I have been working on building some sites with the .info domain
extension. These are legit sites for various topics that I enjoy and
are not adsense or affiliate driven. I purchased them mainly because
of the cost.
I had several of them that were doing well in the SERPS until a few
weeks ago with the Google update. All of them have been deindexed
now.
Did Google just do a massive .info deindexing?
I know that spammers and such use them because of the cheap cost
associated with buying tons of .info names for spamming and creating
"crap" sites. Is there any way to get them reindexed? Do I have to
ask for a reinclusion or should I just wait it out and see if they are
naturally reindexed?
Like I said, these are legit content sites and I don't think it is
fair to just blanket the .info's with a ban or deindexing, although I
can understand the need to control the integrity of the serps
database.
There's no reason and no way Google would treat .info domains any
differently than any others.
Whatever it is you are experiencing has nothing to do with the domains
being .info .
The problems will have to be either of a technical nature, e.g.
1) badly set up DNS
2) bad server responses
3) badly built website, broken code, broken navigation
4) lack of indexable content, duplicate content, unoriginal content
taken from elsewhere like through feeds without any extra of your own
5) unoptimized, unfocused pages
6) spam content (hidden content, hidden links), badware on your site
(maybe due to getting hacked), non-robot proofed paid links, links
tied in to link exchange schemes
Only situations like those in 6) would result in actual penalties,
leading in extreme cases to banning, all others will simply be poor
performance due to having a poorly built website, in other words, not
deserving anything more.
So take your pick and do your own trouble shooting. Or give us some
urls to be able to offer more precise help. You can put the urls in
your profile.
Thanks for the information. I just prefer to not put them out there
as they are niche websites that I am using as an eBay affiliate.
There is no hidden code or anything like that on them. They are all
up and running properly and I am getting a lot of traffic from yahoo
and msn, so the DNS/server should not be an issue.
I had read and heard from several other people that they also suffered
the same fate with all of their .info domains as well. I personally
know these people and they are not doing anything against the TOS of
Google.
As for the content, each site and page is optimized for that specific
item or range of items. All content is unique and not spammy in
nature.
If it was just one site or a few, I might understand, however all of
my .info domains are gone from the serps. The funny thing is that
they have also gone from a PR n/a to a PR 0 in the process.
Do you think this could just be a temporary cleaning of the .info
domains from the serps? How long should I wait to ask for
reinclusion, or should I have to?
Thanks for the pointers too, I need to double check my server logs and
stuff as well.
> There's no reason and no way Google would treat .info domains any
> differently than any others.
> Whatever it is you are experiencing has nothing to do with the domains
> being .info .
> The problems will have to be either of a technical nature, e.g.
> 1) badly set up DNS
> 2) bad server responses
> 3) badly built website, broken code, broken navigation
> 4) lack of indexable content, duplicate content, unoriginal content
> taken from elsewhere like through feeds without any extra of your own
> 5) unoptimized, unfocused pages
> 6) spam content (hidden content, hidden links), badware on your site
> (maybe due to getting hacked), non-robot proofed paid links, links
> tied in to link exchange schemes
> Only situations like those in 6) would result in actual penalties,
> leading in extreme cases to banning, all others will simply be poor
> performance due to having a poorly built website, in other words, not
> deserving anything more.
> So take your pick and do your own trouble shooting. Or give us some
> urls to be able to offer more precise help. You can put the urls in
> your profile.
> On May 31, 9:23 am, engine102 wrote:
> > I have quite a few, but I prefer not to give them out.
There's been quite a bit of chatter about this issue, and I think I
did see some messages saying that this was being fixed, but
interesting all the same.
One reason why Google might treat .info differently is that at $1.99
they have become the TLD of choice for spammers.
> There's no reason and no way Google would treat .info domains any
> differently than any others.
> Whatever it is you are experiencing has nothing to do with the domains
> being .info .
> The problems will have to be either of a technical nature, e.g.
> 1) badly set up DNS
> 2) bad server responses
> 3) badly built website, broken code, broken navigation
> 4) lack of indexable content, duplicate content, unoriginal content
> taken from elsewhere like through feeds without any extra of your own
> 5) unoptimized, unfocused pages
> 6) spam content (hidden content, hidden links), badware on your site
> (maybe due to getting hacked), non-robot proofed paid links, links
> tied in to link exchange schemes
> Only situations like those in 6) would result in actual penalties,
> leading in extreme cases to banning, all others will simply be poor
> performance due to having a poorly built website, in other words, not
> deserving anything more.
> So take your pick and do your own trouble shooting. Or give us some
> urls to be able to offer more precise help. You can put the urls in
> your profile.
> On May 31, 9:23 am, engine102 wrote:
> > I have quite a few, but I prefer not to give them out.
