Manual Webspam Error by Google!
-
Hi,back in June 2013, our company received a notice of unnatural links which resulted in 'a manual spam action' from Google.A reconsideration request was filed a week later which received the following response from Google:_'We reviewed your site and found no manual actions by the webspam team that might affect your site's ranking in Google. There's no need to file a reconsideration request for your site, because any ranking issues you may be experiencing are not related to a manual action taken by the webspam team.'_Naturally we are confused by what seems to be an error in Google's communication.We are also left questioning whether it was necessary to remove the links Google stated were unnatural.Since the notice was received, we have struggled to recover traffic even after implementing Google best practices. Some clarity on the issue would be greatly appreciated.My URL is: www.homefurnitureland.co.uk
-
Hi Jane,
to clarify, the site had been hit heavily by Panda in 2011 and again in 2012 by Penguin. Both are prior to the manual spam action, so we are aware of the impact each has had.
The purpose of the post was to see if anyone within the community has experienced a similar error in communication from Google and could recommend a course of address.
We are also aware of the backlink profile and manipulated anchors, but would like to thank you for your analysis.
Regarding the miscommunication, we have decided to approach a few individuals from the webspam team on Google + for a resolution.
Thanks again for your input : )
M.
-
Hi Marek,
Very few people get anywhere with the tweet-Matt option sadly
If you received a manual penalty, this has little to do with Penguin updates - the penalty has been handed out by a member of the Webspam team rather than by the algorithm.
What concerns me about your links is firstly how many links point to the site using commercial terms rather than brand terms as anchor text. This is one of the red flags Penguin looks for, but it's also amazingly easy for a person to discover: http://i.imgur.com/INcW11X.png
No backlink profile created "naturally" (and I realise how hard it is to create a natural backlink profile) would look like that. A Googler would take a dim view of that anchor text spread.
Secondly, I'm curious about the sites that link to you using those anchors. I tried visiting them and many of them returned the exact same 500 database error: http://i.imgur.com/lQHEk3p.png + http://i.imgur.com/zpw6YC7.png
All these sites have the same IP address. The other sites hosted on this IP are all down as well: http://www.bing.com/search?q=ip%3A176.67.167.170&go=&qs=n&form=QBLH&filt=all&pq=ip%3A176.67.167.170&sc=0-3&sp=-1&sk=&cvid=fd590e3d130749f290febb6a76973ced
If links were placed on this network of sites all hosted on the same IP, this would absolutely be grounds for a penalty. The weird thing to me is not the penalty but the fact that you were later told you didn't have one.
It's also worth noting that I'd recommend removing those links, penalty warning / loss of rankings or not. There are some other low-quality pages linking to you multiple times with competitive anchors, like http://www.lanaintl.com/all-about-desks-and-its-types. This just looks ridiculously unnatural and manipulative: http://www.lanaintl.com/ - starts off talking about Albuquerque pest control, them keeps linking out to a UK furniture store
You've also got commercial links from sites with identical themes: http://www.house2homefurniture.com/lc-140-xx.html
Link removal is absolutely necessary here, I'm afraid. These bad links all have to go.
-
Hi Marie,
I think it depends on the level of impact and number of unnatural links.
After all, a website with 100% natural links will appear unnatural!
M.
-
In almost every case, if a site is affected by Penguin or Panda it happens right at the time of a Penguin/Panda refresh or update. Sometimes it can be a gradual decline, but it should start on the day that the algorithm refreshed. If you have a drop that happens at another time then there could be other issues there.
"In both cases, link removal would not have been necessary as the algorithm adjusted our rankings accordingly. "
I would disagree with this statement. For Penguin, while it's true that the algorithm has already devalued your bad links, having them still pointing to your site is not a good thing. Penguin tends to assign a level of trust to your site. If Google still sees unnatural links then not only are they devalued, but your site has sort of a stigma on it as well. You definitely want to remove or disavow any unnatural (i.e. self made) links that you have.
-
Hi Marie,
The site was hit by both Panda and Penguin, although not at the time of the supposed penalty.
In both cases, link removal would not have been necessary as the algorithm adjusted our rankings accordingly.
So its frustrating to be told by Google to remove links only to later discover this was not necessary.
Will try your suggested hangouts with John.
Many thanks Marie!
-
Hi Jane,
My clients ranking losses are correlated more closely to Panda updates, although Penguin has had some impact.
In both cases, link removal would not have been necessary as the algorithm adjusted rankings accordingly.
So to then be asked by Google to remove links, only to be told later that this wasn't necessary, has been both frustrating and damaging for the business.
