Google Indexing Change ?

[plumbbob]

I don't know if this matters , but up until a few eeks ago if you typed in site:www. etc we would show approx 250 - 280 indexed pages. we are now only showing 1 of 3 of about 260 which have been omitted for similar results ? None of the the other pages are similar. My SEO have said the same. Another competitor who has been trading very well for years now also i see has the same issue.

Any clues?

Ta
Plumb Bob

[RuralWeb]

Normal day at Google HQ

[RuralWeb]

It could also be due to the hidden text at the bottom of your homepage which is stuffed with H1 tagged keyword links - very black hat. Im not surprised that google has dropped you

[Big_Dave]

Hiding key words will always do it. This has to be one of the most basic No No's.

However as mentioned above it is normal service at Google HQ. In the last 7 days I've had 5 pages worth of listingsa appear and then be dropped. No obvious change or reason.

I check my listings every morning and most mornings they change. I get fed up of trying to think why to be honest.

Maybe only those Google Consultants know the real answer.

[jont]

very black hat

You called?

I would also look at the amount of inline and embedded CSS you have on each page - this should all be stripped out to an external stylesheet - not only for ease of alteration but to make the pages as search engine friendly as possible ... whilst Google is very good at handling markup code everything little thing you can do to helping it along adds towards the overall benefit of the sites rankings.

[RuralWeb]

I would also look at the amount of inline and embedded CSS you have on each page

It wont make much difference if the site gets banned

[jont]

No - but once the site is amended they will hopefully regain the trust of Google and begin better listings.

Mal - any knowledge on how long it can take if you are banned for Google to take pity once the site has been sorted?

[RuralWeb]

any knowledge on how long it can take if you are banned for Google to take pity once the site has been sorted

I certainly have - Google will usually issue site owners with a warning asking them to remove the content from thier site first or give a 30 rank penalty prior to banning. Once banned it can take many many months to get listed again at worst case.

However in this case the content has been generated by an SEO company and in these cases I have heard of not only the offending site being banned but every site that the SEO company has done work on being banned as well. Google does not like SEO companies who use suspect methods to get rankings http://www.google.com/support/webmas...y?answer=35291

[leehack]

Google made my heart sink when they mentioned this:

"Reserve the same skepticism for unsolicited email about search engines as you do for "burn fat at night" diet pills or requests to help transfer funds from deposed dictators."

Damn that Nigerian president.

[RuralWeb]

"burn fat at night" diet pills

Bummer I was just building a website to sell these

[jont]

Had to smile at a remark on the Google page about even they receive spam SEO emails ... I would be tempted to contact the company and see if they could get the Google UK from a PR9 to PR10

[Mark H]

Malcolm - are you absolutely sure that the web designers are wearing their black hats here? There is a toggle on the bottom right hand side of the page which reveals the text in question (ie tell me more). I personally don't think there's much point in this as they should just have made the text visible anyway as it is useful and contains appropriate links (but format it a bit better), however I can't see how they are trying to trick Google and/or visitors by doing this. Equally if Google does think that this is trickery I would have to say that IMO it is mistaken. We had a recent thread on "hidden" text using CSS which failed to convince me that there aren't ever legitimate reasons for this technique.

[RuralWeb]

The text is hidden and uses multiple H1 tags IMO it is Black Hat you may differ - it is there explicity IMO to improve rankings and if you look has been placed by the SEO company.

I will report the site to google and see what happens.

[Mark H]

if you look has been placed by the SEO company

I can't see anything which suggests that - what have I missed?

[los_design]

Malcolm - are you absolutely sure that the web designers are wearing their black hats here? There is a toggle on the bottom right hand side of the page which reveals the text in question (ie tell me more). I personally don't think there's much point in this as they should just have made the text visible anyway as it is useful and contains appropriate links (but format it a bit better), however I can't see how they are trying to trick Google and/or visitors by doing this. Equally if Google does think that this is trickery I would have to say that IMO it is mistaken. We had a recent thread on "hidden" text using CSS which failed to convince me that there aren't ever legitimate reasons for this technique.

Unless some changes have been made (if so I apologise to Malcolm firstly as I did not see the first version), I do not think they are wearing any black hat, rather a lack of site aesthetics and understanding of Actinic mechanics as they strive to gain rankings.

Cramming keywords into the top of each page, no apparent quality copy to view, poorly constructed page code and css usage, some basic user & SE friendly actions not implemented.

No black hat IMHO, but, as stated, this may have changed.

However in this case the content has been generated by an SEO company and in these cases I have heard of not only the offending site being banned but every site that the SEO company has done work on being banned as well. Google does not like SEO companies who use suspect methods to get rankings

Interesting point Malcolm and 1 to which I shall read up on, but to date, I understand the old IP C blick banning is very common place from the big G so the VS is more at risk if this is also combined with a banned SEO.

Regards and enjoy the sunshine
DJ