I completely agree Red, and that was my main concern that with the
cheap price of .info domains, sometimes as low as .99 each, that
spammers love them. I purchased them because they are cheap also, but
I didn't want to get mixed in with spammers.
> There's been quite a bit of chatter about this issue, and I think I
> did see some messages saying that this was being fixed, but
> interesting all the same.
> One reason why Google might treat .info differently is that at $1.99
> they have become the TLD of choice for spammers.
> Rgds
> Richard
> On May 31, 2:47 pm, webado wrote:
> > There's no reason and no way Google would treat .info domains any
> > differently than any others.
> > Whatever it is you are experiencing has nothing to do with the domains
> > being .info .
> > The problems will have to be either of a technical nature, e.g.
> > 1) badly set up DNS
> > 2) bad server responses
> > 3) badly built website, broken code, broken navigation
> > 4) lack of indexable content, duplicate content, unoriginal content
> > taken from elsewhere like through feeds without any extra of your own
> > 5) unoptimized, unfocused pages
> > 6) spam content (hidden content, hidden links), badware on your site
> > (maybe due to getting hacked), non-robot proofed paid links, links
> > tied in to link exchange schemes
> > Only situations like those in 6) would result in actual penalties,
> > leading in extreme cases to banning, all others will simply be poor
> > performance due to having a poorly built website, in other words, not
> > deserving anything more.
> > So take your pick and do your own trouble shooting. Or give us some
> > urls to be able to offer more precise help. You can put the urls in
> > your profile.
> > On May 31, 9:23 am, engine102 wrote:
> > > I have quite a few, but I prefer not to give them out.
> Thanks for the information. I just prefer to not put them out there
> as they are niche websites that I am using as an eBay affiliate.
> There is no hidden code or anything like that on them. They are all
> up and running properly and I am getting a lot of traffic from yahoo
> and msn, so the DNS/server should not be an issue.
> I had read and heard from several other people that they also suffered
> the same fate with all of their .info domains as well. I personally
> know these people and they are not doing anything against the TOS of
> Google.
> As for the content, each site and page is optimized for that specific
> item or range of items. All content is unique and not spammy in
> nature.
> If it was just one site or a few, I might understand, however all of
> my .info domains are gone from the serps. The funny thing is that
> they have also gone from a PR n/a to a PR 0 in the process.
> Do you think this could just be a temporary cleaning of the .info
> domains from the serps? How long should I wait to ask for
> reinclusion, or should I have to?
> Thanks for the pointers too, I need to double check my server logs and
> stuff as well.
> On May 31, 9:47 am, webado wrote:
> > There's no reason and no way Google would treat .info domains any
> > differently than any others.
> > Whatever it is you are experiencing has nothing to do with the domains
> > being .info .
> > The problems will have to be either of a technical nature, e.g.
> > 1) badly set up DNS
> > 2) bad server responses
> > 3) badly built website, broken code, broken navigation
> > 4) lack of indexable content, duplicate content, unoriginal content
> > taken from elsewhere like through feeds without any extra of your own
> > 5) unoptimized, unfocused pages
> > 6) spam content (hidden content, hidden links), badware on your site
> > (maybe due to getting hacked), non-robot proofed paid links, links
> > tied in to link exchange schemes
> > Only situations like those in 6) would result in actual penalties,
> > leading in extreme cases to banning, all others will simply be poor
> > performance due to having a poorly built website, in other words, not
> > deserving anything more.
> > So take your pick and do your own trouble shooting. Or give us some
> > urls to be able to offer more precise help. You can put the urls in
> > your profile.
> > On May 31, 9:23 am, engine102 wrote:
> > > I have quite a few, but I prefer not to give them out.
I understand that PR isn't a big todo about anything, however for them
to disappear from the serps and get a PR 0 from a PR n/a I wasn't sure
if it meant anything.
Thanks for all of the links! Wow, that's some great stuff. As for
validation, all of my sites validate as I always make sure the (x)html
and CSS validates (pet peeve of mine) and that they work in all
*modern* browsers... ;)
There is no copied content on any of them, it is all original
content. I haven't linked out from any of them to anything else, and
I don't see any "bad" links pointing in on any of them.
The domains are registered with goDaddy and server DNS is pointing to
my server. I also have other domains on my server and they are all
ok, so it's not an IP issue with my server. The keyword percentage is
not an issue as there is none of the typical "spammer" keyword
stuffing, percentage of keywords is under 5% easily.
What should I look for with the navigation issues? All of my internal
links point to where they are supposed to and are working. Any tips
on the server responses of things to be looking for there?
> > Thanks for the information. I just prefer to not put them out there
> > as they are niche websites that I am using as an eBay affiliate.
> > There is no hidden code or anything like that on them. They are all
> > up and running properly and I am getting a lot of traffic from yahoo
> > and msn, so the DNS/server should not be an issue.
