Penalty for adding too much content too quickly?
-
Hi there,
We released around 4000 pieces of new content, which all ranked in the first page and did well. We had a database of ~400,000 pieces and so we released the entire library in a couple of days (all remaining 396,000 pages).
The pages have indexed.
The pages are not ranking, although the initial batch are still ranking as are a handful (literally a handful) of the new 396,000. When I say not ranking - I mean not ranking anywhere (gone up as far as page 20), yet the initial batch we'd be ranking for competitive terms on page 1.
Do Google penalise you for releasing such a volume of content in such a short space of time? If so, should we deindex all that content and re-release in slow batches? And finally, if that is the course of action we should take is there any good articles around deindexing content at scale.
Thanks so much for any help you are able to provide.
Steve
-
Thanks for replying. The site is getinspired365 dot com.
We saw a spike of 11,000, then 29,000 then back down a steady ~1500.
Yes, we have structured our sitemap such that there is 7 sitemaps (one for authors of 15,000) and then 5 for our quotes (40,000 each) and one for our topics (2000). Looking at it around 90% has successfully been indexed. This was done around 2 months ago and as I say it has pretty much all been indexed but it is not ranking - at all. However, our first batch of content is ranking and ranking really well. It is as though this new content has some sort of penalty and is therefore not ranking in Google but I am not sure 1. What the penalty is and 2. How to fix it? I want to deindex the entire site and start again, and just add the content in much smaller batches but I am not sure how best to do that.
thanks
-
I doubt so. Can you share a link?
Did you publish an updated sitemap?
Do you see a spike in "Pages crawled per day" in "Google WMT/Search Console", in Crawl->Crawl Stats?
400k is a lot, it may take some time to crawl all of them
Did you structure your sitemap as a tree? if you did, adding the 400k new pages to a sub node of the sitemap, you can check in Crawl->Sitemaps how many of those pages are already indexed, and if the figure is growing or not on a day/week basis.
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
-
Copied Content - Define Canonical
Hello, The Story I am working on a news organization. Our website is the https://www.neakriti.gr My question regards copied content with source references. Sometimes a small portion of our content is based on some third article that is posted on some site (that is about 1% of our content). We always put "source" reference if that is the case. This is inevitable as "news" is something that sometimes has sources on other news sites, especially if there is something you cannot verify or don't have immediate sources, and therefore you need to state that "according to this source, something has happened". Here is one article of ours that has a source from another site: https://www.neakriti.gr/article/ellada-nea/1503363/nekros-vrethike-o-agnooumenos-arhimandritis-stin-lakonia/ if you open the above article you will see we have a link to the equivalent article of the original source site http://lakonikos.gr/epikairothta/item/133664-nekros-entopistike-o-arximandritis-p-andreas-bolovinos-synexis-enimerosi Now here is my question. I have read in other MOZ forum articles that a "canonical" approach solves this issue... How can we be legit when it comes to duplicate content in the eyes of search engines? Should we use some kind of canonical link to the source site? Should the "canonical" be inside the link in some way? Should it be on our section? Our site has AMP equivalent pages (if you add the /amp keyword at the end of the article URL). Our AMP pages have canonical to our original article. So if we have a "canonical" approach how would the AMP be effected as well? Also by applying a possible canonical solution to the source URL, does that "canonical" effect our article as not being shown in search results, thus passing all indexing to the canonical site? (I know that canonical indicates what URL is to be indexed). Additionally, does such a canonical indication make us legit in such a case in the eyes of search engines? (i.e. it eliminates any possible article duplication for original content in the eyes of search engines?). Or simply put, having a simple link to the original article (as we have it now) is enough for the search engines to understand that we have reference to original article URL? How would we approach this problem in our site based on its current structure?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ioannisanif0 -
Hidden category content really bad?
Hi Guys, I'm working with a site which has hidden based category content see: http://i.imgur.com/Sgko2we.jpg It seems google are still indexing these pages but i heard Google might ignore or reduce the benefit of hidden content like this.I just want to confirm if this is the case? And if this is a really bad thing for SEO?Cheers.Sgko2we.jpg
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seowork2140 -
Social Media Content Duplicacy?
Since, Social media signals are taken into account for SEO activities. Do you think that Social Profiles account content will also be taken into account? Or is it that how many fans, share, likes a profile has gets into account for SEO activities. Like more number of fans the higher the social value for SEO? Secondly, if someone re-tweets or shares. The content gets duplicated into number of profiles re-tweeted or shared? & what we even do is copy content from other pages, do slight changes & post on our pages? Do you think it will affect the SEO part?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | welcomecure0 -
Duplicate content, the distrubutors are copying the content of the manufacturer
Hi everybody! While I was checking all points of the Technical Site Audit Checklist 2015 (great checklist!), I found that the distrubutors of my client are copying part of the content to add it in their websites. When I take a content snippet, and put it in quotes and search for it I get four or five sites that have copied the content. They are distributors of my client. The first result is still my client (the manufacturer), but... should I recommend any action to this situation. We don't want to bother the distributors with obstacles. This situation could be a problem or is it a common situation and Google knows perfectly where the content is comming from? Any recommendation? Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | teconsite0 -
Does having a page that ends with ? cause duplicate content?
I am working on a site that has lots of dynamic parameters. So lets say we have www.example.com/page?parameter=1 When the page has no parameters you can still end up at www.example.com/page? Should I redirect this to www.example.com/page/ ? Im not sure if Google ignores this, or if these pages need to be dealt with. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MarloSchneider0 -
What is the meaning of anchor text penalty?
If i have 70% back links with same anchor text, will i get penalized? some of my blog's pages which were previously in top 100 in google are no where now. but for other long tail keywords, m still in same position. How to get rid of this penalty? Should i create more links with different anchor text to reduce the effect or should i remove that 70% back links?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | web2smspk0 -
SEO Tools for Content Audit
Hi i'm looking for a tool which can do a full content audit for a site for instance - Find pages which: • Lack text content. • Finds pages with lengthy meta descriptions • Finds missing H1 tags or multiple H1 tags . • Duplicate meta descriptions. • Find images with no alt text Are there any tools besides the ones on SEMOZ which can enable me to do a full content audit on factors like these. Or any SEO audit tools out there which you can recommend. Cheers, Mark
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | monster990 -
Content that is split into 4 pages, should I consolidate?
I am working on improving a website that has each section split into four pages. For example, if Indonesia Vacation was a section, it would have its main page, www.domain.com/indonesia-vacation, and the about, fact sheet, and tips on three other pages www.domain.com/indonesia-vacation-1 www.domain.com/indonesia-vacation-2 www.domain.com/indonesia-vacation-3 The pages share very similar title tags and I am worried it is hurting the main page for placement.. So to conserve link juice, would it make sense to have them all one page? There is not so much content that it would affect load time. My strategy would be to have all content available and part of the main page and 301 the three URL's back to the main page: www.domain.com/indonesia-vacation Any insight would be greatly appreciated!!!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MattAaron0