Partial Manual penalty to a URL
-
Hi Mozers,
I have a website which has got a partial manual penalty on a specific url. That url is of no use to the website now and is going to be taken off in 3 months time as the website is going to be completely redesigned. Till then I dont wont to live with the partial manual penalty for this url. I have few things in mind to tackle this:
1. take out the url from the website now (as the new redesign will take 3 months)
2. take out internal links pointing to this url in question
3. file for reconsideration with google stating we have taken off the url and have not generated any backlinks and the backlinks are organic. (no backlinking activity has been done on this website or the url)
Please let me know if this works or i will have to get the backlinks removed then the disavow then the reconsideration.
Looking forward for ur response
-
I'm in agreement Robert. Hitesh, it does feel like we're missing some part of the story. I have reviewed hundreds if not thousands of sites that were dealt unnatural links penalties and I have yet to see one that was given unfairly. I have seen the occasional example unnatural link given that truly was natural, but I've never seen a site get a penalty when all they had were natural links.
Again, if you'd like to share the url I'll take a look and give you my thoughts. But other than that I think any answer that you'll get here is going to just be speculation.
-
Hitesh,
I have looked at this and read your other comments like those to Marie. Unfortunately, a feeling remains that I am not seeing everything. From your reply to Marie you show a bit more of the Google message: "Some links may be outside of the webmaster’s control, so for this incident we are taking targeted action on the unnatural links instead of on the site’s ranking as a whole."
Then you name some of the sources for the links and you also state that this page has some info regarding IP's in various countries and people are linking because of that, "which is totally natural." Also, "There are no unnatural links to this url but for the fact most of them are coming from forums and spammy sites."
I really get the feeling you are trying to define or redefine what "natural" is instead of realizing the problem you have and that it may shortly involve much or all of your site. You have been warned by Google and the easiest thing to do is to read what Jane Copeland wrote on the 30th and follow that direction:
I'd do a combination of trying to remove the links, disavowing what I couldn't remove, removing the page with a 410 and filing for reconsideration explaining what I did and how I've tried to fix it. I'd also explain that the page was obsolete to begin with and was always destined for the scrap heap.
Failing to take this action very soon could really negatively impact your site. Defining what is or is not natural will not help you.
Good luck,
Robert
-
I think the best place to start would be to contact the site owner, and see if they would be willing to remove the link pointing your way. If not, then use the disavow tool in webmaster tools.
If you have a bad feeling about a link, there is probably a good reason for that feeling. Try using Blacklistalert.com to see if the domains your site is listed on are blacklisted with any dns providers. You can also try MXtoolbox.com to see if thier IP address has been compromised. If you see any of the sites in question fail the test, then I would immediately remove the link by either of the methods mentioned at the start of this post.
Best of luck, I really hope you get it figured out.
-
Interesting. That type of penalty, to just one url is uncommon. Can you tell that there are unnatural links there? You can pm me the url if you'd like me to take a look. Can you tell why they were created?
I would probably still clean up the links to this page which means making efforts to remove them and then disavowing what you can't get removed. While Google says that they are no longer counting these links, we still don't know 100% whether they could affect you algorithmically such as in the eyes of the Penguin update.
-
the screenshots
-
Hi Marie,
Thanks for the response!
Yes the links are gained naturally. No efforts are taken for link building in our case. It was a useful file which users linked previously.
I have attached screenshots of the inbox message and the manual actions tab. Please have a loom and let me know, if the link removal needs to be done for the whole site or just the URL.
In my opinion i feel just the url as the penalty is only on the url and clearly google mentions that in both the messages
"As a result, Google has applied a manual spam action to ixx.xxxxxxxxxxg.info/node/view/54. There may be other actions on your site or parts of your site."
and
"Some links may be outside of the webmaster’s control, so for this incident we are taking targeted action on the unnatural links instead of on the site’s ranking as a whole."
Looking forward for your response
-
Hi Robert,
I agree and will do the clean up act, disavow and reconsideration. But now the question is do i have to clean the links pointing to the whole site or just the url? As i have received manual penalty just for the url which is a sub-domain on the site and not the whole site.
have a look at the screenshot for the warnings received in both inbox and manual actions tab!
It clearly states it is just for the sub-domain url
Let me know your views
-
Is it possible you could post a screenshot of what you are seeing in your manual actions viewer? Or, tell us what wording is in there? Does the message tell you that it is just one particular page on your site that is being affected? Is it an unnatural links warning?
