What´s the penalization extent applied by Google?
-
Hi!
I still don´t get this web site penalization applied by Google due to duplicate content.
My site has many of pages that were among the first positions for top keywords (A Photoshop web site).
Those pages were linked by sites like LifeHacker, BoingBoing, Microsiervos, SmashingMagazine, John Nack, and many other well known blogs.
After mid February 2012 everything went down the drain. I lost half of my traffic and my well ranked pages are now almost nowhere to be found.
I have plenty of ads in some pages of my site, and duplicate content (amazon product description only) in other pages of my site.
So, the good quality pages my site has, are no longer considered as good quality just because I have some duplicate content or ad filled pages?
I´m not complaining. I´m trying to understand this.
Google needs to serve good information to their visitors. But since they found some trash in my site, they decide to remove both the trash and the good information from the search engine?
That doesn´t sound logical to me. Why don´t they just remove the trash and leave the good content?
Of course, I understand that information is added everyday and some may come up with something better than mine, but dropping 40 or more places in the ranking sounds more like a penalty to me.
Again, I´m not complaining (although it sounds like I am!), just want to understand the reasons behind this.
Thanks,
Enrique
-
Yes, thanks Anthony. I will post back as soon (soon..?) as I find something.
Enrique
-
sometimes what you call natural google calls spammy or unnatural. Just sayin. Good luck. Post back with your findings. Im interested to see how things work out for you. Best regards.
-
Yes, thanks, I will check that. I was planning to add nofollow to the amazon pages, I will also check the anchors, but since they are all natural, any change I make will look artificial.
Enrique
-
Have you tried removing the amazon data feed from those pages? Just to see if that's is in fact what is impacting your rankings? What about the thousands of natural links pointing to your site? Are they all using varied anchor text or is it just five for your five main pages? If just five that could also be affecting your ranking.
-
Yes, I know that's the thing to do, but you must agree with me that it's something unnatural.
I have thousands of incoming links, and only exchanged or asked for less than 20 of those. The rest are natural. If I spend time analyzing links it would be something absolutely artificial.
The same goes with quality pages. Let's say that I have four or five pages that are the most referenced in my industry (just and example, of course). Visitors that read those pages get really good, top class information. But I have an Amazon datafeed in my site.
Suddenly, the information of those top quality pages are hidden from search results in Google because my site has an Amazon datafeed?
I know it's a simplistic example, but it can be translated as:
"A good article isn't good anymore just because of a site penalty"
It seems that Google is saying something like "Hey, you can't read this amazing article because it is from a site has lots of junk. So suck it up and read this article of a lesser quality but from from a pristine site!"
It is not about my site anymore, but about trying to understand the concept of it all. And of course it is an extreme example, but I think it is relevant.
-
No, google does care about good quality pages. Its just if you throw in a bunch of bad pages they dilute the goodness of your good pages. Once you clean yp duplicate content then i would suggest running a report on your inbound links. Check to see if your anchor text is spammy, or concentrating on only a few choice keywords. When it comes to link building you want to spread out the keywords to there isn't one or two money keywords banking on the anchor text.
Also, I would remove any inbound links from questionable directories. Once you do that I wold think you should see some significant gains in rankings.
-
Thanks! So it is clear that Google doesn´t care about single, good quality, pages with good quality links.
A good quality page needs a quality site to back it up.
Is that the criteria?
It sounds reasonable to me, but very difficult to repair.
Just for the records, my site isn´t trash or low quality, but it is an old site and has some quirks from old times: lots of directory entries with little content and datafeeds that used to work very well some years ago.
-
The trash part of your site affects the site as a whole, not specifically just the trash parts. If they did just that, then you would still benefit from using trash to promote your good pages.
Now from what I understand about penalties, there is a manual penalty and an algorythm or natural penalty.
The algo penalty can be easily fixed by addressing your penalty issue, which would be duplicate content. Clean up all duplicate content and you will be on your way to flying under the penalty radar so to speak. However, you will still need to add more quality content to make up for the removed or cleaned up duplicate content.
Once that takes place you should notice your ranking drop stabilize, and over time begin the crawl back up. This would be a good time to implement other strategies like social media and quality link building.
Now if its a manual penalty, then you need to clean up all duplicate content and ask for a manual review, and pray. Manual penalties are heard to overcome and will require much more work. Sometimes its best to just start with a new domain from scratch.
Hope this helps some.
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
-
Virtual URL Google not indexing?
