Is there a web 2.0 penalty now?

[argh11]

Op,
I also got de-indexed with 3 Web 2.0 links. I changed some content on my site and added a few high PR links and it came back after 2-3 weeks.

*You could do the same and also I would add at least 2 more articles if you can and definately change from the default theme.

I have only 1 450+ word article and default wordpress theme. Perhaps that's why?

 

[crzyyoungn]

Once I created a web2.0 and linked it to a website and a few hours later it was hacked. I think the web2.0 hacked my website.

 

[agente808]

@Jesse550
are you sure it's de-indexed and not just on page 100+ ?
(you checked with site:mydomain.com ?)

I would say that your problem is the ultra-thin site you have - default theme and 1 page of content? sounds like spam to me. - Your site danced up to #26 (freshness bonus) - then fell down to where it really belongs (nowhere).

Make a real site!
1. add legal pages (privacy policy, TOS, sitemap, contact page)
2. Change the default theme! Make it something nice looking
3. Add more content, and keep adding content - at least once a week if not daily.

....then you can worry about backlinks


@crzyyoungn

Once I created a web2.0 and linked it to a website and a few hours later it was hacked. I think the web2.0 hacked my website.

This just isn't how it works - a web2.0 can't hack your website, and just having a link to your site won't get it hacked - sounds like a coincidence.

 

[seontist]

Im more interested to ask EP how he creates 50K+ web 2.0, what software do you use...

 

[mohnikinsiz]

Im more interested to ask EP how he creates 50K+ web 2.0, what software do you use...

Well, It's not manual work - I can tell you that much!

It's a custom made tool, but I would be extremely interested in knowing how much he paid for it. If you want to come in and straight us out here EP that would be great!

 

[conrulez]

Well, It's not manual work - I can tell you that much!

It's a custom made tool, but I would be extremely interested in knowing how much he paid for it. If you want to come in and straight us out here EP that would be great!

I'm about 99% sure he uses ZENO and his own custom written bots. He has stated it before in the past. Everything you need to know, he's already told you...As far as what is working and what isn't. Doesn't mean he's always right, but he's obviously a "tad" bit smarter than the average bear. LOL

If you can't automate it, do it manually until you have the profits in hand to pay others to automate it or buy the tools you need to do it yourself. I'd bet the farm that once upon a time, he too did most of his linking manually. People want to go from zero to 60 in 1.2 seconds. That RARELY works for ANYONE.

Good luck,
Con

 

[artificial_genius]

I'm about 99% sure he uses ZENO and his own custom written bots. He has stated it before in the past. Everything you need to know, he's already told you...As far as what is working and what isn't. Doesn't mean he's always right, but he's obviously a "tad" bit smarter than the average bear. LOL

If you can't automate it, do it manually until you have the profits in hand to pay others to automate it or buy the tools you need to do it yourself. I'd bet the farm that once upon a time, he too did most of his linking manually. People want to go from zero to 60 in 1.2 seconds. That RARELY works for ANYONE.

Good luck,
Con

Agreed. If you are ever automating anything you should always do it several times manually first.

 

[spruitje]

Well, It's not manual work - I can tell you that much!

It's a custom made tool, but I would be extremely interested in knowing how much he paid for it. If you want to come in and straight us out here EP that would be great!

oh boy, here we go... @Expertpeon expect you inbox to be full this week

 

[Expertpeon]

I'm about 99% sure he uses ZENO and his own custom written bots. He has stated it before in the past. Everything you need to know, he's already told you...As far as what is working and what isn't. Doesn't mean he's always right, but he's obviously a "tad" bit smarter than the average bear. LOL

I have been inserting the disclaimer that I'm still working out this new algorithm a lot
It's tough to figure out, because there's little real guidance one way or another when analyzing top sites. A lot of the stuff ranking has fewer backlinks, but they are just a lot higher quality (manually generated at random places), paid footers/sidebars etc, homepage contextual links, or something along those lines.

Seems google is still vulnerable (in the short term) to paid links.

 

[codo3500]

I have been inserting the disclaimer that I'm still working out this new algorithm a lot
It's tough to figure out, because there's little real guidance one way or another when analyzing top sites. A lot of the stuff ranking has fewer backlinks, but they are just a lot higher quality (manually generated at random places), paid footers/sidebars etc, homepage contextual links, or something along those lines.

Seems google is still vulnerable (in the short term) to paid links.

Not sure if you're already doing this, but where you say 'manually generated at random places', I'd imagine much of this could be automated for some links, such as Web 2.0's. I've just started a process of heavily varying my links within my spun web 2.0's (using your spinning method), where I will have it randomly do one of the following:
- insert a paragraph dedicated to effectively saying "if you want a related site, then click here"
- a random paragraph which will insert my keyword 100% contextually while making sense from a grammatical standpoint
- insert a paragraph at the bottom of the article, saying "This article was by Martin Smith, from http://www.blah.com/"

As for footers and sidebars, you're obviously onto something with paid links being a huge factor.

Just quickly - with the huge amount of Web 2.0's you generate, do you keep track of a natural link pattern, i.e. only 30% of your links should be from web 2.0's (just a random figure)? If so, how do you go about generating enough diversity to keep it looking natural. I've got the web 2.0's nailed now - it's the link-type diversity I'm worrying about.

 

[LikeaSir]

Did I miss this, but Expertpeon, how are you making/registering 10,000 web 2.0s?

 

[shoaibahmad9999]

Hey ep, don't you think creating thousands upon thousands of blogs under free domains will piss off the blog owers? Proxy is the answer ?

 

[Expertpeon]

Hey ep, don't you think creating thousands upon thousands of blogs under free domains will piss off the blog owers? Proxy is the answer ?

I'm sure it pisses them off plenty. They just have a really hard time doing much about it.

 

[nano_bay]

Will it be index if you add 500+ Unique articles and doing some good manual seo work?

Thanks
ICoolfeathers

 

[ok888]

Add more articles and delete the Web 2.0 u created and see what happen

 

[Ulomok]

The most power comes from keeping your web 2.0 total links <40 from each domain and making EXTREMELY powerful PR generating tiers above them.

do you mean <40 links from ONE DOMEN or from ONE TYPE OF WEB 2.0? I mean in your case smthng1.blogspot and smthng2.blogspot are the same or different domens?

 

[VHSEO_Mike]

Phluid from BHW and I had a discussion about this a while ago and we are starting to think especially post penguin there is some kind of neg happening from spun web 2's. Originally we were thinking they would be just discounted (which would be the smart move by Google) however Google has been showing they aren't so smart lately and we could be getting some neg come through. I have found no proof as yet but I am keeping an open mind about it. Anyway from now on any tier 1 and tier 2 web 2's I do will not have spun content. Expensive, but hey I got some good sites that I don't want to damage so that is the way I will be moving in the future.

Agree that web 2.0s are on the G radar and could be next possible targets. We use a mix of unique and spun content but havent seen any change to suggest it is harmful as yet but looking at the sequence of Gs tasks so far, we do expect some of those rankings to get impacted.