Page is a not externally linkable
-- Google SEO News and Discussion
---- Short lapse in redirecting domain aliases creates ongoing problems
starfish7 - 11:53 am on Feb 7, 2013 (gmt 0) Crawl Stats -- ~100 pages /day
I'm completely at my wits end now. The links from the bogus domain just keep growing - now standing at 8,727...
Here's the set up according to Google's webmaster tools:
widget-shop.com (which was the domain that briefly ran side-by-side with www.widgetshop.co.uk):
Total Indexed -- 56 [good! - don't really want any]
Ever Crawled -- static at 4632
Change of Address -- www.widgetshop.co.uk
And here's our principal domain, www.widgetshop.co.uk:
Crawl Stats -- ~4000 pages/day
Total Indexed -- 4063 [sounds about right]
Links to your Site -- widget-shop.com, 8727 links
So what are these links? Here's what webmaster tools gives as an example of a link to www.widgetshop.co.uk
1309 links from widget-shop.com to /information/foo.html
[=> originating links]
page widget-shop.com/product/0001234.html via widget-shop.com/information/foo.html
page widget-shop.com/product/0001235.html via widget-shop.com/information/foo.html
page widget-shop.com/product/0001236.html via widget-shop.com/information/foo.html
So it looks to me like Google is seeing links on its cached pages, it knows they 301, and is saying "hey look at all these links to www.widgetshop.co.uk!" The problem is that for some reason it can't / won't take the originating pages out of its cache, despite the redirection request etc. and the fact that they all too 301 correctly.
I wouldn't mind so much if the number of links were slowly decreasing as Google realises that the originating page 301's now. But we get more and more every week, dominating our incoming links.
And the bit I haven't said is that we had a number of these co-domains, for instance widget-shop.co, widgetshop.com -- and all of them are behaving in exactly the same way as described above. In other words, my incoming links are totally dominated by domains I own 301'ing to my principal domain.
If this site did emoticons there'd be a very unhappy face.
Thread source:: http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4539883.htm
Brought to you by WebmasterWorld: http://www.webmasterworld.com