Dear all, We have two URLs: The main URL which is crawled both by GSC and where Moz assigns our keywords is: https://andipaeditions.com/banksy/ The second one is called a virtual url by our developpers: https://andipaeditions.com/banksy/signedandunsignedprintsforsale/ This is currently not indexed by Google. We have been linking to the second URL and I am unable to see if this is passing juice/anything on to the main one /banksy/ Is it a canonical? The /banksy/ is the one that is being picked up in serps/by Moz and worry that the two similar URLs are splitting the signal. Should I redirect from the second to the first? Thank you
On-Page Optimization | | TAT1000 -
Dissapeared from Google - Urgent
We are new to the whole SEO thing and could be described as total numpties as we have hidden away from it, scared of what it means and what might happen if we open that can of worms. But after seeing a 25% drop in visitors over a year, and a continued fall, we thought we better try and get our heads around what we need to do to improve our chances on google. Consequently we have signed up to MOZ and are exploring its crawl results and trying to learn and action things. Today we noticed that we have dropped fairly completely from Google for many of our top key words. We are based in Italy,our site is in Italian and we only target Italy. Our homepage is http://www.shoechic,it and two of our top keywords that have dissapeared are: "scarpe sexy" & "Scarpe Pleaser" We would love to hear if anyone can throw some light in why this dramatic change may have taken place and what we can do to address it. Many thanks in advance for anyones help and advice. Philip
On-Page Optimization | | shoechic0 -
How the hell do you get microformat to show up on google serp?
Preface: I implemented Microformat aggregate review (http://data-vocabulary.org/Review-aggregate) for our e-commerce website and included only on the homepage. The vote and count are actually coming from real reviews we are getting from our customers, and in the homepage some reviews are shown prominently and a link points to the full list of all the reviews. Microformat markup is correct, validated in GWT. Have been online for a while (probably a couple of years). Our website: http://www.gomme-auto.it The star rating never showed up. When checking competitors I could see their microformats where not showing up either. But now things changed, if I check one competitor (the market leader www.gommadiretto.it) searching for it with their brand name “gommadiretto” no star rating is showing, but if I search for tires of a specific manufactured like “pneumatici barum” I can see their result in serp is showing the star rating for that specific internal page (the brand page) where they simply put the website overall aggregate review microformat mark up, they actually put it on every page. And that make me scratch my head and start asking myself some questions: is google showing their microformats because they manually awarded them somehow? no other competitor seems to have got the star rating in serp is google showing their microformats because they have so much more reviews than I have? I have around 1700, they have around 11000. is google showing their microformats because their reviews are certified by TrustPilot? is google showing their microformats because they put it in the product page? well of course since I am not putting it there (in the brand page) it's a factor, but isn't it recommended to put the website aggregate reviews microformat only on one page? and shouldn't we show the brand reviews on the brand page? isn't it best practice/recommended to put the website aggregate review microformat only on one page? is google showing their microformats because of some other reasons I can't see? What the hell is google criteria for showing the star rating? Does anyone know?
On-Page Optimization | | max.favilli0 -
On Brand Queries Google does not shows my home page first instead of it shows internal pages.
Also on my brand query it doesn't shows sitelinks. What may be the reason?
On-Page Optimization | | vivekrathore0 -
Any idea how Google is doing this? Is it schematic? http://techcrunch.com/2014/02/28/google-adds-full-restaurant-menus-to-its-search-results-pages/
Google is now showing menus on select searches. Any idea how they are getting this information? I would like to make sure my clients get visibility this way.
On-Page Optimization | | Ron_McCabe0 -
Hi.. Can a E-commerce site have a Google Authorship.
Hi Can a E-commerce site have a Google Authorship, and if yes i have learned google requires a face for Google Authorship, as they are applying Facial recognition with the authorship. If So, how can an e-commerce website have an individual's face. ?
On-Page Optimization | | usef4u0 -
Google SERPS showing wrong page.
I am new to SEO and trying to rank for keyword 'corporate entertainment' and my site is currently at 26. However google is showing the homepage http://www.musicliveuk.com in SERPS as opposed to my optomised page http://www.musicliveuk.com/home/corporate-entertainment. Any ideas why it is choosing so show the home page as the most relevant result?
On-Page Optimization | | SamCUK0 -
Does Google still see masked domains as duplicate content?
Older reads state the domain forwarding or masking will create duplicate content but Google has evolved quite a bit and I'm wondering if that is still the case? Not suggesting that a 301 is not the proper way to redirect something but my question is: Does Google still see masked domains as duplicate content? Is there any viable use for domain masking other than for affiliates?
On-Page Optimization | | TracyWeb0