Can you be penalized by a development server with duplicate content?
-
I developed a site for another company late last year and after a few months of seo done by them they were getting good rankings for hundreds of keywords. When penguin hit they seemed to benefit and had many top 3 rankings.
Then their rankings dropped one day early May. Site is still indexed and they still rank for their domain. After some digging they found the development server had a copy of the site (not 100% duplicate). We neglected to hide the site from the crawlers, although there were no links built and we hadn't done any optimization like meta descriptions etc.
The company was justifiably upset. We contacted Google and let them know the site should not have been indexed, and asked they reconsider any penalties that may have been placed on the original site. We have not heard back from them as yet.
I am wondering if this really was the cause of the penalty though. Here are a few more facts:
Rankings built during late March / April on an aged domain with a site that went live in December.
Between April 14-16 they lost about 250 links, mostly from one domain. They acquired those links about a month before.
They went from 0 to 1130 links between Dec and April, then back to around 870 currently
According to ahrefs.com they went from 5 ranked keywords in March to 200 in April to 800 in May, now down to 500 and dropping (I believe their data lags by at least a couple of weeks).
So the bottom line is this site appeared to have suddenly ranked well for about a month then got hit with a penalty and are not in top 10 pages for most keywords anymore.
I would love to hear any opinions on whether a duplicate site that had no links could be the cause of this penalty? I have read there is no such thing as a duplicate content penalty per se. I am of the (amateur) opinion that it may have had more to do with the quick sudden rise in the rankings triggering something.
Thanks in advance.
-
What kind of links they lost, what was that domain? If it was like 250 links form one domain for one month, Google could think that they were paid and that could get you penalty. Buying links is a risky business these days.
-
I have experience of this. And it wasn't a nice!
I created a test copy of a site (WordPress) that I work on with a friend. It had been ranking pretty well mainly though lots of quality curated content, plus a bit of low level link building. The link building had slowed in late 2010.
Within 12 hours of the test version of the site going 'live' (it was set to no-index in WP options, which I no longer trust) the live site rankings and traffic tanked. The test version was on a sub-domain, and was an exact replica of the live site. With no known links, it was somehow picked up by Google and all 400 or so pages where in the Gindex along with the live site. Three re-consideration requests and 6 months later, we got back to where we were. The offending sub domain was 301'd to the live site within minutes of inding the problem, and during the 6 month bad period all other causes were ruled out.
I now password protect any staging sites that are on the internet, just to be safe!
-
I would not worry at all, there is no duplicate copntent penalty for this sort of thing, al that will happen is one site will rank one will not. The original site with the links will obviously be se as the site to rank, block off the deve site anyhow if you are worried. but this seems like a deeper problem that a bit of duplicate content
-
Yes. It should always be practice to noindex any vhost on the development and staging servers.
Not only will duplicate content harm them, but in one personal case of mine, the staging server was outranking the client for their own keywords! Obviously Google was confused and didn't know which page to show in SERPs. In turn this confuses visitors and leads to some angry customers.
Lastly, having open access to your staging server is a security risk for a number of reasons. It's not so serious that you need to require a login, but you should definitely keep staging sites out of SERPs to prevent others from getting easy access to them.
For comparison, the example I gave where the staging server outranked the client, the client had a great SEO campaign and the staging server had several insignificant links by accident. So the link building contest doesn't always apply in this case.
-
While I have no experience with this specifically with regards to SEO and ranking, I do have a development server. If you don't mind me asking, why is your development server public? Usually they should be behind some kind of password and not accessible by search spiders.
If you are worried that that is the problem, just make the entire site noindex and that should get it out of google eventually. It may take some time however.
Good luck.
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
-
Are backlinks within duplicate content ignored or devalued?
From what I understand, Googles no longer has a "Duplicate Content Penalty" instead duplicate content simply isn't show in the search results. Does that mean that any links in the duplicate content are completely ignored, or devalued as far as the backlink profile of the site they are linking to? An example would be an article that might be published on two or three major industry websites. Are only the links from the first website GoogleBot discovers the article on counted or are all the links counted and you just won't see the article itself come up in search results for the second and third website?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Consult19010 -
Lot of duplicate content and still traffic is increasing... how does it work?
