Google Panda Recovery In Detail

Jul 6, 2012 • 7:58 am | comments (9) by twitter Google+ | Filed Under Google Search Engine Optimization
 

PandaWe have covered several Panda recovery stories here but a WebmasterWorld thread links to (which is not often) a story on Search Engine Journal named The Holy Grail of Panda Recovery – A 1-Year Case Study.

This may be one of the most detailed stories of a Panda recovery I've read.

Martin from WebmasterWorld summarized the efforts in a handful of bullet points, for those who don't have time to read it (but do read it):

  • His efforts for recovery are mainly going through "Deep Content"
  • Don't mix different Content, try to make "Content Sections"
  • Do not crosslink this sections
  • Unfortunately, he didn't say anything about coding, nofollow, noindex...
  • If you face duplicate content, make refine sections with refine content

Some more excerpts from Tedster's take on this article:

A major focus of all these changes was tightening up the number of links (300 per page was outrageous!) and thereby helping Google understand the sites themes much better. All that improves organic traffic. That explains a lot of the above questions about reasons for various actions. Note that the whole of this report was NOT second-guessing Panda itself, but rather aligning the site to best practices, period.

The data you see above is from 2010. THAT major drop was from Google's MayDay update. As you can see, daily organic visits plummeted as a result of the MayDay update. That's something I see in about 40% of the Panda audits I've done.

Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.

Previous story: Google: We Know It Won't Be Easy Without iGoogle But Too Bad
 

Comments:

Steve Napier

07/06/2012 12:44 pm

There are 3 errors in your bullet point summary alone :(.

Russ Offord

07/06/2012 03:45 pm

Barry, Can you touch on what you feel might be similar between MayDay and Panda that you alluded to in your last paragraph?

Barry Schwartz

07/06/2012 03:46 pm

That is what was said in the thread. Join the thread, ask there. It is a nice discussion, which I rather not hog here.

Anti-SEO

07/06/2012 07:36 pm

Common guys ) He did a good job, my respect. But these are obvious things. What is new in this article ? Nothing. Read WW. There were a lot of guys reported the same things done ... with zero effect. Why the website in the article finally gained traffic (I would not call it recovery, just a traffic gain) and others didn't ? I would suppose, that it happened because of the website niche. This website is a pregnancy related. Pregnancy by itself is a long lasting thing. Means people would revert to this website to get new information, if they would found it useful at the first visit. Probably they didn't revert because the website was a mess and they started to like it when everything was cleaned up? UX - up, organic traffic - up. It proved, that UX - is a major factor after Panda. But it became obvious a year ago. But I understand why SEOs are so excited ) Now they have 3 (or 4?)) "recovery" stories and they can sell "recovery" myths to mams, paps and other believers )) Be careful ... you can't walk on water, even there is a myth one guy walked )

Milania

07/07/2012 03:06 pm

Because the guidelines are so bendable on Google's end, I'm not so sure the surge was a true recovery. There are a lot of mistomeaners, perhaps even a few felonies that have been committed (based on what Google has been pitching since Panda) with the polished site. To start with, the overpowering number of ads that remain above the fold. Secondly, the renaming of titles triggers an indexing challenge. Thirdly, none of this really matters; it's all about ranking and getting content to the readers - so kudos to Martin.

newyorker_1

07/07/2012 05:29 pm

being recovered now gives you 0% guarantee against being hit with next update.

Anti-SEO

07/07/2012 06:03 pm

was it guaranteed before ?

Imi Papuscan

07/09/2012 09:27 am

I'm not sure if the site was really hit by Panda. http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/babymed.com http://trends.google.com/websites?q=babymed.com&geo=all&date=all&sort=0 Nice advises but IMHO it's not about the Panda Recovery.

Anti-SEO

07/09/2012 10:59 am

It's obvious - Panda didn't touch it. Good example of how SEOs scam believers.

blog comments powered by Disqus