| 1:51 pm on Jun 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I sent a new message to Yahoo asking them about this. Whitey suggested contacting them frequently. Upon looking over their Content Guidelines, I can't see any violations on my site. They mention having pages consisting of mostly affiliate links, which my site is not. I keep these down to a bare minumum, maybe in fact too few to effectively sell product.
I wouldn't want to abandon this domain because I have too much time and work invested in and it's a great domain that applies 100% to what my site is about. Somebody once recommended I consider copying all my content over to a clean domain, specifically for Yahoo but exclude googlebot and msn from there to prevent duplicate content troubles, but I think this idea is too risky. Coming up with totally different content for a second sister site would take too much time, as it is coming up with fresh new content for one site is already hard enough.
I wouldn't be as concerned about being out of Yahoo, if Google was producing decent traffic. Google is currently producing none.
| 2:31 pm on Jun 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
therein lies two of the biggest problems of folks who participate in this forum :
1. the top ten is filled with sites and directories that are made up of affiliate links and/or pointing to other sites with the original content... and the sites with the original content are down in page 3 or worse.
2. many people who get good traffic from G! don't understand that NOT ALL websites enjoy the same. there are many for whom Y! provides really targetted traffic... (that speaks volumes for Y!'s quality when they're not screwed up!).
And as I say that, once again, my site and a whole bunch in the top ten have gone missing... with the serps only returning 1 million results when the normal would be 39 million. go figger!
| 4:22 pm on Jun 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
|They mention having pages consisting of mostly affiliate links, which my site is not. I keep these down to a bare minumum, maybe in fact too few to effectively sell product. |
Unfornuately, the people who review the sites do not know how to objectively evaluate the content. They click through the pages, and see the valuable content, and as soon as they see an affiliate link, they close the browswer and click "ban". They are very uninformed, poorly trained, and narrowminded, it seems.
A child can detect "good" content better than Yahoo. A site with 75 unique article pages, and a single affiliate link on 3 of them, should NOT be banned. But, unfortunately, that is exactly what is happening.
| 9:10 pm on Jun 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
The site: search for my 35-page site is showing over 100 non-existent urls, in the form of
What is this? The real pages that are indexed are shown as url only. Why does Yahoo want to do this? Very unprofessional to associate every single IBL with a site simply because it links to the page. Not all links to a page are correct or even exist.
| 9:34 pm on Jun 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Ironically when my site was a pure affiliate site running a bunch of spam pages, it was doing fine on Yahoo. It was shortly after I decided to clean it up and transformed it into a real content site, that it got penalized.
If that's true what you say, I guess my only alternative is to move on with a fresh domain that hasn't experienced any of these troubles. It's hard enough to come up with unique content for one site, so it will be doubly hard to do it for 2.
I'm about ready to throw in the towel on Google, at least for a while.
| 10:13 pm on Jun 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Whatever you do, don't sign up for YPN. If you run a nice content site that has even a single affiliate link, you risk getting banned. Very narrow-minded approach. My pages began dropping out the day after I applied to participate in YPN and saw an "editor" looking at my site (in my logs).
Coincidence? I doubt it.
| 10:38 pm on Jun 4, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Isn't that Yahoo's own version of Ads by Google?
A different affiliate site of mine was getting up to 2500 hits/day from Yahoo before it got banned. If I can do that well or better on Google with a content site, I wouldn't be as concerned about losing Yahoo, but Google is proving a hard nut to crack.
| 3:25 am on Jun 5, 2006 (gmt 0)|
say buhbye to your yahoo listings....must be competing with Yahoo....
| 6:41 pm on Jun 6, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Yep guys... I have two whole sites dedicated to affiliate links. One got smashed and haven't had a visitor from Yahoo since God knows when and the other is fine. The one that is fine is included in the Yahoo directory. ;)
I may try to start advertising via Yahoo Search to see if it makes a difference.
| 8:40 pm on Jun 6, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Overture? That does get you into Yahoo, but I don't know if that will remove a penalty or ban. It might be worth experimenting with.
| 2:15 pm on Jun 7, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I too, am getting frustrated with Y, the removal of my site which offers unique content, yet others with affiliate content and doorway pages are seen on the top 3 - it's just ignorance on Y's part. I just ignore Y now, and keep doing my best to provide users content that matter.