> > I had read and heard from several other people that they also suffered
> > the same fate with all of their .info domains as well. I personally
> > know these people and they are not doing anything against the TOS of
> > Google.
> > As for the content, each site and page is optimized for that specific
> > item or range of items. All content is unique and not spammy in
> > nature.
> > If it was just one site or a few, I might understand, however all of
> > my .info domains are gone from the serps. The funny thing is that
> > they have also gone from a PR n/a to a PR 0 in the process.
> > Do you think this could just be a temporary cleaning of the .info
> > domains from the serps? How long should I wait to ask for
> > reinclusion, or should I have to?
> > Thanks for the pointers too, I need to double check my server logs and
> > stuff as well.
> > On May 31, 9:47 am, webado wrote:
> > > There's no reason and no way Google would treat .info domains any
> > > differently than any others.
> > > Whatever it is you are experiencing has nothing to do with the domains
> > > being .info .
> > > The problems will have to be either of a technical nature, e.g.
> > > 1) badly set up DNS
> > > 2) bad server responses
> > > 3) badly built website, broken code, broken navigation
> > > 4) lack of indexable content, duplicate content, unoriginal content
> > > taken from elsewhere like through feeds without any extra of your own
> > > 5) unoptimized, unfocused pages
> > > 6) spam content (hidden content, hidden links), badware on your site
> > > (maybe due to getting hacked), non-robot proofed paid links, links
> > > tied in to link exchange schemes
> > > Only situations like those in 6) would result in actual penalties,
> > > leading in extreme cases to banning, all others will simply be poor
> > > performance due to having a poorly built website, in other words, not
> > > deserving anything more.
> > > So take your pick and do your own trouble shooting. Or give us some
> > > urls to be able to offer more precise help. You can put the urls in
> > > your profile.
> > > On May 31, 9:23 am, engine102 wrote:
> > > > I have quite a few, but I prefer not to give them out.
OK, thsi leaves canoncial domain issues: www vs non www . You need to
pick one form and 301 redirect urls from the other form to their
counterparts on the other form. On Apache you do tt in the .htaccess
file.
The server has to return a 404 or 410 for a non-existant file, not a
302 redirection to an error page, nor a 500 or anything else. If you
opt to redirect to an equivalent page, then a 301 should be the
response.
Using Xenu you can see how your navigation works - there should not be
any broken links, nor any redirections at all and all internal urls
shoudl use the same canonical form (not mixing www and non www).
Finally concernign the cntent of the sites, you have to honestly think
whether it's usefule for yru visitors to have multiple domains or
shuodl this all be one domain. If you built several websites for
essentially the same stuff, this is looking like a domain farm, all
will get punished.
Run by us how the ebay affiliate thing works though. This could well
be a source of problems.
> I understand that PR isn't a big todo about anything, however for them
> to disappear from the serps and get a PR 0 from a PR n/a I wasn't sure
> if it meant anything.
> Thanks for all of the links! Wow, that's some great stuff. As for
> validation, all of my sites validate as I always make sure the (x)html
> and CSS validates (pet peeve of mine) and that they work in all
> *modern* browsers... ;)
> There is no copied content on any of them, it is all original
> content. I haven't linked out from any of them to anything else, and
> I don't see any "bad" links pointing in on any of them.
> The domains are registered with goDaddy and server DNS is pointing to
> my server. I also have other domains on my server and they are all
> ok, so it's not an IP issue with my server. The keyword percentage is
> not an issue as there is none of the typical "spammer" keyword
> stuffing, percentage of keywords is under 5% easily.
> What should I look for with the navigation issues? All of my internal
> links point to where they are supposed to and are working. Any tips
> on the server responses of things to be looking for there?
> Thanks for all the help!
> On May 31, 10:46 am, webado wrote:
> > Visible toolbar PR is not relevant, not an issue.
> > Unless you run a battery of tests, you cnanot infer that because you
> > get traffic from A all must be OK.
> > > Thanks for the information. I just prefer to not put them out there
> > > as they are niche websites that I am using as an eBay affiliate.
> > > There is no hidden code or anything like that on them. They are all
> > > up and running properly and I am getting a lot of traffic from yahoo
> > > and msn, so the DNS/server should not be an issue.
> > > I had read and heard from several other people that they also suffered
> > > the same fate with all of their .info domains as well. I personally
> > > know these people and they are not doing anything against the TOS of
> > > Google.
> > > As for the content, each site and page is optimized for that specific
> > > item or range of items. All content is unique and not spammy in
> > > nature.
> > > If it was just one site or a few, I might understand, however all of
> > > my .info domains are gone from the serps. The funny thing is that
> > > they have also gone from a PR n/a to a PR 0 in the process.
