Unable to get site reincluded in the Google index

[errorsamac]

I've got a weird domain that I've been fighting with to get reincluded in the Google index. Years ago (2003), someone else owned example.com which is a popular holiday and they made it an adult website. They also linked to it from their other adult properties using the main keyword "widgets" in the anchor text. At the time, this wass clearly something Google wouldn't want to rank for the holiday when people searched for it, so I can see why it would be penalized.

Over a year ago, we purchased the domain and turned it in to a real on-topic website focusing on the holiday. After many re-inclusion requests, some media coverage/links, and hundreds of other quality links (thanks to the media coverage), the site remained penalized.

Discouraged, we decided to start over and remove all content from the website completely. Right now the domain has a static HTML Coming Soon page with a single paragraph of text and it is not optimized for the keyword (which is also the domain name) at all. I filed a new reinclusion request, gave the entire history of the domain and explained that we purchased the domain and cleaned up all of the old content that the previous owner had. Google said that they've processed the reinclusion request but I'm not seeing any change in the positioning of the site. In fact, I don't really expect this site to rank for anything since it's just a coming soon page, but it would be nice for it to not be the very last result for once. Regardless of the search, it's always at the very end of the indexed even if the search string does not contain "widgets" in it.

I am really at a loss for what I should do next with this domain. I am afraid this domain name might be in some legacy/manual filter that Google used years ago since it's been penalized for so long. If that's the case, maybe it's not even possible to get this domain reincluded? Ultimately, I'd really just love to know what the issue is with this domain and if it will ever be included in the index. Any thoughts?

[tedster]

Did your reconsideration requests include the fact that you were a new owner, had published all new content, and were perfectly willing to be "reset to zero" so that any previous links from the dark side would not affect your site? Also, I assume that you are not reusing any legacy URLs except for the home page.

[hasimsg]

Do you rank well in yahoo or bing?

IMHO, you shouldn't delete all your content.You already have lots of quality backlinks.

I have site that generate most traffic (around 75%) from backlinks and direct visit. My other site generate most traffic from social media (facebook, twitter, etc.). Another site get most traffic from yahoo SE (can you imagine that).

Not listed in one SE doesn't mean end of the world.

Just my 2 cents.

[internetheaven]

Not listed in one SE doesn't mean end of the world.

Depends on whether you're happy to be without Google traffic ... I wouldn't be, even though I'm not totally reliant on them for my business.

[hasimsg]

It's good if you can have traffics from major SE. But If it's not, you don't have to remove all your hard worked contents. In fact, my personal thought, it will make things worst -especially if those contents already exposed in media or ranked well in other SEs.

Like I said before, there are many other sources of traffic to explore.

At the end, it's back to your site purpose, to serve and give benefit for real human or one spesific SE.

[AndyA]

I think I'd add the content back. Google will never figure out the site is different if there's nothing there. I'd make sure any old URLs for that site that might still be floating around out there don't go to any actual pages on your site.

Make sure your server returns a proper error page.

Google seems to be slow to add new pages these days. Time was my new pages were indexed within a day or two, now it takes over a month. Google is just slow. Yahoo and Bing get new pages in about a week on my site. If Google is like this with other sites, that tells me that Google's index is stale.

I have found pages on other sites that aren't listed in Google, and they are quality sites. I found them because I've switched mostly to Bing the last couple of months.

[TheMadScientist]

I'd move the content to another domain and make the penalized domain a single page of content linking to the new domain.

I think Matt Cutts mentioned somewhere (PubCon?) buying penalized domains is not a good idea and they might not ever be included. I think the short paraphrased version is: If a new domain starts at 0 and a penalized domain starts at -100 why would you ever want to start at -100 when you could start at 0?

IMO You're at a disadvantage with a new domain, but most of your time and work will most likely eventually pay off. With a penalized domain you're playing the lottery with your time and efforts... An hour ($1) here or there isn't a big deal, but hours ($100 a drawing) starts to add up in a hurry. Personally, I'd go with the more sure thing and put a page of content on the old site, link it to a new domain, stop trying to get it re-included and build a quality site on another domain, realizing the old penalized site is probably not going to rank and if it does someday it's a bonus.

[Ma2T]

In your google webmaster tools area, under the section for your site, does it have a red banner saying "Violation..etc" ?

I think you can use that to tell if your request was successful or not.

[errorsamac]

Thanks for all of the responses.

@tedster - Yes, the reinclusion requests mentioned that we were new owners, that we changed the website and removed all of the previous content, and that we were willing to be reset to zero. No luck. :( And yes, we are not re-using an legacy URLs except the homepage (/).

@hasimsg - We rank ok in Yahoo (lots of spam websites clutter our keywords) and I think that's due to a Yahoo Directory link that we have. We're also in the Best of the Web dir and a 2-3 other ones. All of the directory links were obtained by us after we purchased the domain (there are no legacy links except the adult ones which still point to the domain).

@Ma2T - There was never a red banner saying the site is penalized. You can definitely tell that it is penalized however.

@TheMadScientist - The Matt Cutts PubCon comment is really interesting. When we purchased the domain name, we knew it didn't rank at all but believed it was due to off-topic (adult) content. After removing that, getting Yahoo/BOTW directory links, getting other natural links, being picked up by some press, we assumed that we would be reincluded in the main index. However, it just didn't happen. Maybe we started at -100 and right now we're at -12 and just need more time/links to start at 0 again? Of course, if we do get back to 0, it would be nice if the -100 penalty could be lifted and Google would truly review the site and see that it's a legit/white-hat website with on-topic content and that all violations/adult content are removed.

I agree that is was a mistake to remove the content on the site and put up a "coming soon" page. Moving forward, I plan to just put up a great looking site with great content and continue w/reinclusion requests every couple of months. The reason we're sticking with this domain for now is that it's a brandable domain name and it would suck to just throw it away because it doesn't rank on Google. The frustrating part of it is that our competition ends up getting all of the natural links and press because the only way to discover our site right now is via "word of mouth".

Thanks for all the help/advice. I'll report back if the domain ever gets reincluded.

[TheMadScientist]

What did you do with the old URLs?

Did you remove the content from them and let them 404?
Did you serve a 410 Gone?
Did you redirect them?

I would guess you're going to have to build up quite a bit of history with the domain being 'clean' to prove you're not going to use it for the same type thing as soon as it gets back in before it's going to be re-included... I can honestly understand why they don't want to include it, even more so since it's a popular holiday name.