I like to think that there is more than just "I" ignoring Y and that makes life easier. (The numbers prove that the SERPs are weak.. a new front page won't make up that difference in lost revenue to Y.)
| 3:15 pm on Jun 7, 2006 (gmt 0)|
The problem is that leaves one with only 2 search engines to work with - Google and MSN. How are the Y SERPs weak? Do you mean they are in decline. Maybe Y is losing out to MSN.
MSN is currently the only one bringing my site visitors.
| 5:09 pm on Jun 7, 2006 (gmt 0)|
SERP's are weak - meaning, the return queries are irrelevant to what the user wants.
numbers = Yahoo's continuing decline in users.
I host several clients, and for the first year, I'm all over Yahoo and MSN search with their sites - easy ranks I call these SE's. After I get my numbers on Google and out of the dreaded sandbox, I ignore optimization for Yahoo and MSN and concentrate on what Google wants.
For example, if I spent the last 2 years doing what everyone was doing and cross linking everywhere, I would have lost in google this past update. Instead, all the cautious linking I've done has moved my sites up to #1 #2 and #3 or have kept them at the same top 5 rankings. If I had done all that cross linking, I would benefit MSN and Yahoo but not Google which delivers the largest number of visitors to my sites. Why would I worry about such a small amount of return at the risk of hurting the larger percentage?
| 8:47 pm on Jun 7, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Maybe Yahoo has seen it's heyday. I have noticed a significant increase in my site's traffic from MSN, so maybe MSN is the future. It's too bad we're down to 2 major search engines. Back 10 years ago, there were 8 or 10 different major search engines, but those have all but disappeared, leaving us with just 3.
I wouldn't be so concerned about losing Yahoo if Google was making up for the loss, except I am getting zippo from G. I will have to ask about this in the Google Forum.
When you say crosslinking, do you mean crosslinking domains? That can be risky if done excessively.
I am keeping my site strictly whitehat, adding only real original content.
| 9:30 pm on Jun 7, 2006 (gmt 0)|
whitehat is the only way to SEO.
| 9:57 pm on Jun 7, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Whitehat is the best longterm SEO plan, although some affiliates have certainly raked in big $$$ with blackhat & disposable domains. Whitehat is slow and takes time, like a long-term investment.
| 9:45 pm on Jun 8, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I wonder if spending some money on Overture PPC might help in getting these stubborn penalties lifted. Overture is owned by Yahoo, so many of their ads appear on Yahoo.
I removed all my Google Ads from my site, then sent off another message to Yahoo.
| 6:09 am on Jun 12, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Don't waste your money, Overture has ZERO effect on penalty removal...believe me, we tried,
Yahoo will just laugh and take your money, that is what they seem to do best.
| 1:31 pm on Jun 12, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I'm sure Yahoo does remove penalties and bans since people here and elsewhere have said they managed to get them removed, so they aren't permanant.
Some people claim Yahoo is more likely to lift a penalty of somebody who's spending money on overture, than somebody who isn't.
| 2:04 pm on Jun 12, 2006 (gmt 0)|
For every site that we've been able to successfully reverse a penalty, the time period was roughly 6 months; my guess on this is that there is some sort of cycle for penalized sites, similar to what MattC described with the way G penalizes.
If you think you fixed the problem, try to forget about it and move on to something else, checking back every month or so.
| 3:38 pm on Jun 12, 2006 (gmt 0)|
Has anyone experiencing the this (just homepage showing, rest of pages url only) tried to contact Yahoo with a reinclusion request? Did anyone get a human response?
| 4:58 pm on Jun 12, 2006 (gmt 0)|
When my site:www search bounced from 147 to 240 backlinks, maybe that's a positive sign or early stages of penalty removal, although most of the links are to nonexistent pages. Somebody told me Google and likely Yahoo remove dead links from their cache after a full year, so I have another month to go.
