Why is our site being penalized?
-
The rankings for our transcription site (gmr transcription) fell around Jul 19. Its been an uphill task to get the rankings back particularly for the keyword 'transcription services'. As per our opinion except for one competitor the rankings of the other top 4 makes no sense to us.
We have tested our site and there seems to be no reason for it to be penalized.
After a month of trial I am reaching out to the community for advise.
-
Well that's good news...and a little bit strange too! It's possible that there is a Penguin update in the works, but there's no official word as of yet.
I'm tempted to think that there was something other than Penguin going on here. But, regardless, I'm glad to hear you are ranking again!
-
Marie, thanks for responding. No we did not get any warnings. I had no idea that a site could be "Penguinzed" so late after an update.
Greg and Maximize suggested altering the site wide link status. We had control over two of our sister websites. We corrected that and hey within an hour we were back!
Seems like magic!
-
Do you have any warnings of unnatural links in your webmaster tools? If so, the answer is to do a thorough cleanup of your links, documenting everything you do in order to try to get the self made ones removed and submit a reconsideration request.
Otherwise, you may be a victim of Penguin. I used to think you could only get "Penguinized" on the date of a Penguin update, but I've seen evidence of sites that have been affected in very similar ways to Penguin within a few weeks of launching a backlinking campaign. As others have mentioned, if your backlinks are primarily anchor text, and you're dropping in the serps for that particular anchor text, then you need to get those links changed to your url or removed.
Sometimes, if you're not sure, it's a good idea to hire a professional to look at your backlink profile and advise you which links need to go.
If this is a Penguin thing (as opposed to an unnatural links warning in WMT) then you have no chance of recovery until there is a Penguin refresh.
-
I checked the keyword transcription services position in Google Singapore and Google USA. I see it has position of Number 3 and 1 respectively.
But if you think anything wrong has happened, you must follow what has been suggested by others here. Besides, i would like to add which for me is the most striking the moment you open the page. The occurrence of keyword "transcription" is approximately 66 times on the home page.
Excessive use of keywords can negatively impact rankings and should be avoided.
-
I checked the keyword transcription services position in Google Singapore and Google USA. I see it has position of Number 3 and 1 respectively.
But if you think anything wrong has happened, you must follow what has been suggested by others here. Besides, i would like to add which for me is the most striking the moment you open the page. The occurrence of keyword "transcription" is approximately 66 times on the home page.
Excessive use of keywords can negatively impact rankings and should be avoided.
-
Thanks Maximise. I will try and rectify the link pattern. Most of the links are old and will be very difficult to moderate.
-
Thanks Greg.
Sangeeta, At the moment these are your top anchor text terms:
- transcription services - 882 links
- transcription services - 601 links
- transcribe - 402 links
- gmr transcription - 335 links
- transcription company - 177 links
- digital transcription - 173 links
- www.gmrtranscription.com - 166 links
- audio transcription - 164 links
As mentioned already though, many of these are sitewide so you should be able to address the percentages fairly easily by contacting some of these sites and asking for the links to be changed.
-
I second what Maximise has said.
Going forward, start promoting your websites brand rather than its keywords. Concentrate on obtaining quality links with the anchor "GMR transctiption Services" or simply GMR transcription services.com
Have a look at your backlink profile and remove site wide links or atleast vary the anchor text were you can.
Your back link profile Ideally should be made up of about 70% branded terms, and 30% "money terms" otherwise it looks un natural to Google. (Generally speaking, its not an exact science)
Greg
-
Is your website www.gmrtranscription.com?
If yes then it's very possible you have been hit by one of the recent updates which target over optimised backlink profiles. You have over 800 links with the exact anchor text "transcription services", which your most linked term, many of these are also sitewide. These links do not look natural to search engines and I would recommend that you try and get them changed.
A natural link profile would mostly contain your brand name or url and then have a wide variety of other terms. I think you need to try to address this balance.
-
Hi webfeat,
The website is gmrtranscription.com(I am avoiding linking) and the keyword we are having trouble with is 'transcription services'.
-
Hard to tell without a link to your site to see what is going on.
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
-
Consolidating small sites into one big site
Hi I have several small review sites in multiple categories and want to consolidate them into a single review site(aged domain I just bought) I'd redirect the old sites to the new one. If I just copied all the old articles onto the new website with solid DA, would this work or would Google think Im trying to start a PBN? Thanks! Eddie
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | calentador20190 -
Are links on sites that require PAD files good or bad for SEO?
I want to list our product on a number of sites that require PAD files such as Software Informer and Softpedia. Is this a good idea from an SEO perspective to have links on these pages?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SnapComms0 -
Duplicate content - multiple sites hosted on same server with same IP address
We have three sites hosted on the same server with the same IP address. For SEO (to avoid duplicate content) reasons we need to redirect the IP address to the site - but there are three different sites. If we use the "rel canonical" code on the websites, these codes will be duplicates too, as the websites are mirrored versions of the sites with IP address, e.g. www.domainname.com/product-page and 23.34.45.99/product-page. What's the best ways to solve these duplicate content issues in this case? Many thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Jade0 -
Ecommerce sites we own have similar products, is this OK?
Hello, In one of our niches, we have a big site with all products and a couple more sites that are smaller niches of the same niche. The product descriptions are different with different product names. Is this OK. We've got one big site and 2 smaller subsides in different niches that cross over with the big site. Let me know if Google is OK with this. We will have a separate blog for each with completely different content. There's not really duplicate content issues and although only the big site has a blog right now, the small ones eventually will have their own unique blog. Is this OK in Google's eyes now and in the future? What can we do to ensure we are OK? Thank you.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobGW1 -
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 -
No Follows - Sister/manufacturer sites
What is the best practice nowadays for linking to sister sites? Should you do it, shouldn't you, and/or should you list them with no follows? What about the reverse - having them link to us. Is this bad for us in anyway? Should we have them no follow their link to us? We are a distributor so manufacturers link to us as well, should we have them no follow their links? Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | CHECOM0 -
2 sites in one niche?
Hello, Can you be penalized for having 2 ecommerce sites in the same niche? Is there a way to do it white-hat? Please explain.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobGW0 -
Should this site be punished?
Every summer for the past 4 years one of our customer's competitors suddenly has a big jump in Google's (.co.uk) rankings for some of the main industry phrases, particularly "air conditioning". We were always under the impression that they bought links before the busy summer season, as they have these strange massive jumps in the rankings. (for the rest of the year they often drop down) I recently checked out some of the back-links going to their site and noticed something I'd not seen before. Of the (approx) 480 links that showed up, around 80% of the SourceURL's ended with "?Action=Webring" (see 1st attached image). To me it doesn't look natural at all and I'm surprised that Google hasn't picked up on. Their site is www.aircon247.com. It had been mentioned to me that this may be to do with link sharing sites (which I assume is black-hat) but I'm not 100% sure that they are doing this. They also have an identical long spammy-looking footer at the bottom of every page which is clearly only for search engines to see. We reported it to Google a year ago but no action was taken. Do you think that it is acceptable to have it on every page? (see 2nd attached image) I would be interested to know your thoughts on both of these, and whether this would be a dangerous tactic to try and emulate? Gc5MU.png iXGA9.png
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | trickshotric0