Hello Mozzers, I've a dilemma with a client's site I am working on that is make me questioning my SEO knowledge, or the way Google treat duplicate content. I'll explain now. The situation is the following: organic traffic is constantly increasing since last September, in every section of the site (home page, categories and product pages) even though: they have tons of duplicate content from same content in old and new URLs (which are in two different languages, even if the actual content on the page is in the same language in both of the URL versions) indexation is completely left to Google decision (no robots file, no sitemap, no meta robots in code, no use of canonical, no redirect applied to any of the old URLs, etc) a lot (really, a lot) of URLs with query parameters (which brings to more duplicated content) linked from the inner page of the site (and indexed in some case) they have Analytics but don't use Webmaster Tools Now... they expect me to help them increase even more the traffic they're getting, and I'll go first on "regular" onpage optimization, as their title, meta description and headers are not optimized at all according to the page content, but after that I was thinking on fixing the issues with indexation and content duplication, but I am worried I can "break the toy", as things are going well for them. Should I be confident that fixing these issues will bring to even better results or do you think is better for me to focus on other kind of improvements? Thanks for your help!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Guybrush_Threepw00d0 -
Duplicate Content Issues :(
I am wondering how we can solve our duplicate content issues. Here is the thing: There are so many ways you can write a description about a used watch. http://beckertime.com/product/mens-rolex-air-king-no-date-stainless-steel-watch-wsilver-dial-5500/ http://beckertime.com/product/mens-rolex-air-king-stainless-steel-date-watch-wblue-dial-5500/ Whats different between these two? The dial color. We have a lot of the same model numbers but with different conditions, dial colors, and bands.. What ideas do you have?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KingRosales0 -
Opinion on Duplicate Content Scenario
So there are 2 pest control companies owned by the same person - Sovereign and Southern. (The two companies serve different markets) They have two different website URLs, but the website code is actually all the same....the code is hosted in one place....it just uses an if/else structure with dynamic php which determines whether the user sees the Sovereign site or the Southern site....know what I am saying? Here are the two sites: www.sovereignpestcontrol.com and www.southernpestcontrol.com. This is a duplicate content SEO nightmare, right?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MeridianGroup0 -
Artist Bios on Multiple Pages: Duplicate Content or not?
I am currently working on an eComm site for a company that sells art prints. On each print's page, there is a bio about the artist followed by a couple of paragraphs about the print. My concern is that some artists have hundreds of prints on this site, and the bio is reprinted on every page,which makes sense from a usability standpoint, but I am concerned that it will trigger a duplicate content penalty from Google. Some people are trying to convince me that Google won't penalize for this content, since the intent is not to game the SERPs. However, I'm not confident that this isn't being penalized already, or that it won't be in the near future. Because it is just a section of text that is duplicated, but the rest of the text on each page is original, I can't use the rel=canonical tag. I've thought about putting each artist bio into a graphic, but that is a huge undertaking, and not the most elegant solution. Could I put the bio on a separate page with only the artist's info and then place that data on each print page using an <iframe>and then put a noindex,nofollow in the robots.txt file?</p> <p>Is there a better solution? Is this effort even necessary?</p> <p>Thoughts?</p></iframe>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sbaylor0 -
Can I redirect duplicate blogs to give credit to one?
I have two sites that have no duplicate content (yet). One ranks better than the other but has a crappy hyphenated domain name (Domain A), and the other one is the "brand site" with a better domain name (Domain B). I'm creating a blog with technical articles and corresponding videos. I want the videos to refer to the better domain name (Domain B) because I can't see referring people to a hyphenated domain (it would sound horrible). But, the hyphenated domain has a better chance of improving it's rankings (long story why). Can I duplicate the content and just use a canonical tag on Domain B to give the credit to Domain A? If I do that, is it done on each post? Or the blog's main page? What I think would happen is any links to Domain B would pass the juice to Domain A. Is that correct? I know Canonical's are tricky and I don't want to screw this up, so I'd greatly appreciate some advice from the experienced people on here. Thank you.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PhoenixDev0 -
Duplicate content resulting from js redirect?
I recently created a cname (e.g. m.client-site .com) and added some js (supplied by mobile site vendor to the head which is designed to detect if the user agent is a mobi device or not. This is part of the js: var CurrentUrl = location.href var noredirect = document.location.search; if (noredirect.indexOf("no_redirect=true") < 0){ if ((navigator.userAgent.match(/(iPhone|iPod|BlackBerry|Android.*Mobile|webOS|Window Now... Webmaster Tools is indicating 2 url versions for each page on the site - for example: 1.) /content-page.html 2.) /content-page.html?no_redirect=true and resulting in duplicate page titles and meta descriptions. I am not quite adept enough at either js or htaccess to really grasp what's going on here... so an explanation of why this is occurring and how to deal with it would be appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SCW0 -
Duplicate content - canonical vs link to original and Flash duplication
Here's the situation for the website in question: The company produces printed publications which go online as a page turning Flash version, and as a separate HTML version. To complicate matters, some of the articles from the publications get added to a separate news section of the website. We want to promote the news section of the site over the publications section. If we were to forget the Flash version completely, would you: a) add a canonical in the publication version pointing to the version in the news section? b) add a link in the footer of the publication version pointing to the version in the news section? c) both of the above? d) something else? What if we add the Flash version into the mix? As Flash still isn't as crawlable as HTML should we noindex them? Is HTML content duplicated in Flash as big an issue as HTML to HTML duplication?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Alex-Harford0