Site deindexed after HTTPS migration + possible penalty due to spammy links
-
Hi all, we've recently migrated a site from http to https and saw the majority of pages drop out of the index.
One of the most extreme deindexation problems I've ever seen, but there doesn't appear to be anything obvious on-page which is causing the issue. (Unless I've missed something - please tell me if I have!)
I had initially discounted any off-page issues due to the lack of a manual action in SC, however after looking into their link profile I spotted 100 spammy porn .xyz sites all linking (see example image).
Didn't appear to be any historic disavow files uploaded in the non https SC accounts.
Any on-page suggestions, or just play the waiting game with the new disavow file?
-
Thanks for answering all of my questions!
It's interesting that when I do a simple site:search in Google none of the main pages of your website are appearing. Most of the search results are either archives or comments. Typically, I've seen this kind of thing happen when something goes wrong in the redirects or a site is penalized.
It looks like the big dip in indexation didn't occur until about August. I would think that if you pulled the trigger in June, pages would start dropping out of the index much sooner.
In this case, your theory about a possible penalization might be right. I'd be interested to see what happens once Google considers the disavow file (unfortunately, that will take some time).
Does anyone else have any input or possible reasons why pages on this site have dropped out of the index so quickly?
-
Hi Serge,
Thanks for your input. I've answered your questions below.
- How long ago did you switch to https? - 21st June
- Have you submitted both non-www and www versions of the https site to Google Search Console (GSC)? - Yes
- Have you kept the http versions of your website in GSC? - Yes
- From the looks of it, your sitemap has been updated to reflect the https pages. Have you submitted the updated sitemap to GSC? - Yes - Submitted pages are not matching Indexed pages
- Are there any sitemap errors appearing in GSC? Any other errors? No Sitemap Errors. some 404ing pages.
- Could you attach a screenshot of the indexation rate on both https and http versions of the site from GSC?
- Could you confirm that all redirects were done 1-to-1 and properly redirected? (301s and not 302s) - Confirmed - all tools are reporting 200 status after hitting the 301.
We are still waiting to see some results from submitting the disavow file. So far, no positive movement.
Thanks for your help!
-
Hi there,
There could be a lot of reasons why certain pages of your website are dropping out of your index. Could you answer the following questions to help us narrow down the possible cause?
- How long ago did you switch to https?
- Have you submitted both non-www and www versions of the https site to Google Search Console (GSC)?
- Have you kept the http versions of your website in GSC?
- From the looks of it, your sitemap has been updated to reflect the https pages. Have you submitted the updated sitemap to GSC?
- Are there any sitemap errors appearing in GSC? Any other errors?
- Could you attach a screenshot of the indexation rate on both https and http versions of the site from GSC?
- Could you confirm that all redirects were done 1-to-1 and properly redirected? (301s and not 302s)
Some things that we could rule out:
- It looks like the site isn't using noindex tags in a way that would cause deindexing
- It looks like the robots.txt file isn't disallowing any important paths that would cause deindexation
- The http version of the www and non-www pages redirects to the www, https version of the site which is good
- Canonicals seem to be updated and pointing to the https version of the site
Sorry for all of the questions, I just want to make sure and rule out possible causes to focus in on what the issue could be.
Thanks, Serge
-
Hi!
what information do you seen in search console?
Assuming that you have already tested all of your old URL's and the redirection paths points correctly to the new URLs, does Google Search console indicates any problems with the number of URLs submitted to it?
canoncals? are they in use? pointing to the correct version of the site?
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
-
Site Speed Testing Tools For Production Sites
Hi Guys, Any free site speed testing tools for sites in production, which are password protected? We want to test site speed before the new site goes live on top priority pages. Site is on Shopify – we tried google page insights while being logged into the production site but believe its just recording the speed of the password page. Cheers.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | brandonegroup1 -
HTTP vs HTTPS duplication where HTTPS is non-existing
Hey Guys, **My site is **http://www.citymetrocarpetcleaning.com.au/ Goal: I am checking if there is an HTTPS version of my site (duplication issue) What I did: 1. I went to Screaming Frog and run https://www.citymetrocarpetcleaning.com.au/. The result is that it is 200 OK (the HTTPS version exists - possible duplication) 2. Next, I opened a browser and manually replace HTTP with HTTPS, the result is "Image 1" which doesn't indicate a duplication. But if we go deeper in Advanced > Proceed to www.citymetrocarpetcleaning.com.au (unsafe) "Image 2", it displays the content (Image 3). Question: 1. Is there an HTTP vs HTTPs duplication here? 2. Do I need to implement 301 redirection/canonical tags on HTTPS pointing to HTTP to solve duplication? Please help! Cheers! uIgJv DsNrA El7aI
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | gamajunova0 -
How do you handle a site with inherited negative links, but no penalty?