"...have not generated any backlinks and the backlinks are organic. (no backlinking activity has been done on this website or the url)"
The vast majority of the time when a site owner gets a penalty and says that there are no unnatural links to their site, they actually HAVE created links that are unnatural. A good example is a site that has done widespread guest posting for links. Many site owners have a hard time understanding that those links are actually unnatural. However, if you are certain that you have done no link building to this page (assuming it is a single page that has been targeted) and you have an unnatural links warning, then is it possible that someone else has been building links to it? An example would be if you wrote a story about a particular company that put that company in a favorable light and then that company built links to your site in order to boost their story higher in the SERPS.
If you'd like to PM me the url and the details of your penalty I'd be happy to take a look.
-
I would say that it depends on why the penalty happened in the first place, but if it's a manual penalty then removing the resource probably won't get rid of the penalty overnight. I'd do a combination of trying to remove the links, disavowing what I couldn't remove, removing the page with a 410 and filing for reconsideration explaining what I did and how I've tried to fix it. I'd also explain that the page was obsolete to begin with and was always destined for the scrap heap.
-
If you first remove the url, even with the 410, I do not believe you will get any action on the penalty in terms of a reconsideration. Remember, with a reconsideration Google wants to see penance. Removing the issue is not penance, it is easy in their eyes.
Yes, these actions remove the issue, but I am not sure they will have an affect as far as reconsideration.I am certainly open to being wrong.
Best -
1. Make sure you have no internal links pointing to that page
2. Put a rule in place with a 410, meaning GONE before filing the reconsideration request.
3. Do not redirect the page with a 301 or any other method. Remember, you want the page to disappear, not redirect.Also, what is the message you received stating that only that one URL was penalized? Very strange to hear that only one was affected. Run a link check to see what other sites or listings are pointing to that URL, and if possible, log in to the citation or platform and change the link to one you know is not affected.
-
Hitesh,
Just so I am clear, you got a partial manual penalty on a single url? While it seems odd to me, most who come to us have partial or full penalties that are affecting their entire sites. My concern with not taking an effort to clean it up, file a disavow.txt file covering any remaining links, and requesting consideration is that it might leave you open for further urls and even affect the new site. This would be assuming you are going to 301 the old url's to the new site. Even without the "bad" url, there is the potential for carryover IMO around the site having been assessed a penalty and never addressed it.
So, if you have the time, clean it up and then file for reconsideration.
Best
-
unfortunately taking the url out and taking internal links away will not get the penalty removed you need to work on getting external links removed for it as that's where the penalty has come from. You can disavow them (I also recommend dropping them an email) if you don't want the page. There are some great guide here on Moz if you take a quick search.
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
-
Seeing URLS indexed that we don't want how do we approach this?
Hey guys, I have seen a few pages in the SERPS that are appearing from my site, some of these pages urls are actually ajax to refresh the buttons on our site... If these are important to our site but don't need to show up in the serps results can anyone recommend anything? Should I remove the urls? Or exclude them from the sitemap? or noindex? Any advice would be much appreciated thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | edward-may0 -
80% of traffic lost over night, Google Penalty?
Hi all.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Hemjakt
I have a website called Hemjakt (http://www.hemjakt.se/) which is a search engine for real estate currently only available on the Swedish market. The application crawl real estate websites and collect all estates on a single searchable application. The site has been released for a few months and have seen a steady growth since release, increasing by 20% weekly up to ~900 visitors per day. 3 days ago, over night, I lost 80% of my traffic. Instead of 900 visitors per day I'm at ~100 visitors per day and when I search for long, specific queries such as "Åsgatan 15, Villa 12 rum i Alsike, Knivsta" ( <adress><house type=""><rooms><area> <city>), I'm now only found on the fifth page. I suspect that I have become a subject of a Google Penalty. How to get out of this mess?</city></rooms></house></adress> Just like all search engines or applications, I do crawl other websites and scrape their content. My content is ~90% unique from the source material and I do add user value by giving them the possibility to compare houses, get ton of more data to compare pricing and history, giving them extra functionalities that source site do not offer and so on. My analytics data show good user engagement. Here is one example of a Source page and a page at my site:
Source: http://www.hemnet.se/bostad/villa-12rum-alsike-knivsta-kommun-asgatan-15-6200964
My Site: http://www.hemjakt.se/bostad/55860-asgatan-15/ So: How do I actually confirm that this is the reason I lost my traffic? When I search for my branded query, I still get result. Also I'm still indexed by Google. If I am penalized. I'm not attempting to do anything Black Hat and I really believe that the app gives a lot of value to the users. What tweaks or suggestions do you have to changes of the application, to be able to continue running the service in a way that Google is fine with?0 -
Is horizontal hashtag linking between 4 different information text pages with a canonical tag to the URL with no hashtag, a White Hat SEO practice?
