Google admits it can take up to a year to refresh/recover your site after it is revoked from Penguin!
-
I found myself in an impossible situation where I was getting information from various people that seem to be "know it all's" but everything in my heart was telling me they were wrong when it came to the issues my site was having.
I have been on a few Google Webmaster Hangouts and found many answers to questions I thought had caused my Penguin Penalty. After taking much of the advice, I submitted my Reconsideration Request for the 9th time (might have been more) and finally got the "revoke" I was waiting for on the 28th of MAY.
What was frustrating was on May 22nd there was a Penguin refresh. This as far as I knew was what was needed to get your site back up in the organic SERPS.
My Disavow had been submitted in February and only had a handful of links missing between this time and the time we received the revoke. We patiently waited for the next penguin refresh with the surety that we were heading in the right direction by John Mueller from Google (btw.. John is a great guy and really tries to help where he can). The next update came on October 4th and our rankings actually got worse! I spoke with John and he was a little surprised but did not go into any detail.
At this point you have to start to wonder WHAT exactly is wrong with the website. Is this where I should rank? Is there a much deeper Panda issue. We were on the verge of removing almost all content from the site or even changing domains despite the fact that it was our brand name.
I then created a tool that checked the dates of every last cached date of each link we had in our disavow file. The thought process was that Google had not re-crawled all the links and so they were not factored into the last refresh. This proved to be incorrect,all the links had been re-cached August and September. Nothing earlier than that,which would indicate a problem that they had not been cached in time.
i spoke to many so called experts who all said the issue was that we had very few good links left,content issues etc.. Blah Blah Blah, heard it all before and been in this game since the late 90's, the site could not rank this badly unless there was an actual penalty as spam site ranked above us for most of our keywords.
So just as we were about to demolish the site I asked John Mueller one more time if he could take a look at the site, this time he actually took the time to investigate,which was very kind of him. he came back to me in a Google Hangout in late December, what he said to me was both disturbing and a relief at the same time. the site STILL had a penguin penalty despite the disavow file being submitted in February over 10 months ago! And the revoke in May.
I wrote this to give everyone here that has an authoritative site or just an old one, hope that not all is lots just yet if you are still waiting to recover in Google. My site is 10 years old and is one of the leaders in its industry. Sites that are only a few years old and have had unnatural link building penalties have recovered much faster in this industry which I find ridiculous as most of the time the older authoritative sites are the big trustworthy brands. This explains why Google SERPS have been so poor for the last year. The big sites take much longer to recover from penalties letting the smaller lest trustworthy sites prevail.
I hope to see my site recover in the next Penguin refresh with the comfort of knowing that my site currently is still being held back by the Google Penguin Penalty refresh situation.
Please feel free to comment below on anything you think is relevant.
-
We were hit with an unnatural links penalty on 23rd of July 2012. (full story here)
The effects of the Penguin algorithm lead to the unnatural links penalty.
Google claims to ignore all bad links but when you reach a certain point they want to make you aware of it and accountable. That's when you get the manual penalty.
Without a warning there are tons of websites out there who are about to trigger a manual penalty because the website owners have no clue about this stuff. The disavow file can be used to protect you from the penguin algorithm triggering a manual penalty.
The fact your site can also be affected by the links with no warning is so counter productive to good search results. If Google says they ignore them already then your site should simply lose the benefit of those links not also receive negative effects as a result. I am going to reconfirm this point with John at the next hangout.
-
I'm a bit confused here.
Penguin is an algorithmic penalty, not a manual action. Reconsideration requests are only used when manual actions are applied, not algorithmic penalties and you clearly said you submitted a reconsideration request and had the penalty revoked.
So were you caught in both a manual action penalty and Penguin algorithmic penalty at the same time? Please clarify. I've submitted disavows for both our sites in the last few months and I'm always interested in hearing others experiences with this.
-
I have a theory that the cache date on a page does not always represent the date that all of the links on the page were crawled. Google has said repeatedly that it can sometimes take 6 months to a year for the disavow file to fully take effect. In other words, if you have disavowed a particular link, it could take a year for Google to revisit that link and apply the invisible nofollow. BUT, I have never seen a page with a cache date that was 6-12 months ago.
It's possible that the cache just shows the on page information but that the data that Google gets and uses to update the link graph could take longer. This could explain why we often see "new" links in WMT that were actually made months or years ago.
In response to Wiqas, who wanted to see an example of a Penguin recovery, they can happen. Below is the non-branded Google organic traffic for a site for which we did a thorough audit, removal and disavow project. It is important to note though that this site had a really good base of natural links and continues to truly attract natural links. If that is not present then recovery is unlikely to happen.
-
Since Penguin 1 (April, 2012), I was closely observing and working for many websites to recover. Being honest, with all efforts, I have never seen a website that has fully recovered. Maximum recover is up to 50%. If anyone have better example, I love to see it.
I realized the fact in early 2013, if i work even 50% on new site as compared to recovery, I can rank better than my original website. So, I changed my policy. I started similar domains and ranked them. I promoted by original website through PPC & Social Media. And I am pretty much successful with my plan.
I feel for you and wish for your recovery soon. I agree with you at most of points.
