Categories: Chit-chat :

Hypothetical Penguin Question...

Showing 1-53 of 53 messages
Hypothetical Penguin Question... Marie Haynes 9/1/12 12:00 AM
This question is totally hypothetical...I'd love to hear what you guys think about this.

Let's say I have a website called www.example.com.  I have a product page called www.example.com/redshoes.php.  I spent time building a lot of links to this site, mostly containing the anchor text, "red shoes".  As a result, my site was affected by Penguin and received a keyword specific traffic drop.  Where I previously ranked #1 for "red shoes", I am now nowhere to be seen in the first 10 pages of Google.

Would the following plan work to recover some or all of my rankings?

Here is my (hypothetical) plan:

-Noindex the page called www.example.com/redshoes.php.
-Make a new page on my site called www.example.com/buyredshoes.php.  Optimize it on-page well for "red shoes".
-Get some quality links to that particular page with well diversified anchor text.  (i.e. there may be some links that use the anchor text "red shoes", but a good number of links have my url and my brand as anchor text.

Do you think it is possible for that page to start ranking for "red shoes"? 

I know it's totally hypothetical, but it's 3 am and I can't sleep because all I can think of is whether this is possible.  I so badly need to get a life.

Marie
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Free2Write 9/1/12 12:28 AM
"Get some quality links". Red flag.

Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Pacifiers 9/1/12 12:34 AM
Hi Marie, 

I am sorry to say but what i think Your approach won't work, as your keyword would be part of your domainname also, So changing a pageurl or domain name is not the solution as google know everything :).


Just follow this approach and i think you goona get your life back.

Step 1- Take out all of your backlinks from GWT or SEOMOZ
Step 2- Check there PageRank
Step 3- Create a Pivot table based on those PageRank
Step 4- Select all PR 0 and PR 1 backlink domains 
Step 5- Mail a removal request to all bad domains
Step 6- Maintain the excel sheet with you, after lets say 15days send reconsideration request to Google with attached sheet of your work done.
Step 7 - Start creating more good links, NaturalLinks* with other keywords like, Yourdomainname, Yourdomainname.com, Anyotherkeyword etc.. What this step will do it will decrease the kw density of your earlier KE "redshoes"

If any other question do let us know. 

Thanks,

Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Suzanneh 9/1/12 4:46 AM
-Get some quality links to that particular page with well diversified anchor text.  (i.e. there may be some links that use the anchor text "red shoes", but a good number of links have my url and my brand as anchor text.

That's where your hypothetical plan blows up, depending on what you mean by "get some quality links".  It sounds like the same old backlinks that 'hypothetically' got you into trouble in the first place. Creating a quality business with a solid, diversified marketing plan sounds like a better third step than "get some quality links."

Suzanne
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Pacifiers 9/1/12 5:35 AM
Its a long debate and everyone has his/her opinion.

Google updates states "Stop making unnatural Links", But it never said stop Link Building.  Quality links are those where belong to your themes, not just positing the links any where for highPR. If any website is relevant with your theme you can request them to put your link or either you can find some of the good forms&blogs. 

Everyone one has his own way to handling this situation, but always remember one thing. Google has spotted unnatural links not Yahoo or Bing. So don't loose your traffic them.

@Suzanne -  Creating a quality business with a solid, diversified marketing plan sounds like a better third step -

Dear what you said is 100% true if you are starting a new online store, but if you are hit by google update then you have no choice rather then said above. :)


Cheers !!
Guru 
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Marie Haynes 9/1/12 6:31 AM
I think you guys missed the point where I said the question was totally hypothetical...or perhaps didn't believe me.  :)

Don't get hung up on whether or not it's possible to get quality links.

My point is to figure out whether Penguin is a page level issue or a whole site level issue. 

I have not been affected negatively by Penguin.  But I've seen a LOT of sites that have been.  The main issue seems to be anchor texted links.  A page that has too many anchor texted links pointing at it (i.e. obvious attempts at manipulation of the SERPS) is not going to be able to rank for the keyword that was used as an anchor.  