> > > Do you think this could just be a temporary cleaning of the .info
> > > domains from the serps? How long should I wait to ask for
> > > reinclusion, or should I have to?
> > > Thanks for the pointers too, I need to double check my server logs and
> > > stuff as well.
> > > On May 31, 9:47 am, webado wrote:
> > > > There's no reason and no way Google would treat .info domains any
> > > > differently than any others.
> > > > Whatever it is you are experiencing has nothing to do with the domains
> > > > being .info .
> > > > The problems will have to be either of a technical nature, e.g.
> > > > 1) badly set up DNS
> > > > 2) bad server responses
> > > > 3) badly built website, broken code, broken navigation
> > > > 4) lack of indexable content, duplicate content, unoriginal content
> > > > taken from elsewhere like through feeds without any extra of your own
> > > > 5) unoptimized, unfocused pages
> > > > 6) spam content (hidden content, hidden links), badware on your site
> > > > (maybe due to getting hacked), non-robot proofed paid links, links
> > > > tied in to link exchange schemes
> > > > Only situations like those in 6) would result in actual penalties,
> > > > leading in extreme cases to banning, all others will simply be poor
> > > > performance due to having a poorly built website, in other words, not
> > > > deserving anything more.
> > > > So take your pick and do your own trouble shooting. Or give us some
> > > > urls to be able to offer more precise help. You can put the urls in
> > > > your profile.
> > > > On May 31, 9:23 am, engine102 wrote:
> > > > > I have quite a few, but I prefer not to give them out.
> > > > > On May 31, 8:31 am, Robbo wrote:
> > > > > > What is your URL?- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Just to reiterate, I wouldn't assume .info domains as such are or have
been in any way targeted fro exclusion.
It's more likely that the .info dns resolution is or was broken
somehow.
The idea that just because they are cheap to acquire may only be an
indirect cause - such as causing DNS problems with a big influx
of .info registrations in a short time.
The parent nameservers are provided by a0.info.afilias-nst.info
through a9.info.afilias-nst.info , and they may well experience
problems at busy registration times.
> I understand that PR isn't a big todo about anything, however for them
> to disappear from the serps and get a PR 0 from a PR n/a I wasn't sure
> if it meant anything.
> Thanks for all of the links! Wow, that's some great stuff. As for
> validation, all of my sites validate as I always make sure the (x)html
> and CSS validates (pet peeve of mine) and that they work in all
> *modern* browsers... ;)
> There is no copied content on any of them, it is all original
> content. I haven't linked out from any of them to anything else, and
> I don't see any "bad" links pointing in on any of them.
> The domains are registered with goDaddy and server DNS is pointing to
> my server. I also have other domains on my server and they are all
> ok, so it's not an IP issue with my server. The keyword percentage is
> not an issue as there is none of the typical "spammer" keyword
> stuffing, percentage of keywords is under 5% easily.
> What should I look for with the navigation issues? All of my internal
> links point to where they are supposed to and are working. Any tips
> on the server responses of things to be looking for there?
> Thanks for all the help!
> On May 31, 10:46 am, webado wrote:
> > Visible toolbar PR is not relevant, not an issue.
> > Unless you run a battery of tests, you cnanot infer that because you
> > get traffic from A all must be OK.
> > > Thanks for the information. I just prefer to not put them out there
> > > as they are niche websites that I am using as an eBay affiliate.
> > > There is no hidden code or anything like that on them. They are all
> > > up and running properly and I am getting a lot of traffic from yahoo
> > > and msn, so the DNS/server should not be an issue.
> > > I had read and heard from several other people that they also suffered
> > > the same fate with all of their .info domains as well. I personally
> > > know these people and they are not doing anything against the TOS of
> > > Google.
> > > As for the content, each site and page is optimized for that specific
> > > item or range of items. All content is unique and not spammy in
> > > nature.
> > > If it was just one site or a few, I might understand, however all of
> > > my .info domains are gone from the serps. The funny thing is that
> > > they have also gone from a PR n/a to a PR 0 in the process.
> > > Do you think this could just be a temporary cleaning of the .info
> > > domains from the serps? How long should I wait to ask for
> > > reinclusion, or should I have to?
> > > Thanks for the pointers too, I need to double check my server logs and
> > > stuff as well.
> > > On May 31, 9:47 am, webado wrote:
> > > > There's no reason and no way Google would treat .info domains any
> > > > differently than any others.
> > > > Whatever it is you are experiencing has nothing to do with the domains
> > > > being .info .
> > > > The problems will have to be either of a technical nature, e.g.