Question is, how do we raise this with Google? Tweet Matt Cutts directly?!
-
Hi Marek,
I have a few thoughts. It's odd that you received a message and then when you filed for reconsideration you were told there was no penalty. Back in June of 2013 any site could file for reconsideration. But, now, you can only do so if you actually have a manual penalty. Otherwise, no "request review" button is visible.
John Mueller recently said in a hangout that if the manual spam actions viewer shows no penalty then you can be certain that there is no manual penalty. So, it's unlikely that there is still a manual penalty there and you just don't have access to see it. Still, one thing you could do is contact John Mueller through Google+ and ask if he could have the webspam team take a look. You may not get a reply, but if there has been some kind of error then it should come to light.
My guess though is that you are probably suffering under EITHER the Penguin or the Panda algorithm or possibly both. You've definitely got unnatural links such as this one: http://www.house2homefurniture.com/ which make Penguin a possibility. A lot of e-commerce sites were affected by Panda. A quick site:search shows a large number of pages in the Google index. Are they all adding unique, quality content?
It's probably a good idea to go through your organi bc traffic and see if you can pinpoint the day of your drop and see if it coincides with the date of a known Penguin or Panda refresh. http://moz.com/google-algorithm-change
-
William,
there are two place you can look for notices and webspam actions in WMT:
1. 'Site Messages'
2. 'Search Traffic > Manual Actions'
The 'webspam action' and 'reconsideration request' was received in 'Site Messages'. As was the subsequent message stating no webspam action was taken and a reconsideration request wasn't necessary. Clearly there's been miscommunication from Google resulting in links being removed and lost unnecessarily.
How do we take this up with Google? Tweet Matt Cutts directly?!
-
How did you know you received a manual action if there's no message about it in Webmasters? If there was a message there and now it's gone, then congratulations! You got it removed, and they had poor communication while informing you of such.
Also, just because a MANUAL action no longer exists doesn't mean you are free and clear. You could still be penalized for spammy links, just not manually.
Link cleanup is a good thing, with or without a manual action. Clean up your stuff, so you can know where you stand on that front. Then if you are still suffering, look into other areas.
-
Guys,
let me rephrase.
The issue is, Google said they implemented a manual spam action and then later said they didn't.
So we were made to remove links for no apparent reason!
If I check Webmaster Tools > Search Traffic > Manual Actions, there are 'no manual webspam actions found'!
M.
-
Hi Marek,
Agree with William that doing the reconsideration request in the same week is too soon, barring exceptional circumstances. By that, I mean that if you had been actively removing bad links in the weeks / months leading up to receiving the spam action notice / penalty, you could submit a reconsideration request and cite this. However, in general Google does like to see significant effort on a webmaster's part to get rid of bad links before asking for reconsideration. What this means is that your request should show the activity you've engaged in to try and remove links: how many emails you have sent to the websites hosting the bad links, how many replies you've had, how many of those links were removed as the results of your efforts and how man you feel you cannot remove due to inaction on the part of the webmaster or your inability to find a real person to contact.
It's confusing that you received a message saying that you did not in fact have manual action against your site if you were previously told that you did - this could just be a glitch, but if that first message coincided with a ranking problem that is persisting, I would say that it is necessary to remove the poor quality links pointing to the site, including those from low-quality sites, and those with overly-optimised anchor text.
Cheers,
Jane
-
From a quick glance at OSE, looks like you do have some backlinks to clean up. Your anchor text is heavily weighted towards money terms - primarily [oak furniture], [solid oak furniture], and [oak office furniture]. Plus sites like http://www.lanaintl.com/basic-info-about-real-estate-agents (which you have a backlink from) are clearly spammy.
-
I'm assuming you submitted a disavow report? If so, it must have been within a week of the reconsideration request, which is too short in my opinion. I like to give disavows longer than that to be recognized by Google.
Google wants to see you put a lot of work into link clean up, multiple contacts to the webmasters asking for removal and such.
Google is a slow moving machine and its tough to be patient. It's possible you were too fast for Google. I would recommend trying again. Update your disavow report, force crawl, wait 2 weeks, explain everything in a new reconsideration request.