My thought was whether another page on that site could ever rank for that keyword.

But of course it's all conjecture because we don't know anything for certain till we get a refresh.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Marie Haynes 9/1/12 6:34 AM
From my experience, the links seen in SEOMoz are only a fraction of the links that can be downloaded from Webmaster tools.  I learned my lesson with my first unnatural links cleanup job.  I quoted based on 37 bad backlinks and once I got into Webmaster tools found hundreds of them.

Plus, filing a reconsideration request is not going to help if you've got a Penguin issue.  
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Lysis 9/1/12 7:14 AM
Ugh...another freakin SEO "guru" here to divide by 0. FAIL

A good rule of thumb is that if it isn't seo101, ignore any advice by dudes here with SEO in their name.

To build traffic and get natural links is to market for traffic and not for search engines. That means advertise to bring in traffic from users and not to get a link. The whole "build links" thing is an art form that you aren't going to find from some dude charging $x for y amount of links. 
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... KCle 9/1/12 7:42 AM
Marie, Penguin is a domain level ..pena, no they don't like calling it that.  Maybe adjustment or filter is a better word.
There was never any clear confirmation of this, but from what I've seen on many domains ..it is in fact domain level.

For more read:
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... fathom 9/1/12 8:16 AM

On Saturday, September 1, 2012 4:00:43 AM UTC-3, Marie Haynes wrote:
This question is totally hypothetical...I'd love to hear what you guys think about this.

Let's say I have a website called www.example.com.  I have a product page called www.example.com/redshoes.php.  I spent time building a lot of links to this site, mostly containing the anchor text, "red shoes".  As a result, my site was affected by Penguin and received a keyword specific traffic drop.  Where I previously ranked #1 for "red shoes", I am now nowhere to be seen in the first 10 pages of Google.

Would the following plan work to recover some or all of my rankings?

Here is my (hypothetical) plan:

-Noindex the page called www.example.com/redshoes.php.
-Make a new page on my site called www.example.com/buyredshoes.php.  Optimize it on-page well for "red shoes".
-Get some quality links to that particular page with well diversified anchor text.  (i.e. there may be some links that use the anchor text "red shoes", but a good number of links have my url and my brand as anchor text.

 

I know it's totally hypothetical, but it's 3 am and I can't sleep because all I can think of is whether this is possible.  I so badly need to get a life.

Marie
 
Because we haven't seen much of PENGUIN playing the jury is probably still in the room debating this out.
 
That said, any issue for a subordinate page can be most likely be fixed by deleting the page, and disallow Googlebot to it,nd re-establish the page elsewhere.
 
You cannot do that to a default page for the domain name but you can certainly negates unnatural links to any subordinate page.
 
Please note: USE WITH CAUTION you also negate all natural links as well... this isn't a "easy way to get rid of unnatural links," it is an easy way to get rid of all links.
 
 
Do you think it is possible for that page to start ranking for "red shoes"?
 
Yes it is absolutely possible to start ranking for the phrase on the same page moved elsewhere but here's the rub... what natural links are you going to get to replace the old unnatural? If that page was certainly able to acquire natural links I cannot fathom why anyone would demand unnatural ones instead.
 
Thus the problem with Hypothetical discussions... they generally don't much much sense in the real world. 
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Free2Write 9/1/12 9:12 AM
"I think the site that set the record most recently had nine completely different things that we flagged on it." -- Matt Cutts

Trying to rank for a keyword on a specific page that has already been flagged as a poor signal raises a red flag. The notion that such a signal can be deduced to be for the page or website and then sculpted away assumes a lot about what a company with 100 petaflops of compute power can't do and raises a red flag that users being satisfied enough to want to tell their friends about the site is not the priority.

Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... luzie 9/1/12 9:28 AM
>>> I said the question was totally hypothetical...or perhaps didn't believe me.  :)

Surprise ... at least I didn't - and still don't. I've never seen "hypothetical" questions in here.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Marie Haynes 9/1/12 9:33 AM
Great points fathom.  :)  Was wondering when you would appear.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Lysis 9/1/12 9:56 AM
They never are, luzie.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Marie Haynes 9/1/12 10:01 AM
I don't know why I feel the need to keep pressing on this point, but I seriously woke up from a deep sleep thinking about Penguin and all of the things we don't know about it.  It really was totally hypothetical....but then I'm kind of weird and geeky like that.  :)
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... fathom 9/1/12 10:27 AM
I often find when 90% of your job is hidden from view people over-think everything..
 
 
Without Google connecting the dots you can see all kinds of potential scenarios to this and I'll add 3 more...
  1. If you really want to make spammers perplexed apply for a bogus patent and let the SEO world do its job
  2. If you really want to make spammers perplexed apply for a patent and never use it
  3. But then again doesn't this sound like PENGUIN?
It's odd that the patent appears during the test driving of PENGUIN and Matt Cutts recent comment (the next PENGUIN update) "it's gonna be big".
 
Pure spectulation that I'll ignore myself because it doesn't change anything.
 
No matter what with a launch of PENGUIN and a single re-RUN mere spectulation can be more damaging than helpful. At some point we all repeat our spectulations so much that some where along the way we start to treat them as facts without us even realizing it. That is what damages an SEO Pracitioner.
 
Be that as it may... disproving your assumptions is better than proving yourself correct.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Marie Haynes 9/1/12 10:38 AM

No matter what with a launch of PENGUIN and a single re-RUN mere spectulation can be more damaging than helpful. At some point we all repeat our spectulations so much that some where along the way we start to treat them as facts without us even realizing it. 

Isn't that the truth!  Last night when I couldn't sleep I read through the entire thread on webmaster world on brainstorming about what Penguin was about:


Some of the initial conjecture is scary.  Many people were convinced Penguin was about keyword density and a lot of on page things that are most likely actually Panda factors. When Matt Cutts officially came out and send that Penguin is primarily about links, I was thinking, "Well, duh!  Doesn't everyone know that?"  But, after reading that thread I see that a lot of SEOs had convinced themselves that Penguin was about so many other things.

I sure hope there is a refresh soon...not that I personal sites to recover but so we can get some data on what actually works rather than speculating.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Lysis 9/1/12 10:55 AM
The last company I worked for, an SEO firm told the marketing director (who was completely clueless about how Google works, and I found that hilarious since most of their income was Google traffic..good job, guys) was told that Google was lying about nofollow and that adding it was useless.

People are dumb and gullible and would rather go for the elaborate conspiracy theories than owning up to the fact that their little SEO tricks got them into trouble, Google caught up with them, and now it's time to fix what has been broken. People would rather do that than own the problem and work with it.

I'd have far more respect for anyone who posts here and says "I screwed up...I thought it was ok to do directory submissions and it's not" but instead people argue about it and defend it.

Of course, that excludes the jackasses who were praising their SEO for the blog and forum spam...those guys get 0 empathy, because they are the scum of the Internet.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Free2Write 9/1/12 11:08 AM
How would you know if the algorithms weren't showing a recovery for a time based on the initial push and then settle worse off after later analysis? No matter how fun, speculating about Google's in-house algorithms rarely if ever helps the end user.

Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... fathom 9/1/12 11:14 AM
Not sure what you are driving at but since you cannot recover from PENGUIN without a re-RUN it is safe to say that all initial "pushes" will not change anything until the re-RUN occurs.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Free2Write 9/1/12 3:15 PM
Even after a rerun there's no way to tell if a "recovery" is temporary or permanent or simply a method to analyze reactions since there's no access to the internal details. The entire exercise is less than speculative. There are no control groups, no precise measurements, and no way to determine exactly what the algorithms are reacting to over time. It's like trying to force a  two dimensional balloon analogy on a multidimensional universe.

Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... fathom 9/1/12 3:31 PM
On Saturday, September 1, 2012 7:15:55 PM UTC-3, Free2Write wrote:
Even after a rerun there's no way to tell if a "recovery" is temporary or permanent or simply a method to analyze reactions
...the fact that it has only happened once in the history of Google has nothing to do with the lack of observations... right?
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Free2Write 9/1/12 3:51 PM
That's correct. In this case, the lack of observations would have nothing to do with any historic lack of opportunity for observation. Without the proper instruments the event count can be as often as you like.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... fathom 9/1/12 3:59 PM
Surely you can tell if you have natural or unnatural links.
 
What instrumentsd do you need other than WMT?
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... zihara 9/1/12 4:29 PM
Been watching this develop for so many years... and it's all been so easy to avoid simply by applying a liberal amount of time-tested real world publishing professionalism. Of course, that's something that seems to be in short supply among the denizens of these forums but what to say...

I have yet to have any of the problems. I did see one of my test sites take a hit from Panda more than a year ago but ten days later, that same test site was fully restored to it's previous ranking status in the same amount of time it took to fall: overnight. But that was a test that was trying to make some heads-or-trails out of what Panda was doing (and was actually launched back in the early days of Caffeine as a test of the capabilities of that confabulation). The results of that effort have pointed out so many ambiguities, smoke-and-mirrors, fog and outright dissemination of FUD that I gave it up and went back to doing what I prefer to do: play games with code bases and contributing to those that show real promise in the arenas of dynamic presentation, "feeling lucky" and accessibility.

I kinda figure if people were to put their time and effort into learning to do it right the first time, they wouldn't be wasting so much time and effort in trying to figure out what they did wrong. And they wouldn't be counting the days to the end of their open-ended sentences... I am still waiting with bated breath for the government to issue hunting licenses for anyone who claims any knowledge whatsoever of "SEO" practices... but we'd probably be seeing a hunter behind every tree and a couple in between, wouldn't we?

I've been getting a lot of "Christian" terminology tossed at me lately. One particular theme that seems applicable here is: "We're fishers-of-men. Let the dead bury the dead."
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... JohnMu 9/6/12 6:31 AM
Hi Marie

I'm sorry to hear about your websearch-insomnia, I hope it's better in the meantime :). Getting back to your post, let me just look at a small part of your hypothetical plan. In particular, if links to a specific page are causing a problem for your site (regardless of how), then removing those links is generally the best solution. If you absolutely can't remove those problematic links and if you're certain that the page itself is otherwise not that relevant for the rest of your site, then removing the page that's being linked to (returning 404/410) will also help us to drop the links to that page. Obviously, this is not a perfect situation (you wouldn't want to remove an important page unless it's really necessary), so I'd recommend really taking steps to make sure that this is really the source of the problem. 

With algorithmic changes, over time, as we recrawl and reindex the pages involved, any changes that you have done would generally be reflected. Sometimes this is a fast process (if the affected pages are crawled frequently and the algorithms updated quickly), other times it can take quite some time (especially if the pages involved are rarely crawled). 

Cheers
John
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Marie Haynes 9/6/12 6:52 AM
Thank you so much for responding John.  You always give such informative answers!

Your answer has actually helped me with another situation (this time a real one, not hypothetical) where I am helping with a manual unnatural links warning.  There are many unnatural links pointing at one particular page and I was considering removing that page.  I understand that I'll be removing the benefit of any natural links to that page, but it may be worth it if we can't get the unnatural ones dealt with.  But, now I see that if I 404 the page I will essentially accomplish the same thing as removing the links.

Thanks for your concern on my websearch insomnia.  It's a real problem. :)  Even when I am sleeping I am dreaming about Google penalties.  

Marie
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Richard Hearne 9/8/12 3:15 AM
>> Marie, Penguin is a domain level ..pena [... ]

Nope.  That's not correct.  Penguin acts at page level, but it can also affect the entire domain.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Richard Hearne 9/8/12 3:18 AM
>> Not sure what you are driving at but since you cannot recover from PENGUIN without a re-RUN

According to who or what?
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... fathom 9/8/12 4:11 AM
EXACTLY!
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Richard Hearne 9/8/12 4:36 AM
So we're agreed that there's currently no way to know if Penguin needs a refresh to release sites?
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... ShopSafe 9/8/12 4:36 AM
He's aptly correcting both you and kcle, fathom. :)

"Exactly!" is a strange response unless you add something like "Oh sorry, I see where I am going wrong now."  :)

(Sorry, I did not see you posting there).
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... fathom 9/8/12 5:24 AM
Making rherotical comments isn't evidence that you have done something or you know something.
 