Regards
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
-
Suspicious external links to site have 302 redirects
Hi, I have been asked to look at a site where I suspect some questionable SEO work, particularly link building. The site does seem to be performing very poorly in Google since January 2014, although there are no messages in WMT. Using WMT, OPenSiteExplorer, Majestic & NetPeak, I have analysed inbound links and found a group of links which although are listed in WMT, etc appear to 302 redirect to a directory in China (therefore the actual linking domain is not visible). It looks like a crude type of link farm, but I cant understand why they would use 302s not 301s. The domains are not visible due to redirects. Should I request a disavow or ignore? The linking domains are listed below: http://www.basalts.cn/
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | crescentdigital
http://www.chinamarbles.com.cn/
http://www.china-slate.com.cn/
http://www.granitecountertop.com.cn/
http://www.granite-exporter.com/
http://www.sandstones.biz/
http://www.stone-2.com/
http://www.stonebuild.cn/
http://www.stonecompany.com.cn/
http://www.stonecontact.cn/
http://www.stonecrate.com/
http://www.stonedesk.com/
http://www.stonedvd.com/
http://www.stonepark.cn/
http://www.stonetool.com.cn/
http://www.stonewebsite.com/ Thanks Steve0 -
Content website of the year 2009 ....
I own a network of travel sites, after all the changes that happened to past 12 months and so. I am really thinking if maybe my sites are worthless. I mean, let's be honest here. I understand what Google is doing. So i ask myself. If I wasn't trying to make a living with google adsense and affiliate sites... Would I still have these travel sites ? well the truth is NO NO... Therefore should i forget about my content site ? It is a punch of useless content. well some interesting information but it is a travel guide like many others online. What do you think? now it is better to focus on your product site or create 1 good websites rather than a network of sites that worked very veryyy well the past 10 years...
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | sandyallain0 -
Tags on WordPress Sites, Good or bad?
My main concern is about the entire tags strategy. The whole concept has really been first seen by myself on WordPress which seems to be bringing positive results to these sites and now there are even plugins that auto generate tags. Can someone detail more about the pros and cons of tags? I was under the impression that google does not want 1000's of pages auto generated just because of a simple tag keyword, and then show relevant content to that specific tag. Usually these are just like search results pages... how are tag pages beneficial? Is there something going on behind the scenes with wordpress tags that actually bring benefits to these wp blogs? Setting a custom coded tag feature on a custom site just seems to create numerous spammy pages. I understand these pages may be good from a user perspective, but what about from an SEO perspective and getting indexed and driving traffic... Indexed and driving traffic is my main concern here, so as a recap I'd like to understand the pros and cons about tags on wp vs custom coded sites, and the correct way to set these up for SEO purposes.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | WebServiceConsulting.com1 -
Site-wide links: Nofollow or eliminate altogether?
As a web developer, it's not uncommon for me to place a link in the footer of a website to give myself credit for the web design/development. I recently decided to go back and nofollow all these site-wide footer links, to avoid potentially looking spammy. I wanted to know if I should remove these links altogether, and just give myself text credit without a link at all? I would like for a potential client who is interested in my work to still be able to get to my site if they like my work - but I want to keep my link profile squeaky clean. Thoughts?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | brad.s.knutson0 -
Partial Match Penalty Site - Move Portion & Redirect To New Site
So I have a site that currently has a partial match penalty from google, I have been working to get it removed...Bad SEO basically my site was submitted to a bunch of bad blog networks..Hopefully it gets lifted soon as we remove and disavow links. That said I was planning on moving a portion of my site to a new site since its not really the focus of the site anymore however still pays the bills. I have also have been building it more of a network of sites..So If I do that and 301 redirect the pages I moved, will the penalty carry? On the current site I planned on using Rel no follow to any links that I may change in the header/menus etc.. Some of these pages I believe have the penalty while others dont. I really just dont want to screw anything else up more then it is? My biggest fear is that its perceived as a blackhat method or something like that? Any thoughts?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | dueces0 -
Preparing for Penguin: Remove, Disavow, or change to branded
For someone that has 80 root domains pointing to their domain and 10 of them are sitewide backlinks from 10 PR4+ sites. All paid for. All with the same main keyword anchor text Should I advise him to remove the links, dissavow the links, dissavow then remove or just change to branded anchor text for the 10 sitewide links. Another option is to just keep one link (preferrably editorial) from each site. The only reason not to pull them off right away is that the client could not sustain his business with a drop in sales. These are by far the strongest 10 root domains. Eventually, when he has enough good backlinks these are all coming off. There was a huge drop in sales for this site last fall, but it recovered almost completely by changing keyword stuffing and adding ecommerce content. Looking to keep his sales and also prepare for this years updates.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobGW0 -
Multiple domains pointed at one site
I know things are changing and the things Google thinks are cheating searchers from finding what they are really looking for are changing too. So, I have multiple domain names that are related to my site, but not the actual site name. For instance, I have a certification program called Certified NetAnalyst that has a few domains for it... .com, .org and other derivatives like NetAnalyst. I would like to point the domains to my main company web site and not create a site just for the certification. Does Google think it is cheating to point domain names with my company branding names to my main web site? What about domain name forwarding to a specific URL, like taking the certification name domains and pointing them to the certification page instead of the main site? Wondering if one could no follow (don't know how to do that) the domain forwarding links so it is not duplicate content? Is that possible in some way? Could you put another robots.txt file with excludes in the domain forwarding url landing page so it would not be duplicate content? For the future I want all SEO "juice" to go to the main domain, but the keyword value of the domain names is valuable. I sure would be grateful if someone that has a good understanding and specific recent experience with Google policy and enforcement could offer some sage and practical advice and perhaps a case study example where Google "likes it" or on the other hand a good explanation of why I may not wish to do this! Thank You! Bill Alderson www.apalytics.com
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Packetman0071 -
Link Building after Google updates!
Hello All, I just wanted to ask the question to start a discussion on link building after the Google Updates. I haven't been very proactive lately with regards to link building due to the updates and not wanting to get penalised! Are there any link building trends/techniques people are using since the changes? Thanks, seo_123
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | TWPLC_seo0