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
-
Google Sitelinks Search Box
For some reason, a search for our company name (“hometalk”) does not produce the search box in the results (even though we do have sitelinks). We are adding schema markup as outlined here, but we're not sure about: Will adding the code make the search bar appear (or at least increase the chances), or is it only going to change the functionality of the search box (to on-site search) for results that are already showing a search bar?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | YairSpolter0 -
Pages Returning A 403 Error
Hiya Moz Community I hope you are all great, I have a question regarding one of my websites, I have the main site and 2 sub folder sites essentially, I decided to upgrade one of the sites and placed it in a different sub folder, I then set up a 301 redirect to the new location, so far so good, I have been having a look at my link profile using AHrefs, inside there is an SEO report facility, I ran the report and I have over 500 pages returning a 403 or Forbidden error. my question is whether the Equity from those pages is being passed to the new site? I actually removed all the old site from Google Cache to avoid misleading visitors, I suppose I could set the re-directs up manually if I the equity is not being passed to the new site although I was under the impression it would be, or 85% - 90% of it would be anyway. The reason why I am asking is that I have seen a significant drop in rankings for keywords that my site has always ranked highly for. thought I would see if you guys can clear that up for me. Thanks and regards Wes Dunn
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | wesdunn19770 -
User generated content - manual warning from Google
Over the weekend our website received large amounts of spammy comments / user profiles on our forums. This has led to Google giving us a partial manual action until we clear things up. So far we have: Cleared up all the spam, banned the offending user accounts, and temporary enabled admin-approval for new sign ups. We are currently investigating upgrading the forum software to the latest version in order to make the forums less susceptible to this kind of attack. Could anyone let me know whether they think it is the right time for us to submit a reconsideration request to get the manual action removed? Will the temporary actions we have taken be enough to get the ban lifted, or should we wait until the forum software has been updated? I'd really appreciate any advice, especially if there is anyone here who has experienced this issue themselves 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RG_SEO0 -
Keyword search in Google Adwords
Hello all, I would like to use the Google Adwords Keywords search tool, in order to start working in the structure of my website and targeting the right keywords. I am targeting all the world, all languages, global monthly searaches but: I have the doubt which filte I should use: broad?, exact? or phrase?I am using "braod" but I do not know if I should use exact instead for keyword selection. Would you recommend me any other tool instead of Google Adwords Keywords Search for keyword analysis? Thank you very much Antonio
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | aalcocer20030 -
Can Google read my backlink in Javascript??
Hi SeoMoz community! I have a software product, which our clients implement onto their websites. It is like a pop up box. I know that backlinks are very important for SEO ranking, and I really want to give our clients 2 options of product: 1. you can get the free/cheaper option if you use the code which has a keyworded backlink to our site on it 2. you can pay small fee if you don't want to use the version with a link to our site on it Now, the problem is that the product is written entirely in Javascript, and I don't think that Google crawls this, do they? Is there a way around this? Thanks for your help!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | qdigi0 -
Google Page Rank Dead?
Does PR still work? I have sites that have PR3 and get almost no traffic and sites that are PR1 and get thousands of uniques per month. My PR on my main sites haven't moved for about 7 years, even though we've grown significantly. I know lots of you are going to jump in with get the MOZ toolbar, which I already have done, and I agree, it's great ... But can anyone tell me about what's going on with Google PR? Is it still active? Or has Google abandoned? I noticed that the Google toolbar is not even available for Google Chrome. That should say something ... If you like this question, do me a favor, and give me a THUMBS UP!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | applesofgold2 -
Is Google Webmaster tools Accurate?
Is Google webmaster Tools data completely inaccurate, or am I just missing something? I noticed a recent surge in 404 errors detected 3 days ago (3/6/11) from pages that have not existed since November 2011. They are links to tag and author archives from pages initially indexed in August 2011. We switched to a new site in December 2011 and created 301 redirects from categories that no longer exist, to new categories. I am a little perplexed since the Google sitemap test shows no 404 errors, neither does SEO MOZ Crawl test, yet under GWT site diagnostics, these errors, all 125 of them, just showed up. Any thought/insights? We've worked hard to ensure a smooth site migration and now we are concerned. -Jason
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jimmyjohnson0 -
Will this get penalized by google?
I had a thought recently, and perhaps it is a pretty bad thought, but i don't see the flaw in it, or how google would really detect it, so please correct me where I am wrong here. Say we ran some sort of marketing campeign and through that campeign we created about 100 extra pages on our domain. A lot of these pages are heavily shared on facebook, twitter, google+ etc. These pages also have several backlinks here and there. Now this campaign is over and so these pages no longer seem relevant to us. If we were to add 301 redirects to all these pages, to three different (and unrelated) internal pages (our primary targets) would this pass all the accumulated link juice on to those three target internal pages? Or would this behaviour get penalized by google?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | adriandg0