Ads above the fold penalty. Should I request reinclusion?
-
HI!
My site has been losing traffic slowly for about 18 months. But it was in January 19 that was hit big time.
My site has a lot of ads, including two 300x250 above the fold ads that were very lucrative for me.
After January 19, I decided to remove only one ad of those two, but no change was reflected in the traffic.
It is obvious that I needed to remove the other ad, but I didn't do it for two reasons.
-
I still earn money from that ad and removing it would result in serious problems.
-
A webmaster friend of mine that was hit too by this penalty, removed the ads and tried all sort of stuff to regain the lost traffic with NO LUCK in several months. He has unique and excellent content. So, after seeing his experience I didn't want to touch my biggest source of income and leave it as it is.
My site has other problems that concerns Panda and maybe Penguin, and since yesterday I've been starting to fix them.
Is it a good idea to request a reinclusion to check if I was manually penalized, without being previously notified by GWMT of any problem in my site?
Thanks in advance,
Enrique
-
-
Yes, I have it all. Not sure about incoming spammy links. I did almost everything to my site (datafeeds, lots of ads, duplicate content, etc.) but never engaged in spammy links.
I will try to find some other way to show ads and see what happens.
Thanks!
-
Google DOES allow ads above the fold. As long as your are not slapping the visitors face with your ads and the visitor has zero problems finding your page content without scrolling then ads are allowed.
If Google did not allow ads above the fold then most of the content providers on the web would go bankrupt.
My best is that you have a duplicate content, a skimpy content, a thin affiliate or links problem.
-
Hi Enrique,
Google don't give manual penalties for too many ads above the fold. Their manual penalities are for blatent violations of their webmaster guidlines, so things like buying links, cloaking or hidden text.
Although they recommend not putting too many ads above the fold from a user experience perspective, it's certainly not one of their terms and conditions and wouldn't be the cause of a penalty.
If you friend tried removing his ads and saw no recovery, it could be one of several issues:
-
It might not have been the excessive ads that were causing his problem
-
If it was the ads, he may not have removed them for long enough for the Panda update to be refreshed
One very important thing though; the ads above the fold issue and the Panda issue are the same thing.
It's the same algorithm update that is focused on user experience. It is nothing manual, and the only way to recover is to fix all the issues and wait for the refresh.
If you're fixing the site then that's a great start. With a bit of luck your new site will regain the rankings with your ads still in place, and then everyone is happy
Thanks,
David
-
-
Thanks David, and yes, I've been hit by panda and I know my site's weakness (most of it!). But it is difficult to make changes when your site was built 10 years ago with a different web in mind. I'm rebuilding it again (a whole new site with THIS CURRENT web in mind).
But I was not speaking about Panda specifically, I meant the "Ads above the fold" issue.
In January 19 my site was hit very hard by that update. Very hard. That was why I thought about a penalty.
You may think I'm dumb or something. I could fix it by just removing the ads an that's it.
But as I mentioned in my first post, a webmaster I work closely with had the same problem and removing the ads didn't help him a bit.
So, that's why I was wondering if it was a manual penalty, and requesting reinclusion was a solution to confirm it.
Thanks!
Enrique
-
Hi Enrique,
Firstly, the Panda update which you mention isn't penalty, it's an algorithmic updated that Google implemented with the general aim of reducing the number of poor quality sites in the search results.
By poor quality; they mean sites that have thin or duplicate content, sites that contain excessive advertising, and sites that are poorly designed or constructed.
If it is Panda (which it sounds like it could be considering the 18 month decline), a re-inclusion request won't help. This update is refreshed periodically (roughly every 4-6 weeks), so if you had fixed the issues on your site you would see your rankings return when it was refreshed.
The main issues to fix are generally around the quality and originality of the content, however depending how excessive your advertising is this might need to be addressed to.
There are some great resources out there for finding out if it is Panda that's effecting your site, and if so how to recover. My personal favourite is here on SeoMoz by Cyrus Shepherd:
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/beat-google-panda
From speaking to many Webmasters, the one thing I have found is that the people that recover are the ones who are willing to take a critical look at their own website and really own up to it's weaknesses. For example, you say your friend tried excellent content, but by what standard was it excellent? His own standards might be very different than that of Google.
The best way to stay ahead of updates like Panda is by being your own worst critic, and constantly challenging yourself to make your website the best it can possible be.
David
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
-
Handling XML Sitemaps for Ad Classified Sites
Let's put on a scenario for a Job Classified site, So far the way we are handling xml sitemaps is in a consecutive number containing only ads historically: http://site.com/sitemap_ads_1.xml http://site.com/sitemap_ads_2.xml http://site.com/sitemap_ads_99.xml Those sitemaps are constantly updating as each ad is published, keeping expired ads but I'm sure there is a better way to handle them. For instance we have other source of content besides ads pages, like those related to search results (Careers, Location, Salary, level, type of contract, etc) and blog content, but we are not adding them yet So what I'm suggesting is to reduce the amount of xml sitemaps ads to just one, including just the ones that are active (not expired), add another xml sitemap based on search results, another one on blog content, another one on images and finally one for static content such as home, faq, contact, etc. Do you guys think this is the right way to go?
