Penguin Panic Jumps Shark
Posted 24 December 2012 - 10:47 AM
There is only the one link to his site from mine, it is from a short synopsis mention of a highly specialised sub-niche within a quite long broad on-topic page, to his rather unique page on that specialty. His content was so good and the topic so narrow that it really wasn't worth producing my own page.
I took a look at the traffic from my page to his through the link and saw that, while not high it was quite steady (and given my bot defences likely the cleanest traffic he gets) and given the page, surrounding copy, and anchor text probably well targeted. In other words the type of traffic I'd like to receive from one of my backlinks.
Just to be sure I emailed him back mentioning all of the above. He replied insisting that I remove the link. So, I did. And replaced it with a link to my own new page on the specialty that he had previously 'owned'.
This Penguin Panic has definitely jumped the shark.
Posted 11 February 2013 - 10:16 AM
Posted 11 February 2013 - 12:05 PM
I haven't a clue when the next Google Penguin data refresh will be (don't even know when the previous ones were ) but if the work your SEO contractor is doing is within what Penguin is calculating then they are correct that until the next update there will be no SERP change from the work being done. And until then you - and your SEO - won't know whether the work being done is beneficial, harmful, or of little consequence
Posted 11 February 2013 - 12:48 PM
I forgot to say - I got my first link removal request too. What was really funny was that they asked to place an advertorial, and that is exactly what I did. I added nofollow to the links and sent them a mail when the article was live. They replied to say "looks great!!" or something like that.
In the email I received that told me how it was harming their site and my own. As I was still getting some visitors to the page I swapped the links (they were product links) for Amazon affiliate links. They only asked me to remove their links, not to remove their article.
I assume that the new SEO has a list of websites that the previous SEO placed links on. They are not bothering to check if the link is actually causing them harm before requesting removal.
Posted 11 February 2013 - 01:54 PM
Well, in all fairness, there's no surefire way for the SEO to know if any particular link is causing them harm. The SEO is likely seeing an obvious "arranged" link (whether paid or not, whether nofollowed or not), and figures it's best to just dump it rather than risk keeping it. It's a tough call on the SEO's part.
Posted 11 February 2013 - 03:16 PM
Probably not. But these days, who the *&^% knows anymore?
Let's put it this way...the nofollow link isn't helping their SEO efforts anyway, supposedly, so removing the link altogether won't hurt those efforts either. So, for SEO purposes only (not counting direct traffic benefits), it's best to just remove it and not take the chance that Google sees it as some sort of manipulative tactic.
Posted 11 February 2013 - 03:33 PM
Jon, Jon, Jon...
1. do not take what Google (their spokespeople) has to say at face value; always parse carefully including not just what IS said but HOW it is said, what is NOT said, what is implied, et al.
2. Google pronouncements are written in sand not upon solid tablets. Expect change, without notice, to any extent, at any moment.
2.1 More often than not, change is announced for some variable of time, after said change has been introduced.
2.2. When future change is announced consider it a test of change reception.
The weird and wonderful history of rel=nofollow, where each of the above came into play at least once is a wonderful parable (well, it would be except that it has become rather more epic than parable).
rel=nofollow has mutated in meaning several times over the years, only Google knows when it is treated how today, and then there is always tomorrow...
Note: some testing types may have inferred some behaviours but knowing is a whole different level of certainty.
And Penguin is to rel=nofollow as the algo is to Penguin.
Posted 12 February 2013 - 12:51 AM
I get removal requests from guest bloggers who were happy at the time to have a link to their website and no longer wish it to be there. The volume of requests is such that so far I have not thought to require a fee to do this.
It struck me that one benefit of having Google around is all the make-work projects they create as people try to follow their guesses on how Google works and then reverse all this when Google points out it really doesn't want them to do that. Just think if there weren't all these Google make-work projects, then people would have to go and get real jobs like flipping hamburgers or washing cars.
Posted 12 February 2013 - 08:36 AM
All this smoke and mirrors on the part of Google is brilliant. They can now show exactly what they want having managed to sow the seeds of dispair among the SEO community.
Let's see after the next update whether I've been able to completely cook a domain I own by link-spamming the hell out of it on all the sites that Google says its algo is so brilliant at detecting.
Reply to this topic
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users