penalties and they have expressed that it's invaluable in getting rid of them.
-
I just don't think that is the right move, we still hold rankings for other pages, it just seems to be keyword/page specific some how
-
I know this may not be what you want to hear but it might make sense to start over. New domain and website. To be completely rid of the old site is a hard but necessary move.
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
-
Is Google creating meta descriptions on the fly?
I'm doing some competitor analysis for a client. I'm looking at the client's title tags and meta descriptions for specific search results, in comparison to their main competitor. I'm trying to establish if the client is ranking higher due to better relevance, or just because they have higher PA and DA. It appears to be the latter. Observations: For both the client and their competitor, their home pages appear in the results much more frequently than specific landing pages The meta description Google chooses to display in the search results for the home page does not always match the ACTUAL meta description for the page and appears to vary depending on the specific search query Questions: Does Google create meta descriptions on the fly? Is this an example of Google using semantic search? And if so, why are we bothering to type customised meta descriptions for specific pages, if Google is just going to recreate them anyway? Is Google displaying results of the home pages simply because they cannot find pages more relevant (ie. if we produced landing pages more relevant to these specific search queries, would Google rank them higher)?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | muzzmoz0 -
Google Penalty Checker Tool
What is the best tool to check for the google penalty, What penalty hit the website. ?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Michael.Leonard0 -
How many times will Google read a page?
Hello! Do you know if Google reads a page more than once? We want to include a very robust menu that has a lot of links, so we were thinking about coding a very simple page that loads first and immediately loading the other code that has all the links thinking that perhaps Google will only read the first version but won't read it the second time with all the links. Do you know if we will get penalized? I'm not sure if I got the idea across, let me know if I need to expand more. Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | alinaalvarez0 -
Removing Parameterized URLs from Google Index
We have duplicate eCommerce websites, and we are in the process of implementing cross-domain canonicals. (We can't 301 - both sites are major brands). So far, this is working well - rankings are improving dramatically in most cases. However, what we are seeing in some cases is that Google has indexed a parameterized page for the site being canonicaled (this is the site that is getting the canonical tag - the "from" page). When this happens, both sites are being ranked, and the parameterized page appears to be blocking the canonical. The question is, how do I remove canonicaled pages from Google's index? If Google doesn't crawl the page in question, it never sees the canonical tag, and we still have duplicate content. Example: A. www.domain2.com/productname.cfm%3FclickSource%3DXSELL_PR is ranked at #35, and B. www.domain1.com/productname.cfm is ranked at #12. (yes, I know that upper case is bad. We fixed that too.) Page A has the canonical tag, but page B's rank didn't improve. I know that there are no guarantees that it will improve, but I am seeing a pattern. Page A appears to be preventing Google from passing link juice via canonical. If Google doesn't crawl Page A, it can't see the rel=canonical tag. We likely have thousands of pages like this. Any ideas? Does it make sense to block the "clicksource" parameter in GWT? That kind of scares me.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AMHC0 -
Site Indexed by Google but not Bing or Yahoo
Hi, I have a site that is indexed (and ranking very well) in Google, but when I do a "site:www.domain.com" search in Bing and Yahoo it is not showing up. The team that purchased the domain a while back has no idea if it was indexed by Bing or Yahoo at the time of purchase. Just wondering if there is anything that might be preventing it from being indexed? Also, Im going to submit an index request, are there any other things I can do to get it picked up?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dbfrench0 -
Google Disavow Tool - Waste of Time
My humble opinion is that Google's disavow tool.... is a utter waste of your time! My site, http://goo.gl/pdsHs was penalized over a year ago after the SEO we hired used black hat techniques to increase ranking. Ironically, while having visibility, Google itself had become a customer. (I guess the site was pretty high quality, trust worthy and user friendly enough for Google employees to purchase from.) Soon enough the message about detecting unnatural links had shown up on the webmaster tools and as expected, our rankings sank and out of view. For a year we had contacted webmasters, asking them remove links pointing back to us. 90% didn't respond, the other 10% complied). Work on our site continued, adding high quality, highly relevant unique content.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Prime85
Rankings never recovered and neither did our traffic or business….. Earlier this month, we learned about Google’s "link disavow tool" and were excited! We had hoped that following the cleanup instruction, using the “link disavow tool”, we would get a chance at recovery!
We watched Matt Cutts’ video, read the various forums/blogs/topics online that were written about it, and then we felt comfortable enough to use it... We went through our backlink profile, determining which links were either spammy or seemed a result of black hat practices or the links added by a 3rd party possibly interested in our demise and added them to a .txt file. We submitted the file via the disavow tool and followed with another reconsideration request. The result came a couple of weeks later… the same cookie cutter email in the WMT suggesting that there are “unnatural links” to the site. Hope turned to disappointment and frustration. Looks like the big box companies will continue to populate the top 100 results of ANY search, the rest will help Google’s shareholders… If your site has gotten in the algorithm crosshairs, you have a better chance of recovering by changing your URL than messing around with this useless tool.0 -
Penalised for duplicate content, time to fix?
Ok, I accept this one is my fault but wondering on time scales to fix... I have a website and I put an affiliate store on it, using merchant datafeeds in a bid to get revenue from the site. This was all good, however, I forgot to put noindex on the datafeed/duplicate content pages and over a period of a couple of weeks the traffic to the site died. I have since nofollowed or removed the products but some 3 months later my site still will not rank for the keywords it was ranking for previously. It will not even rank if I type in the sites' name (bright tights). I have searched for the name using bright tights, "bright tights" and brighttights but none of them return the site anywhere. I am guessing that I have been hit with a drop x place penalty by Google for the duplicate content. What is the easiest way around this? I have no warning about bad links or the such. Is it worth battling on trying to get the domain back or should I write off the domain, buy a new one and start again but minus the duplicate content? The goal of having the duplicate content store on the site was to be able to rank the category pages in the store which had unique content on so there were no problems with that which I could foresee. Like Amazon et al, the categories would have lists of products (amongst other content) and you would click through to the individual product description - the duplicate page. Thanks for reading
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Grumpy_Carl0 -
Have we suffered a Google penalty?
Hello, In January, we started a new blog to supplement our core ecommerce website. The URL of the website is www.footballshirtblog.co.uk and the idea behind it was that we would write articles related to our industry to build a community which would ultimately boost our sales. We would add several posts per day, a mix between shorter news stories of around 150 words and more detailed content pages of around 500 words. Everything was going well, we were making slow but sure progress on the main generic keywords but were receiving several thousand visitors a day, mostly finding the posts themselves on Google. The surge on traffic meant we needed to move server, which we did around 6 weeks ago. When we did this, we had a few teething problems with file permissions, etc, which meant we were tempoarily able to add new posts. As our developers were tied up with other issues, this continued for a 7-10 day period, with no new content being added. In this period, the site completely dropped from Google, losing all it's rankings and traffic, to the extent it now doesn't even rank for it's own name. This is very frustrating as we have put a huge amount of work and content into developing this site. We have added a few posts since, but not a huge amount as it is frustrating to do it with no return and the concern that the site has been banned forever. I cannot think of any logical reason why this penalty has occured as we haven't been link spamming, etc. Does anyone have any feedback or suggestions as to how we can get back on track? Regards,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ukss1984
David0