> > > > 1) badly set up DNS
> > > > 2) bad server responses
> > > > 3) badly built website, broken code, broken navigation
> > > > 4) lack of indexable content, duplicate content, unoriginal content
> > > > taken from elsewhere like through feeds without any extra of your own
> > > > 5) unoptimized, unfocused pages
> > > > 6) spam content (hidden content, hidden links), badware on your site
> > > > (maybe due to getting hacked), non-robot proofed paid links, links
> > > > tied in to link exchange schemes
> > > > Only situations like those in 6) would result in actual penalties,
> > > > leading in extreme cases to banning, all others will simply be poor
> > > > performance due to having a poorly built website, in other words, not
> > > > deserving anything more.
> > > > So take your pick and do your own trouble shooting. Or give us some
> > > > urls to be able to offer more precise help. You can put the urls in
> > > > your profile.
> > > > On May 31, 9:23 am, engine102 wrote:
> > > > > I have quite a few, but I prefer not to give them out.
> > > > > On May 31, 8:31 am, Robbo wrote:
> > > > > > What is your URL?- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Ok, thanks for all of that info...now to fully understand it all!
lol...
I have set the preferred domain in webmaster tools to show without the
WWW, but didn't think about making sure it was in .htaccess.
As for the eBay affiliate, each domain is focused on a different
product or niche. I am using software that pulls the RSS feed from
eBay and then styling it for my "products" on my sites. There are
lots of other people doing the same thing, so I don't think it is an
issue with that.
Is there a way I can contact you privately to get your opinion about a
site and have you review it instead of posting the URL here?
> Just to reiterate, I wouldn't assume .info domains as such are or have
> been in any way targeted fro exclusion.
> It's more likely that the .info dns resolution is or was broken
> somehow.
> The idea that just because they are cheap to acquire may only be an
> indirect cause - such as causing DNS problems with a big influx
> of .info registrations in a short time.
> The parent nameservers are provided by a0.info.afilias-nst.info
> through a9.info.afilias-nst.info , and they may well experience
> problems at busy registration times.
> On May 31, 10:51 am, engine102 wrote:
> > Webado,
> > I understand that PR isn't a big todo about anything, however for them
> > to disappear from the serps and get a PR 0 from a PR n/a I wasn't sure
> > if it meant anything.
> > Thanks for all of the links! Wow, that's some great stuff. As for
> > validation, all of my sites validate as I always make sure the (x)html
> > and CSS validates (pet peeve of mine) and that they work in all
> > *modern* browsers... ;)
> > There is no copied content on any of them, it is all original
> > content. I haven't linked out from any of them to anything else, and
> > I don't see any "bad" links pointing in on any of them.
> > The domains are registered with goDaddy and server DNS is pointing to
> > my server. I also have other domains on my server and they are all
> > ok, so it's not an IP issue with my server. The keyword percentage is
> > not an issue as there is none of the typical "spammer" keyword
> > stuffing, percentage of keywords is under 5% easily.
> > What should I look for with the navigation issues? All of my internal
> > links point to where they are supposed to and are working. Any tips
> > on the server responses of things to be looking for there?
> > Thanks for all the help!
> > On May 31, 10:46 am, webado wrote:
> > > Visible toolbar PR is not relevant, not an issue.
> > > Unless you run a battery of tests, you cnanot infer that because you
> > > get traffic from A all must be OK.
> > > All else is according to your own conscience.
> > > On May 31, 10:25 am, engine102 wrote:
> > > > Webado,
> > > > Thanks for the information. I just prefer to not put them out there
> > > > as they are niche websites that I am using as an eBay affiliate.
> > > > There is no hidden code or anything like that on them. They are all
> > > > up and running properly and I am getting a lot of traffic from yahoo
> > > > and msn, so the DNS/server should not be an issue.
> > > > I had read and heard from several other people that they also suffered
> > > > the same fate with all of their .info domains as well. I personally
> > > > know these people and they are not doing anything against the TOS of
> > > > Google.
> > > > As for the content, each site and page is optimized for that specific
> > > > item or range of items. All content is unique and not spammy in
> > > > nature.
> > > > If it was just one site or a few, I might understand, however all of
> > > > my .info domains are gone from the serps. The funny thing is that
> > > > they have also gone from a PR n/a to a PR 0 in the process.
> > > > Do you think this could just be a temporary cleaning of the .info
> > > > domains from the serps? How long should I wait to ask for
> > > > reinclusion, or should I have to?
> > > > Thanks for the pointers too, I need to double check my server logs and
> > > > stuff as well.
> > > > On May 31, 9:47 am, webado wrote:
> > > > > There's no reason and no way Google would treat .info domains any
> > > > > differently than any others.
> > > > > Whatever it is you are experiencing has nothing to do with the domains
> > > > > being .info .
> > > > > The problems will have to be either of a technical nature, e.g.