I got a couple human responses, but the first one told me she sees no indication my site has been blocked from the yahoo index, then after I persisted, a later human response from somebody else confirmed that there was indeed a penalty.
Yahoo's Content Guidelines mention nothing against affiliate sites specifically, but they do clearly state they do not want pages that are dedicated to directing a user to another page. This I guess would be a doorway page, except I got rid of all mine long ago before the penalty began. They are very secretive and love to keep us in suspense.
| 7:29 pm on Jun 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
So Yahoo's hundred thousand plus travel pages are ok to be indexed, but a competitor's site is called a "guidelines violation"...It's simple folks...Yahoo squashes all competition, that's what they do, plain and simple. If you have a site that competes with Yahoo it will eventually be penalized and banned, it may take some time for them to find you, but they eventually will. After that forget any reinclusion, or penalty reductions, they DO NOT HAPPEN. I strongly suggest you spend your advertising monies elsewhere because that WILL NOT have any affect on penalties with Yahoo.
| 10:24 pm on Jun 13, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I don't believe I was competing with Yahoo, except I was running Ads by Google.
Do they excommunicate people whom they scheduled a re-review. Last message from Yahoo told me the "re-review process takes several weeks to complete" and "You will not be receiving further notification from Yahoo."
| 11:44 pm on Jun 14, 2006 (gmt 0)|
"You will not be receiving further notification"
and that be bout it....
don't lose any sleep over waiting for action, if you
compete in any way...fugetaboutit
| 12:19 pm on Jun 15, 2006 (gmt 0)|
How you do mean compete? Would this include Google ads? I had some but I removed them.
Maybe enough website owners could file a class-action lawsuit against Yahoo.
| 6:54 am on Jun 22, 2006 (gmt 0)|
I now see that the sites with crazy url strings showing in the site: search are now showing homepage only for that query. So, at least for me, the url-only listings are gone, and I am left with homepage only= banned.
| 2:45 pm on Jun 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
My site is almost ready for another reinclusion request, except I am unsure about one last detail, affiliate links. I and many other people are unclear about Yahoo's policy towards affiliate links.
For many years, I have been using simple redirects to affiliate links, by adding something like Redirect /affiliatelink https:...affiliate link... to my .htaccess file, instead of using a direct affiliate link. A redirected link can be changed in an instant for the entire site, instead of having to be updated individually, as affiliate links do change. I experimented with hosting a copy of the affiliate sales page on my site which I am authorized to do (with a robots.txt exclusion) as an alternative to this technique, but maybe this is a bad idea. I guess it's a question of which technique is more ok with Yahoo.
| 8:00 pm on Jun 27, 2006 (gmt 0)|
The last time I submitted my 35 page site for reinclusion, I actually saw someone from Yahoo look through the site (from their IP). They looked at three pages, then left as soon as they hit the third page which contained a single affiliate link.
The site has never returned to the serps, and it is rejected from SiteMatch and mails go unanswered.
This tells me that they have a zero policy when it comes to AFF links, regardless of those affiliate sites which are doing well in the serps right now; a manual review might get them zapped in a heart beat, and you will not get back in.
This policy is a double standard since thousands of sites run Adsense or YPN. I see no harm in monetizing a site as long as the content provided is useful.
Historically, my visitors have conducted 2.3 page views on my site, on average. 83% of them go beyond the homepage, and my sales conversions (which Yahoo does not get to see) exceeds 12% on average. That tells me that they (the user) found my site useful enough to continue on past the homepage. Yet, Yahoo has "banned" it. Incidentally, out of the 35 pages of my site, only 3 of them have 2 affiliate links (total of 6 links sitewide).
I think Yahoo should let the users decide, based on these types of data, to the best of their ability.
| This 46 message thread spans 2 pages: 46 (  2 ) > > |