So ShopSafe... I "FATHOM" claim you cannot recover without a re-RUN.
 
I welcome you to prove me wrong. Please post evidence not just your untested bunk.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... ShopSafe 9/8/12 5:31 AM
It's not my job to make a fool of you, fathom. You'll have to ask someone else.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... fathom 9/8/12 5:34 AM
Given that we had 1 re-RUN and recoveries on that re-RUN and the world isn't a buzz with "I RECOVERED FROM PENGUIN" (since then)... we can agree you can observe the same things I can observe from a multitude of sources. Are you seeing something different?
 
I can theorize that no one likes to admit they recovered. Is that a better way to phrase for your uncertainty?
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... fathom 9/8/12 5:36 AM
Glad we agree you are wrong yet again. :-)
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... YCPD 9/8/12 9:36 AM
I have data clearly showing keyword recovery is page by page, but the data may also be showing that traffic recovery is separate, site-wide, and over-arching.

If you search for anyone claiming to recover from Penguin, you will find a whole lot of nothing no matter how long you search. The only clear claim is a special case of a prominent site (WordPress) with clout to work directly with SEO columnists who work closely with Google.

I have 4 months of data starting soon after 4-24 clearly showing without question that at least part of the penalty appears to be page by page as I have been saying in other threads.The penalty algo is obviously elaborate and complex but the one element I think my data shows with certainty is that individual pages can show marked improvement for specific keywords. Example: My keywords for Page X were in pre-Penguin top 3 results, post-Penguin >100, Page 1-3 after "cleaning" page, sometimes back to top 3 results.

Data also clearly demonstrates that central keywords lag, peripheral keywords recover first, BUT, and this is key *overall traffic* stays incredibly depressed, off by 60% or more, as if there is a cap on incoming traffic to the WHOLE site. In fact, as rankings recovered, traffic continues to go down and remains at lower levels than any time since 4-24. Explain that!! My guess is that a new iteration is needed to improve traffic even with page by page keyword improvement in place.

Suspect data is showing that spammy unsolicited and devalued inbound links may be a key factor in reduced traffic, that the algo lets your peripheral keywords reclaim their rankings but then traffic capped site-wide.

So, data show that something is killing traffic despite keyword recovery. What is it???

Note, I was following the rules all along as best I could, am not a spammer and most definitely didn't want links from hemmoroids, STD sites, and other utterly irrelevant sites for my content.

Note that recovered/recovering pages are the ones with the most bad inbound links. "Cleaning" pages seems to be the factor driving keyword recovery but why doesn't traffic recover too?? Site is http://www.youthchg.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Absentee Thoughtlord 9/8/12 9:52 AM
I was following this thread quite nicely up until the point Marie said "This question is totally hypothetical".
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... fathom 9/8/12 12:37 PM
Since the opening title contained the word hypothetical it is hard to identify where you went awry.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Richard Hearne 9/10/12 1:36 AM
I'm genuinely interested to learn more about these recoveries.  Can you post some links please?

I've seen some partial recoveries myself, but I've no way to determine if these happened due to a refresh of Penguin.  It strikes me there could be some decay set into the penalty (as there is with all Google penalties). 
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Richard Hearne 9/10/12 1:41 AM
Great post YCPD.

FWIW I can also tell you I've seen sites recover on the head terms rather than peripheral terms.

I have also observed some traffic capping whereby rankings for keywords appear to revert to pre=Penguin levels, but overall organic referrals on those same words are still greatly deflated.  

I'm very interested to learn more about the "cleaning" you refer to - are you only cleaning links or is there more you've tried?
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... YCPD 9/10/12 9:21 AM
I did extensive "cleaning."

