dunivan - 3:16 pm on Oct 10, 2011 (gmt 0)
Hi Dunivan, are you saying that you actually have a site that has completely recovered from panda (on one of the panda run dates) where the only change made to the site was to identify poor quality articles and to rewrite them, or were other changes made to the site as well?
None of my client sites have had panda issues. I have however helped other seo's recover using those methods. All that was done was refinement of site architecture, and a rewriting of low quality content which was id'd using bounce-rate/visitors ratio (e.g., a page that got 100 visits but had a 93% bounce rate is probably low quality)
If so are you 100% sure it was panda issue (daft question perhaps but a lot of changes seem to be attributed to panda nowadays even outside the dates when panda is being run)?
It was panda, organic google search was down 80-85%
I am aware that google suggest this, and it's pretty much what I'm doing myself (except I'm using bounce rate along with time on site and article size to identify low quality articles rather than just bounce rate), but I haven't heard of it actually working for anyone...
This is where site architecture comes in, google believes panda is right all of the time, and won't recrawl what they hit until the next iteration at least. Moving the content to a sub-domain gets it recrawled and you can see your work if its better or worse, this is based off hub-page theory. I don't think that is why they show recovery, but it helps seperate the wheat from the chaff so to speak.