1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Why a network didn't get deindexed entirely?

Discussion in 'Black Hat SEO' started by Netvertiser, Dec 2, 2015.

  1. Netvertiser

    Netvertiser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    7
    A network of 120 ministites got 90 of them axed in Google. Deindexed.

    They were all:
    - using the same (true) PBN
    - using the same template/setup
    - whatever way you look at the minisites you can find a fingerprint that ties them together. be it mostly same type of ads, same tracking javascript code (not GA, but nonetheless), same specific type of info in the <head> tag, same amount of ads, mostly same text in ads, same amount of content, same type of outgoing links.
    - hosted on 4 hosts, spread over 30 different IPs. so 4 minisites per IP, 30 ministes per host.

    The fun part:
    - a few sites that got deindexed haven't had incoming links (from that PBN) for a year. you would think maybe someone scraped them and since they had no incoming link power, they got hit because scraped copies had more power. yet they were deindexed along with many the rest that weren't scraped yet. so it wasn't duplicates.
    - whatever way I try to analyze what happened, panda, penguin, hosts, links, overoptimization, content, same template... whenever I find a reason that sticks out at one minisite that got deindexed I then find a minisite with the same characteristics that didn't get deindexed. it kept the ranks and all.

    I thought it was penguin, but then it hit me there are minisites that had NO links for a year and they got deindexed. ok so it wasn't penguin. I thought panda. ok, maybe so, but I was thinking if it was panda they should get axed for that long ago (some of these were 1.5 years old!). then it hit me there are 30 minisites that didn't get deindexed that use the same setup. so it wasn't panda.

    Then I thought Google went after the network of minisites. someone must have reported a minisite and spam team hit it and other ministes having the same fingerprint. But then 75% success rate is ridiculous, especially when the network has a clear fingerprint. They should have hit all of them. 100%.

    So what's the catch? Any ideas?

    P.S.: one other interesting thing:
    the minisites that had links removed from the PBN a year ago and also weren't updated for a year kept some ranks on Google. they were gradually losing them, but still traffic from Google was there. For a YEAR! Majority of those now got deindexed.
     
  2. accelerator_dd

    accelerator_dd Jr. VIP Jr. VIP

    Joined:
    May 14, 2010
    Messages:
    2,448
    Likes Received:
    1,010
    Occupation:
    SEO
    Location:
    IM Wonderland
    Either Google didn't pick up those footprints you mentioned or it left a few domains live as honeypots.

    I'm betting it's the first though.
     
  3. Netvertiser

    Netvertiser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    7
    Google can't be this bad at connecting the dots. 75% success rate is too poor with this one. It's like you used the same template in WP, same amount of articles, same amount of text, same ads, same backlink sources. If you check that you are done. It's detected and killed. Yet no. 25% were left standing.

    Honeypot for what reason? These 25% don't reveal anything more than those 75% wouldn't.
     
  4. Netvertiser

    Netvertiser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    7
    I was thinking some competitor uncovered these 75% and reported them all to Google, while Google didn't attempt to uncover the whole network and just banned due low quality content (too many ads - 1 ad per 100 words of text). If Google really went after them, they would all be gone. It appears as if some low level G reviewer just selected all and clicked "deindex" button without any effort to uncover more. But does G operate like that? Well, yes, they do, but for a small network of 90 minisites that isn't really sticking out, that got like 40k daily uniques?
     
  5. dronez

    dronez Newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2015
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    1
    May be someone reported specific number of links.
     
  6. Netvertiser

    Netvertiser Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    7
    In that case you check where the links come from. You identify a PBN. There was nothing else used to link from. PBN is clear blackhat. You open a page, check the source code and it's in your face.

    Then you try to check PBN's footprint and with very little effor you quickly identity the whole PBN. You then compare minisites linked from that PBN and realize they scream the same footprint. You ban all minisites and ban the PBN. Done.

    Yet that is not what happened.