I have posted in this long thread most of the many steps I took: https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/webmasters/6q9QwWmAIJc/EVAEAI6oNLYJ It is a long list that details most of what I did.

The results are dramatic in terms of ranking. Google obviously avoids "unclean" pages even when pre-Penguin, that page was served for a Keyword X, and the whole page is devoted to Keyword X. Instead, Google serves pages that have a tiny, incidental mention of Keyword X but that page has either been cleaned or is a PDF with nothing that could offend Google. Since 4-24, prior to cleaning, Google was primarily serving obscure PDFs while avoiding the obvious but "unclean" pages.

The result of the sharp improvement in ranking on peripheral words is that my traffic remains at an all-time low in the 16 years of my site existing. The crash began 4-24 but hit rock bottom 7-3 and has stayed there since.  Why???
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... fathom 9/10/12 10:11 AM
First you can't take a quick look and say "here's a recovery". Here's one example:
 
 
This guy shows Adsense clicks as the PENGUINized loss... wow that's cool - I didn't realize PENGUIN was a website ban as oppose specific phrase targeting. This allows you to have multitude of recovery false positives.
 
Re-directing another domain adds link juice and more link juice will impact everything that wasn't effected by PENGUIN which naturally would produce more clicks... YES? Can we agree here?
 
But did you really recover from PENGUIN or did you simply ignore the problem and make it less apparent.
 
Also buying unnatural links (from ffiver) to recover from unnatural links seem a little odd to me. Don't you think?
 
This is SEO Quackery at its best IMHO. If it looks good and sounds good it makes for great entertainment. It doesn't really matter if it is a non-fiction account, based on a true story, a dramatization, or absolute bull because who can disprove the account when they don't have access to the source data.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... fathom 9/10/12 10:22 AM
On Monday, September 10, 2012 1:21:39 PM UTC-3, YCPD wrote:

I did extensive "cleaning."

 
Your problems pre-dates PENGUIN launch and while you can indeed have PENGUIN related issues involved afterthefact of your original issues any recovery you may see cannot be conclusively tied to PENGUIN without a re-RUN thus IMHO you have a false positive.
 
Since you did not resolve your original issues between March 5 - April 23 you cannot be included in any dataset for PENGUIN recovery without a re-RUN.
 
My site's URL is http://www.youthchg.com. Have used white hat SEO with great success until around March 5, 2012. Have dropped out of Top 100 on keywords I was in top 10 for years especially for searches that use "professional development" or "workshop." There has been just a minimal/no drop on other keywords like "posters". Traffic down 10% each week since 3-5-12, totaling around 30% drop to date, 4-11-12. In 2011, our traffic increased during this time period.
No site additions/changes prior to March 5. In late March began a newspaper that aggregates info on our topic using paper.li, and added a page for Google Author information. I have always used white hat SEO, and regularly gotten people to remove content stolen from our site. Site content is scraped a lot. We have many good articles on article web sites, but perhaps that is a problem, Many of the links that point to us use the exact same anchor words because we host workshops so all the links from conference listing sites are pretty similar to each other. I don't know if the repetition of the same keywords in links pointing to our site are a problem. I have looked at site speed, addded Google + links, tried to figure out canonicalization, tried to figure out if I've "over-optimized," and on and on but I can't figure out how to fix this massive drop in traffic. I would be grateful for any help. Thanks.  
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... YCPD 9/10/12 11:24 AM
Fathom, I had complietely forgotten about March drop in traffic because it was so eclipsed by the massive crash in traffic on April 24. Thanks for the reminder. As for why the improvement in keywords without accompanying traffic, your explanation is as good as any other.

I just don't understand how so many keywords can recover but traffic stay at rock bottom rates.

Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... fathom 9/10/12 11:35 AM
Unfortunately, there are no easy answers without dedicated testing, retesting, undoing and redoing experimentations again, and again and again.
 
Ranks recovering without traffic can be simply explained by changes in searchers' habits... you once had volumes of searchers not logged in and now they are which moves them from "keyword phrase" queries to NOT PROVIDED queries.
 