Technical SEO | | JoaoCJ0 -
Which URL do I request Google News inclusion for: the http or the non-http?
In Google WMT/Search Console, I've marked the non-www. version of my site as the preferred. But I haven't run into a choice between http:// and non-http:// before. Should I choose the one listed at the top, which is the non-http (AND the non-www) version? Thanks! Unknown.png
Technical SEO | | christyrobinson1 -
Ranking Drop and Google Disavow Requests
My website, www.nile-cruises-4u.co.uk has fallen dramatically for the top industry search terms (nile cruise, nile cruises) over the last 12 months from previous page one rankings to page three which has very badly affected us financially. I found, using Linkdetox, that we had thousands of back-links for non-related anchor-text, mainly porn terms, viagra, etc. I have submitted a Disavow file and request about a week ago and wondered firstly if the enormous amount of these links would have helped cause the drop to page three and secondly if the Disavow request will eventually help the website return to better rankings? Thanks,Colin
Technical SEO | | GratefulFred0 -
Similar Websites, Same C Block: Can I Get a Penalty?
One of my website has been heavily hit by Google's entire zoo so I decided to phase it out while building a new one. Old website: www.thewebhostinghero.com
Technical SEO | | sbrault74
New website: www.webhostinghero.com Now the thing is that both websites are obviously similar since I kept the branding. They also both have content about the same topics. No content has been copied or spinned or whatever though. Everything's original on both websites. There were only 3 parts of both websites that were too similar in terms of functionalities so I "noindexed" it on the old website. Now it seems that Google doesn't want you to have multiple websites for the same business just for the sake of occupying more space in the search results. This can especially be detected by the websites' C block. I am not sure if this is myth or fact though. So do you think I'm in a problematic situation with this scenario? It's getting ridiculous all you have to watch for when building a website, I'm afraid to touch my keyboard in fear my websites will get penalized! Sorry for my english btw.0 -
Why are the bots still picking up so many links on our page despite us adding nofollow?
We have been working to reduce our on-page links issue. On a particular type of page the problem arose because we automatically link out to relevant content. When we added nofollows to this content it resolved the issue for some but not all and we can't figure out why is was not successful for every one. Can you see any issues? Example of a page where nofollow did not work for... http://www.andor.com/learning-academy/4-5d-microscopy-an-overview-of-andor's-solutions-for-4-5d-microscopy
Technical SEO | | tonykelly0 -
Single Keyword Penalty?
Hi guys, I recently taken over SEO for strikebowling.com.au and I'm stumped to what has happened with the keyword 'Bowling' for the home page. Historically they have been ranking 5-6 for the year and they do come up in the local results. Start of September, bang they drop out of the top 100 for Bowling. No other words seem to be effected. However the keyword 'Bowling Alley' did improve around the same time for an internal page. What could have happened? A single keyword penalty? No messages in Webmaster tools No dodgy link building Look forward to some theories. Regards, Corey
Technical SEO | | LoudClear0 -
Another Penalty Question - Should I Start from Scratch?
I've seen many questions on google penalties recently. Not really sure where to go from here. I realised a year or so we would be living on borrowed time with our link building methods. We have been really successful in the past and are keen to build a site that has a bit more longevity. We have not received a warning from google but have lost pretty much all of our ranking for everything. My question is with our backlink profile as it is. Building links from various blog networks for the past 3 years. Is it just worth rebranding and starting from scratch rather than trying to get over a million links removed? We have a lot of content that I guess could be classed as spam. Should I really remove all of the content? or leave it running as we are still getting some traffic from other marketing activities. Or should I just get a new domain and transfer all the decent content?
Technical SEO | | DaveDawson2 -
Noindex duplicate content penalty?
We know that google now gives a penalty to a whole duplicate if it finds content it doesn't like or is duplicate content, but has anyone experienced a penalty from having duplicate content on their site which they have added noindex to? Would google still apply the penalty to the overall quality of the site even though they have been told to basically ignore the duplicate bit. Reason for asking is that I am looking to add a forum to one of my websites and no one likes a new forum. I have a script which can populate it with thousands of questions and answers pulled direct from Yahoo Answers. Obviously the forum wil be 100% duplicate content but I do not want it to rank for anyway anyway so if I noindex the forum pages hopefully it will not damage the rest of the site. In time, as the forum grows, all the duplicate posts will be deleted but it's hard to get people to use an empty forum so need to 'trick' them into thinking the section is very busy.
Technical SEO | | Grumpy_Carl0