Hey guys, I need help. hope it is a simple question : if I have horizontal 4 text pages which you move between through hashtag links, while staying on the same page in user experience, can I canonical tag the URL free of hashtags as the canonical page URL ? is this white hat acceptable practice? and will this help "Adding the Value", search queries, and therefore rank power to the canonical URL in this case? hoping for your answers. Best Regards, and thanks in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Muhammad_Jabali0 -
Identifying why my site has a penalty
Hi, My site has been hit with a google penalty of some sort, but it doesn't coincide with a penguin or panda update. I have attached a graph of my visits that demonstrates this. I have been working on my SEO since the latter part of last year and have been seeing good results, then all of a sudden my search referrals dropped by 70%. Can anyone advise on what it could be? Thanks! Will XBvZq2e
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | madegood0 -
Help required as difficulty removing Google algorithmic penalty
I am not an SEO expert but I am trying to recover my company's ranking on Google. We are a UK based baby shower company. Been established since 2003. We have used SEO companies a few years ago. On September 28th 2012 our rankings in Google dropped significantly on certain landing pages, others like our baby shower gifts page has remained position 1 for UK Google searches . Bing and Yahoo were unaffected. Searches for baby shower and baby shower decorations has gone from position 1 or 2 (behind wikipedia ) to these 2 landing pages being unranked in Google. I have for the first time ever gone through our back links, tried to locate bad or low quality links, emailed where possible, and set up in webmaster tools a dissavow file ( currently not acted upon by Google). I have also amended the text in the baby shower department so it does not read as keyword stuffed. It has been two and a half months now and sales has dropped significantly and me and the staff are getting very concerned. Our site is www.showermybaby.co.uk . We have not received a manual penalty. Any suggestions or help in removing this Google penalty would be greatly appreciated.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | postagestamp0 -
Should I ask for Nofollow on directory URLs?
Hi, I'm just putting pizza restaurant on various very relevant 'eating out' directories. Just noticed one directory then proceeds to place your listing on around 40 other sub-directories (each with own URL). They don't put <no follow="">tags on any of the 40 odd backlinking URLs.</no> I currently have around 300 existing backlinks, to this pizza restaurant, from a diverse range of sites. Should I ask them to put a nofollow on these 40 odd new backlinking directory URLs?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | McTaggart0 -
What to do about "Penguin" penalties?
What are your suggestions about moving forward with sites hit by the "Penguin" penalties? Wait it out and see if the penalty goes away Try to remove spammy backlinks and resubmit (is this worth the time and effort) Build quality backlinks to offset (will this even work if they have thousands of spammy links) Blog more (I think this is probably a no brainer) Scrap the site and start from scratch (This is last resort and don't want to do this if at all possible) Or any other ideas are greatly appreciated
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | RonMedlin0 -
When to give up on a website with a Google penalty?
I recently had a Google 60 penalty hit my website. The main two issues were that I had a person helping me with SEO and they bought some links. The second issue is that I own about 90 URL's in the my vertical. I created about 60 one page sites for these keyword targeted domains. I then linked these sites to main site. Big mistake! I kept these URL's all on the same server as my main site. In October 2010 I noticed my site hits dropped dramatically. I started looking for the issue. I didn't know which issue caused the penalty. I fixed both issues in November 2010 and asked Google for reconsideration in early December 2010. I kept link building for my site by finding quality links.I was extremely honest with Google. I gave them all of the domains I own and I told them the name of the person that bought links for me and the websites where those links were placed. As of late February 2011 a Google search for my domain still showed up in approximately the 64th position. I recently asked Google again to lift the penalty. I basically told them that I fixed all of my issues that led to the penalty and let them know I have been waiting for almost 3 months. I told them I have put the past 2 years of my life into this website and begged them to forgive me. I also asked them to let me know if my site was never going to be forgiven? I got the typical canned response from the Google team. As of today the penalty is still in effect. I just want to know when you should give up on a site. I have spent about $20,000 on this site and about 2 years of hard work. I don't want to give up, but I don't want to keep putting my hard work and time into the site if it will never escape the dreaded Google penalty. Do you think I should continue to wait and if so how long? Anything else I can do to persuade Google to release me from this penalty hell? If I do abandon the site and start from scratch what steps should I take? Do I need a new server? What if any content can I take from my current site and transfer to the new site? If I can how do I do this without getting another penalty or lose the credit for the original content. I created about 2,000 pages of original content for this site. I'd love to be able to transfer this content if I have to start from scratch. Any ideas or detailed help plans would be greatly appreciated.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | tadden0