That's just one 'off the wall' occurence that suggests "nothing changed"... you are just viewing the data differently.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Lysis 9/10/12 11:40 AM
Are you saying your site recovered in impressions but traffic is still low?

From my experience, if you spammed with a target phrase, those phrases get killed along with any other phrases that contain that one phrase. Most people got greedy and spammed with phrases that were already placing decently but just "not high enough" so they basically killed their main phrases, which is why you see people with 50%+ less traffic.

So, just to clarify, are you saying your site is seeing the same amount of impressions but traffic is still low or are you saying you are ranking high for phrases again but no traffic is coming in? I'm assuming you are correctly segregating organic from paid traffic as well.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... YCPD 9/10/12 11:58 AM
Lysis, I am saying that many peripheral keywords are ranking close to their highs but no increased traffic is coming in. I am talking about organic traffic only.

Many keywords have been back on Page 1 for 3-4 weeks or so, but not necessarily all the way up the page again. Central keywords still >100 or worse but moving up very slowly.

Traffic fell first, just a bit in March, fell off a cliff 4-24, hit rock bottom 7-3-12 and has stayed at bottom since then despite steady, dramatic, peripheral keyword ranking improvement. Can you explain that beyond what's been said here already?

For what it's worth, I wasn't spamming originally. I had very long pages of articles, informational pieces on how to help troubled kids. I can see now that they look like keyword stuffing, and can see how other site components could be misinterpreted vis a vis Penguin algo. Have been going page by page fixing all these elements. Only "cleaned" pages are served by Google. "Uncleaned" pages are almost always "avoided" by Google even when they are the obvious target of a search.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Lysis 9/10/12 12:30 PM
Keyword stuffing has nothing to do with Penguin. That's more of a Panda issue.

If you are on the first page but ranking below the scroll, that can make a huuuuuge difference, so then I can understand why you see impressions but no traffic. That does make sense.
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Richard Hearne 9/10/12 12:58 PM
I think you're offering the same answer I was gave - there are no credible examples of Penguin recoveries.

I don't discount the theory that a refresh is needed to escape from Penguin, but I think it is equally possible that Penguin includes a decay factor that means no site can get out, regardless of what they do, for some period of time.  We all know Google doesn't want anyone reverse-engineering their anti-spam processes.

Until I hear a Googler say it needs a refresh I'm keeping an open mind.  Or until I start seeing multiple reports of recoveries :)
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Lysis 9/10/12 1:03 PM
>>  Penguin includes a decay factor that means no site can get out, regardless of what they do, for some period of time.

I agree with that, since it seems to be the commonplace for their other penalties. 
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... fathom 9/10/12 2:03 PM
That is an interesting way to view it.
 
I can see maybe a long-term decaying factor but over a few weeks to a few months much more unlikely. I've had 10 sites intentionally devalued for unnatural links, immediately remove all unnatural links, resubmited sitemaps ensuring all credits are removed and still decaying factor noticed. (Not saying there is not one just saying I haven't seen it with even a modest amount of consistency. 
 
At the same time... I do see a few bubbles that may support:
I tend to post and let thing lie as they may instead of knee jerk reacting to any flucuations and the bubbles up & down come and go without any theme.
 
Re: Hypothetical Penguin Question... Lysis 9/10/12 2:17 PM
I think it depends on the violation. This is speculation on my part. The length of a penalty is depending on the violation, so I would imagine the same could be said for their decay factor. 

I agree with it, because you could totally game the system if you just bounced right back. I mean, create 10 sites, spam the hell out of the Internet for cash moneys (or whatever method that is against the TOS), wait for the penalty warning, remove said penalty from the site, wait for the reversal, do it again, remove it...You could make a ton of money that way, so I agree they have to put a choke hold on violators. However, you wouldn't want to put the same choke hold on someone who, let's say, keyword stuffed the site in a basic, noobish way compared to the guy who xrumer'd 100k links on forums.
More topics »