> > > > > 1) badly set up DNS
> > > > > 2) bad server responses
> > > > > 3) badly built website, broken code, broken navigation
> > > > > 4) lack of indexable content, duplicate content, unoriginal content
> > > > > taken from elsewhere like through feeds without any extra of your own
> > > > > 5) unoptimized, unfocused pages
> > > > > 6) spam content (hidden content, hidden links), badware on your site
> > > > > (maybe due to getting hacked), non-robot proofed paid links, links
> > > > > tied in to link exchange schemes
> > > > > Only situations like those in 6) would result in actual penalties,
> > > > > leading in extreme cases to banning, all others will simply be poor
> > > > > performance due to having a poorly built website, in other words, not
> > > > > deserving anything more.
> > > > > So take your pick and do your own trouble shooting. Or give us some
> > > > > urls to be able to offer more precise help. You can put the urls in
> > > > > your profile.
> > > > > On May 31, 9:23 am, engine102 wrote:
> > > > > > I have quite a few, but I prefer not to give them out.
> > > > > > On May 31, 8:31 am, Robbo wrote:
> > > > > > > What is your URL?- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Hmm, rss feed - that means the same content is used elsewhere. Thus
duplication. Layout, styling, doesn't matter.
You need to add extra content truly of your own.
Just because there are "lots of other people doing the same thing"
doesn't mean every newcomer can jump into this and continue doing the
same thing, it doesn't mean they won't get axed one day as well.
Google prefers to index one copy of something only, strongly leaning
towards the original page where that content comes from. In such a
case it would be the actual ebay site listing. Just because Google's
robots haven't yet figured out all the duplication doesn't mean they
won't eventually, and doesn't give them a license to proliferate.
You can contact me through my website contact form, see my profile.
But I'm not the best one to assess this kind of issue.
> Ok, thanks for all of that info...now to fully understand it all!
> lol...
> I have set the preferred domain in webmaster tools to show without the
> WWW, but didn't think about making sure it was in .htaccess.
> As for the eBay affiliate, each domain is focused on a different
> product or niche. I am using software that pulls the RSS feed from
> eBay and then styling it for my "products" on my sites. There are
> lots of other people doing the same thing, so I don't think it is an
> issue with that.
> Is there a way I can contact you privately to get your opinion about a
> site and have you review it instead of posting the URL here?
> Thanks!
> Elliott
> On May 31, 11:23 am, webado wrote:
> > Just to reiterate, I wouldn't assume .info domains as such are or have
> > been in any way targeted fro exclusion.
> > It's more likely that the .info dns resolution is or was broken
> > somehow.
> > The idea that just because they are cheap to acquire may only be an
> > indirect cause - such as causing DNS problems with a big influx
> > of .info registrations in a short time.
> > The parent nameservers are provided by a0.info.afilias-nst.info
> > through a9.info.afilias-nst.info , and they may well experience
> > problems at busy registration times.
> > On May 31, 10:51 am, engine102 wrote:
> > > Webado,
> > > I understand that PR isn't a big todo about anything, however for them
> > > to disappear from the serps and get a PR 0 from a PR n/a I wasn't sure
> > > if it meant anything.
> > > Thanks for all of the links! Wow, that's some great stuff. As for
> > > validation, all of my sites validate as I always make sure the (x)html
> > > and CSS validates (pet peeve of mine) and that they work in all
> > > *modern* browsers... ;)
> > > There is no copied content on any of them, it is all original
> > > content. I haven't linked out from any of them to anything else, and
> > > I don't see any "bad" links pointing in on any of them.
> > > The domains are registered with goDaddy and server DNS is pointing to
> > > my server. I also have other domains on my server and they are all
> > > ok, so it's not an IP issue with my server. The keyword percentage is
> > > not an issue as there is none of the typical "spammer" keyword
> > > stuffing, percentage of keywords is under 5% easily.
> > > What should I look for with the navigation issues? All of my internal
> > > links point to where they are supposed to and are working. Any tips
> > > on the server responses of things to be looking for there?
> > > Thanks for all the help!
> > > On May 31, 10:46 am, webado wrote:
> > > > Visible toolbar PR is not relevant, not an issue.
> > > > Unless you run a battery of tests, you cnanot infer that because you
> > > > get traffic from A all must be OK.
> > > > All else is according to your own conscience.
> > > > On May 31, 10:25 am, engine102 wrote:
> > > > > Webado,
> > > > > Thanks for the information. I just prefer to not put them out there
> > > > > as they are niche websites that I am using as an eBay affiliate.
> > > > > There is no hidden code or anything like that on them. They are all
> > > > > up and running properly and I am getting a lot of traffic from yahoo
> > > > > and msn, so the DNS/server should not be an issue.
> > > > > I had read and heard from several other people that they also suffered
> > > > > the same fate with all of their .info domains as well. I personally
> > > > > know these people and they are not doing anything against the TOS of
> > > > > Google.
