Forum Moderators: open
Here is the problem. In past we created sites such as city1-widget.com and city2-widget.com. Following a Yahoo update those sites got dumped by yahoo, after good ranking, and we wrote to yahoo and they said make a supersite where all those sites are consolidated. We did that even though that meant alot of content got duplicated but kept the old sites since some did regain some ranking and cross linked it.
The supersite is doing extremely well in google but in yahoo the new national site has no ranking, but the old city centered sites have in some case second page type ranking. We are convinced that the best course is to use 301 redirects to purge out the old sites and hope this ends a duplicate content and cross linking ban, which we can only assume and hope the rankings for the old site get transferred in some cases.
But is it enough to just end the cross linking? Will Yahoo remember the cross linking to the new national site and keep it banned?
[edited by: martinibuster at 9:36 pm (utc) on Sep. 20, 2005]
[edit reason] Added paragraph breaks. [/edit]
Why didn't you get rid of the mini-sites, though? It seems like you took Yahoo's advice half-way by building the integrated site while maintaining the existing sites they didn't like.
Btw, why didn't they like the mini-sites? Was it excessive linking between them, or was it a template similarity issue, where the difference between content wasn't enough to call it original?
however you dont seem to be saying your sites were'nt banned since you say your mini sites are ranked. Sounds like a filter and not a no-hope-forget-it-and-move-on-ban.
And yeah, why keep the minisites? For Google? Sounds a bit like cake and eat type thing. You seem to be saying 301 from mini to super. Seems a sure way to make sure any legacy negative affects from the mini sites are passed to the supersite if thats what you are saying.
Its abit confusing cause you talk about a supersite and a national site, are they the same thing?
Dump the feeder sites and focus your resources on the main site. Make your content unique and plentiful, get honest links and you'll be fine in Yahoo and every other engine.
Although the one way links are hard to "go out and get", as they either happen on their own because your site is so rich with content that others want to link, or they don't. But I was also referring to reciprocal links. Do you think reciprocal links are bad?
Because they regard anything else as spam.
Oh brother...
cause the idea of telling someone to get links and then saying they cant/should not be harvested in anyway doesnt make sense..thats why im saying they regard any harvesting as spam...how do you get links and have no input in those links?..
sure you put up content that people want to link to..but thats taken as obvious...when i hear someone say get links i assume they mean harvesting..
<added for my own amusment>sister!</added for my own amusment>
However it seems to me that the egregious rank manipulators who attach huge multi-category reciprocal link directories to their websites are the ones that piss off the search engineers most of all. One of them told me he saw no basic use for that except for rank manipulation.
As far as ye olde basic recip campaign, that still seems to work.
What I am wondering is, is it normal for slurp to keep crawling the site aggressively even though they have a manual ban on the site?
And why am I seeing these other yahoo spiders never seen them in logs before.
YahooSeeker/1.2
YahooSeeker/CafeKelsa
YahooSeeker/CafeKelsa-dev
YahooSeeker/1.0
As far as ye olde basic recip campaign, that still seems to work.
agreed. Except for anyone trying to come out of a ban theres no apparent threshold, you just cant have one. So if the point of this thread is about unbanning then you simply cant 'get' links if you think the eyes on you.
What I am wondering is, is it normal for slurp to keep crawling the site aggressively even though they have a manual ban on the site?
yes its normal for them to crawl, but not agressively. The giveaway is normally the robots to actual pages ratio of crawling.
The giveaway is normally the robots to actual pages ratio of crawling
That's exactly what I see. Almost a 1:1 relationship for robots:page.
a sign of reinclusion?
ps I never submitted it for reinclusion, I figured it was useless.
If I still get some traffic from Yahoo am I not banned?
I get 4 or 5 pages crawled day, and it is also one to one. Robot page then one other page.
I was on the first page of Yahoo for most of the keyword/pages on my site. Then one day I was gone. I still show up on page 2 for a couple of my pages. But if I do a site:domain.com all of my pages show up. I still get a little traffic from Yahoo when the searches are very specific. Any idea why this would happpen?
Any comments/suggestions would be appreciated.
Thanks!
I get 4 or 5 pages crawled day, and it is also one to one. Robot page then one other page.
This is the same exact pattern that I see. Nearly a 1: 1 robot hit:page slurped.
generally if you do a site:www.domain.com search on your site in yahoo and only your domain root comes up, you're banned.
Slurp has been slowly spidering my site since, but I understand that doesn't mean anything good or bad.
egregious rank manipulators who attach huge multi-category reciprocal link directories to their websites are the ones that piss off the search engineers most of all.
This, I hope is the reason one my sites is banned in Yahoo. Although there are possibly only 20 links in this system, what the system represents in yahoo's eyes is what is causing the ban.
I have contacted Yahoo and got a canned automated response with about 10 possible reasons.
When I try spider the otherwise clean site, the spiders seem to be running loops with the recip software.
Let's hope this removes the problem....
- Cloaking (showing crawlers deceptive content about a site)
- Massive domain interlinking- Use of affiliate programs without the addition of substantial unique content
- Use of reciprocal link programs (aka "link farms")
- Hidden text
- Excessive keyword repetition
Hmmm, the only thing I am possibly guilty on is the "reciprocal link programs ".