I'm trying to rank a new client for various key phrases that contain "it support." The problem is that about 100 of their 180 total referring domains have links that include "it support" (usually as partial match, or if exact then for uninteresting terms with low traffic), mostly on quite low quality directories. So, no penalty, and not much exact match I'm worried about, but I'm concerned that there's too high a percentage overall of partial match or simpy "it support"-based links for me to continue building keyword-optimized links to try and rank for the much harder terms we need to rank for... Despite the large number of low quality directories, a disavowal does not seem like a good idea since there is no penalty, but how does one avoid being handicapped by such bad links that came before one's time?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | zakkyg0 -
Having possible problems with rankings due to development website
Hi all, I've got an interesting issue and a bit of a technical challenge for you. It's a bit complicated to explain, but please bear with me. We have a client website (http://clientwebsite.com) which we are having a hard time ranking in the past few months. Main keywords simply don't show up in Top100 searches, even though we are constantly building backlinks through Guest Posts, Citations, Media mentions, Profile links etc. Normally, we use ahrefs to look at the client's website backlinks, but just today we used Majestic to look at the backlink profile and one backlink stood out. This is a backlink from a development server (http://developmentwebsite.com) which redirects to http://clientwebsite.com
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | zakkyg
The developers who were working on the redesign of the client website, put it up on their server and forgot to delete it.
Also, the content inside the development website is almost identical with the client website. We then checked to see if http://developmentwebsite.com is indexed.
It's not. Although, inside the robots file http://developmentwebsite.com/robots.txt there's:
User-agent: *
Allow: /
The funny (and weird thing) is that http://developmentwebsite.com/ and all development website inner pages are not indexed in Google. But if we go to http://developmentwebsite.com/inner-page, it doesn't redirect to the corresponding http://clientwebsite.com/inner-page, it's the same development website page URL and the pages even have links to the client website, but like I said, none of the pages of the development website are indexed, even though crawlers are allowed in the robots.txt's development website. In your opinion, could this be the reason why we are having a hard time to rank the client website? Second question is:
How do we approach in solving this issue?
Do we simply delete the whole http://developmentwebsite.com with all the inner pages?
Or should we do 301 redirrects on a per-page basis?0 -
Same page Anchor Links vs Internal Link (Cannibalisation)
Hey Mozzers, I have a very long article page that supports several of my sub-category pages. It has sub-headings that link out to the relevant pages. However the article is very long and to make it easier to find the relevant section I was debating adding inpage anchor links in a bullet list at the top of the page for quick navigation. PAGE TITLE Keyword 1 Keyword 2 etc <a name="'Keyword1"></a> Keyword 1 Content
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ATP
<a name="'Keyword2"></a> Keyword 2 Content Because of the way my predecessor wrote this article, its section headings are the same as the sub-categories they link out to and boost (not ideal but an issue I will address later). What I wondered is if having the inpage achor would confuse the SERPS because they would be linking with the same keyword. My worry is that by increasing userbility of the article by doing this I also confuse them SERPS First I tell them that this section on my page talk about keyword 1. Then from in that article i tell them that a different page entirely is about the same keyword. Would linking like this confuse SERPS or are inpage anchor links looked upon and dealt with differently?0 -
Should I remove all vendor links (link farm concerns)?
I have a web site that has been around for a long time. The industry we serve includes many, many small vendors and - back in the day - we decided to allow those vendors to submit their details, including a link to their own web site, for inclusion on our pages. These vendor listings were presented in location (state) pages as well as more granular pages within our industry (we called them "topics). I don't think it's important any more but 100% of the vendors listed were submitted by the vendors themselves, rather than us "hunting down" links for inclusion or automating this in any way. Some of the vendors (I'd guess maybe 10-15%) link back to us but many of these sites are mom-and-pop sites and would have extremely low authority. Today the list of vendors is in the thousands (US only). But the database is old and not maintained in any meaningful way. We have many broken links and I believe, rightly or wrongly, we are considered a link farm by the search engines. The pages on which these vendors are listed use dynamic URLs of the form: \vendors<state>-<topic>. The combination of states and topics means we have hundreds of these pages and they thus form a significant percentage of our pages. And they are garbage 🙂 So, not good.</topic></state> We understand that this model is broken. Our plan is to simply remove these pages (with the list of vendors) from our site. That's a simple fix but I want to be sure we're not doing anything wring here, from an SEO perspective. Is this as simple as that - just removing these page? How much effort should I put into redirecting (301) these removed URLs? For example, I could spend effort making sure that \vendors\California- <topic>(and for all states) goes to a general "topic" page (which still has relevance, but won't have any vendors listed)</topic> I know there is no distinct answer to this, but what expectation should I have about the impact of removing these pages? Would the removal of a large percentage of garbage pages (leaving much better content) be expected to be a major factor in SEO? Anyway, before I go down this path I thought I'd check here in case I miss something. Thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MarkWill0 -
Do links from twitter count in SEOMoz's Toolbar link count?
I am using the Chrome extension and looking at a SERP, when a page is said to have 2000 incoming links, does that include tweets with a link back to this page? What about retweets. Are those counted separately or as one? And what about independent tweets that have exactly the same content (tweet text + link)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | davhad0 -
A Client Changed the Link Structure for Their Site... Not Just Once, but Twice
I have a client who's experiencing a number of crawl errors, which I've gotten down fo 9,000 from 18,000. One of the challenges they experience is that they've modified their URL structure a couple times. First it was: site.com/year/month/day/post-name
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | digisavvy
Then it was: site.com/category/post-name
Now it's: site.com/post-name I'm not sure of the time elapsed between these changes, but enough time has passed that the URLs for the previous two URL structures have been indexed and spit out 404s now. What's the best/clean way to address this issue?I'm not going to create 9k redirect rules obviously, but there's got to be a way to address this issue and resolve it moving forward.0