> > > > > As for the content, each site and page is optimized for that specific
> > > > > item or range of items. All content is unique and not spammy in
> > > > > nature.
> > > > > If it was just one site or a few, I might understand, however all of
> > > > > my .info domains are gone from the serps. The funny thing is that
> > > > > they have also gone from a PR n/a to a PR 0 in the process.
> > > > > Do you think this could just be a temporary cleaning of the .info
> > > > > domains from the serps? How long should I wait to ask for
> > > > > reinclusion, or should I have to?
> > > > > Thanks for the pointers too, I need to double check my server logs and
> > > > > stuff as well.
> > > > > On May 31, 9:47 am, webado wrote:
> > > > > > There's no reason and no way Google would treat .info domains any
> > > > > > differently than any others.
> > > > > > Whatever it is you are experiencing has nothing to do with the domains
> > > > > > being .info .
> > > > > > The problems will have to be either of a technical nature, e.g.
> > > > > > 1) badly set up DNS
> > > > > > 2) bad server responses
> > > > > > 3) badly built website, broken code, broken navigation
> > > > > > 4) lack of indexable content, duplicate content, unoriginal content
> > > > > > taken from elsewhere like through feeds without any extra of your own
> > > > > > 5) unoptimized, unfocused pages
> > > > > > 6) spam content (hidden content, hidden links), badware on your site
> > > > > > (maybe due to getting hacked), non-robot proofed paid links, links
> > > > > > tied in to link exchange schemes
> > > > > > Only situations like those in 6) would result in actual penalties,
> > > > > > leading in extreme cases to banning, all others will simply be poor
> > > > > > performance due to having a poorly built website, in other words, not
> > > > > > deserving anything more.
> > > > > > So take your pick and do your own trouble shooting. Or give us some
> > > > > > urls to be able to offer more precise help. You can put the urls in
> > > > > > your profile.
> > > > > > On May 31, 9:23 am, engine102 wrote:
> > > > > > > I have quite a few, but I prefer not to give them out.
> > > > > > > On May 31, 8:31 am, Robbo wrote:
> > > > > > > > What is your URL?- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
As webado mentioned, the best way to get feedback here is to post your
URL. If you'd prefer to not have it indexed, you can put it in your
profile (those pages are not indexed), we're pretty good at respecting
your wish for privacy so if you mention it, we won't post anything
identifiable :-).
That said, if you are using a feed from eBay as the main source of
content for your website, one question I would ask myself in your
position is "what am I providing which users can't find anywhere
else?" Or from Google's perspective, why should we send users to your
site instead of sending them to eBay directly? What's in it for them?
Without unique and compelling content, it will be hard to convince a
search engine to send users your way.
It would be nice to see your site so that we can convince ourselves
that your site is not like that -- or perhaps offer you tips on how
you could improve the quality and quantity of your unique content in
general.
I am just a little cautious with posting my URL's for my niche sites
as I have had problems posting them before and people spamming them,
or reporting them as spam.
What I am doing is taking a particular product or niche, researching
it and creating pages with totally unique content on them, just like
any other blog or site out there. I talk about the pro's and con's of
the product and things like that. I then use the eBay RSS feed to
pull that particular item or group of items into the site for sale.
I don't think it's an issue of duplicate content from the feeds as the
product list is continually changing. The actual content that I write
is truly unique as I research the niche or product and then write
about it. I'm not using PLR or other articles and just doing a copy/
paste with them as I am aware of duplicate content issues.
I feel the sites that I am creating are truly unique and worthy of
being indexed as they are providing information about products.
As for posting the URL's of my sites, I had an offer from a "friend"
to help me get started with building links and marketing a few of my
sites, so I sent him a list of some of the URL's. These were not
the .info's that I am working on. All of those sites are now in
akismet as he was "helping" me by running them with a black hat
program he had. Needless to say we don't talk anymore. That is why I
am nervous about posting them publicly.
I will send you a URL for you to look at if you don't mind and just
request that you keep that URL private. If you want to report the
findings and suggestions here, I don't have a problem with that as it
might help someone else learn something about how to better their
sites.
> As webado mentioned, the best way to get feedback here is to post your
> URL. If you'd prefer to not have it indexed, you can put it in your
> profile (those pages are not indexed), we're pretty good at respecting
> your wish for privacy so if you mention it, we won't post anything
> identifiable :-).
> That said, if you are using a feed from eBay as the main source of
> content for your website, one question I would ask myself in your
> position is "what am I providing which users can't find anywhere
> else?" Or from Google's perspective, why should we send users to your
> site instead of sending them to eBay directly? What's in it for them?
> Without unique and compelling content, it will be hard to convince a
> search engine to send users your way.
> It would be nice to see your site so that we can convince ourselves
> that your site is not like that -- or perhaps offer you tips on how
> you could improve the quality and quantity of your unique content in
> general.
> I am just a little cautious with posting my URL's for my niche sites
> as I have had problems posting them before and people spamming them,
> or reporting them as spam.
> What I am doing is taking a particular product or niche, researching
> it and creating pages with totally unique content on them, just like
> any other blog or site out there. I talk about the pro's and con's of
> the product and things like that. I then use the eBay RSS feed to
> pull that particular item or group of items into the site for sale.
> I don't think it's an issue of duplicate content from the feeds as the
> product list is continually changing. The actual content that I write
> is truly unique as I research the niche or product and then write
> about it. I'm not using PLR or other articles and just doing a copy/
> paste with them as I am aware of duplicate content issues.
> I feel the sites that I am creating are truly unique and worthy of
> being indexed as they are providing information about products.
> As for posting the URL's of my sites, I had an offer from a "friend"
> to help me get started with building links and marketing a few of my
> sites, so I sent him a list of some of the URL's. These were not
> the .info's that I am working on. All of those sites are now in
> akismet as he was "helping" me by running them with a black hat
> program he had. Needless to say we don't talk anymore. That is why I
> am nervous about posting them publicly.
> I will send you a URL for you to look at if you don't mind and just
> request that you keep that URL private. If you want to report the
> findings and suggestions here, I don't have a problem with that as it
> might help someone else learn something about how to better their
> sites.
> Thanks again John and Webado!
> On May 31, 12:01 pm, JohnMu wrote:
> > Hi Elliott and welcome to the groups!
> > As webado mentioned, the best way to get feedback here is to post your
> > URL. If you'd prefer to not have it indexed, you can put it in your
> > profile (those pages are not indexed), we're pretty good at respecting
> > your wish for privacy so if you mention it, we won't post anything
> > identifiable :-).
> > That said, if you are using a feed from eBay as the main source of
> > content for your website, one question I would ask myself in your
> > position is "what am I providing which users can't find anywhere
> > else?" Or from Google's perspective, why should we send users to your
> > site instead of sending them to eBay directly? What's in it for them?
> > Without unique and compelling content, it will be hard to convince a
> > search engine to send users your way.
> > It would be nice to see your site so that we can convince ourselves
> > that your site is not like that -- or perhaps offer you tips on how
> > you could improve the quality and quantity of your unique content in
> > general.
> > I am just a little cautious with posting my URL's for my niche sites
> > as I have had problems posting them before and people spamming them,
> > or reporting them as spam.
> > What I am doing is taking a particular product or niche, researching
> > it and creating pages with totally unique content on them, just like
> > any other blog or site out there. I talk about the pro's and con's of
> > the product and things like that. I then use the eBay RSS feed to
> > pull that particular item or group of items into the site for sale.
> > I don't think it's an issue of duplicate content from the feeds as the
> > product list is continually changing. The actual content that I write
> > is truly unique as I research the niche or product and then write
> > about it. I'm not using PLR or other articles and just doing a copy/
> > paste with them as I am aware of duplicate content issues.
> > I feel the sites that I am creating are truly unique and worthy of
> > being indexed as they are providing information about products.
> > As for posting the URL's of my sites, I had an offer from a "friend"
> > to help me get started with building links and marketing a few of my
> > sites, so I sent him a list of some of the URL's. These were not
> > the .info's that I am working on. All of those sites are now in
> > akismet as he was "helping" me by running them with a black hat
> > program he had. Needless to say we don't talk anymore. That is why I
> > am nervous about posting them publicly.
> > I will send you a URL for you to look at if you don't mind and just
> > request that you keep that URL private. If you want to report the
> > findings and suggestions here, I don't have a problem with that as it
> > might help someone else learn something about how to better their
> > sites.
> > Thanks again John and Webado!
> > On May 31, 12:01 pm, JohnMu wrote:
> > > Hi Elliott and welcome to the groups!
> > > As webado mentioned, the best way to get feedback here is to post your
> > > URL. If you'd prefer to not have it indexed, you can put it in your
> > > profile (those pages are not indexed), we're pretty good at respecting
> > > your wish for privacy so if you mention it, we won't post anything
> > > identifiable :-).
> > > That said, if you are using a feed from eBay as the main source of
> > > content for your website, one question I would ask myself in your
> > > position is "what am I providing which users can't find anywhere
> > > else?" Or from Google's perspective, why should we send users to your
> > > site instead of sending them to eBay directly? What's in it for them?
> > > Without unique and compelling content, it will be hard to convince a
> > > search engine to send users your way.
> > > It would be nice to see your site so that we can convince ourselves
> > > that your site is not like that -- or perhaps offer you tips on how
> > > you could improve the quality and quantity of your unique content in
> > > general.
> > > Hope it helps!
> > > John- Hide quoted text -
