whitebar vs. greybar: Is my site actually banned or not?

crankin · #1 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 02:48 PM

My niche site has had PR6 for about 2 years. About 10 days ago, it simply disappeared from the Google index. I have NOT been doing any funny stuff. The only new things are forum posts from my users and an occasional new article.

I cannot find it using site:mysite.com or links:mysite.com, yet if I do a search for "mysite.com" or "My Site Name" it shows all the folks who link to me or mention me. If I search for a snippet of proprietary text found only on my site, I get a bunch of garbage pages that go nowhere or redirect to my site.

I have a PR-0 whitebar, and I am told that if I was actually banned, I would show a grey bar. Can anyone confirm which one means 'banned' for real?

I can't get any kind of feedback whatsoever from Google, and I've sent in both help and reinclusion requests. I just want a clue, anything, to help me understand whether or not I'm actually banned, and what if anything I should be doing. Their silence is deafening.

Should I hang in there and keep bothering Google for some kind of response, or should I just think about scrapping www.contractorcity.com as far as Google is concerned?

I'm really at a loss as to what is happening and what I can or should do.

edit: I should also mention that I can still find my site using cache:contractorcity.com

thanks

jestep · #2 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 04:38 PM

I would say that the site is banned. There is hidden text at the bottom which may have been the cause of it. How long has the site been up? Also, how long ago did you try contacting google?

crankin · #3 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 04:56 PM

I found what you're talking about. I hired a college kid to build this version of my site a couple of years ago, he made it in PHP-nuke, and I can't find where the short line of text at the bottom is coming from. I'll keep looking. Also, shouldn't that be like a minor infraction or something?

I contacted Google 10 days ago, followed up like five days later, absolutely no word of any kind back.

I'm still puzzled about the PR-0 whitebar - if I am actually banned, shouldn't there be a greybar and no cached copy?

greeneagle · #4 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 05:16 PM

Hidden text and links haven't been "venial sins" for a long time; years.

They may not punish more technically cloaked methods like CSS Spam as severely, but I can just about guarantee that any OBLs using any Spam Technology that doesn't get selected, because it isn't seen....isn't going to count and may count negatively under some predetermined threshold.

IMO - It's a very clean, neat, concise and accurate "OBL Relevancy" filter they have introduced, effective beyond technologies or codes deployed.

Just plain sweet and clean, without prejudice.

Now, flagarant abuse, such as hidden html text and links seem to be still drawing the "god's" ire... but that is documented in years of history at this time.

What's really new here?

That's what we need to look at!

Forget dealing with CSS Spam, scrapers, pseudo Adsense directories and all the other spam cloaking technologies, they started dealing with those issues in the last update!

Why wouldn't they "wrap that up"? They were demonstrated intentions, while fitting the expressed nomenclature of future updates.

What is so surprising here?

Ken

wsmeyer · #5 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 05:17 PM

I'd say banned.

Looking at your home page as a person, I see a lot of information, links to products that all relate to each other, and a forum that is on topic and appears to get alot of use. All good stuff.

Looking at the source code like a search engine would, I see a whole bunch of links to a yahoo store with a variable (?).

Like I said, as a person what you are doing makes sense. Providing alot of usefull content with links to your Yahoo store where you can purchase products. But I think your being mistaken for one of those crappy websites that is made up of a bunch of afilliate links.

It will be interesting to hear others opinions but if I'm right the only way to really fix the problem is to get rid of the Yahoo store and install your own shopping cart system.

William.

**crankydave** · #6 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greeneagle

They may not punish more technically cloaked methods like CSS Spam as severely, but I can just about guarantee that any OBLs using any Spam Technology that doesn't get selected, because it isn't seen....isn't going to count and may count negatively under some predetermined threshold.

IMO - It's a very clean, neat, concise and accurate "OBL Relevancy" filter they have introduced, effective beyond technologies or codes deployed.

How many threads are you going to post your "IMO.. OBL filter..." in? I'm tired of reading it over and over again. How about following your own advice and try keeping it in one thread.

Dave

greeneagle · #7 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 06:18 PM

cranky;

You did get "cranky" this time, but if you will notice:

1) I have brought out different aspects in threads as I am developing this theory.

2) No one has had a reasonable counter.

They all seem relative to me! - How should I tie these together?

In which thread, specificly does the theory just not fit?

IMO - We were already on this path in the last update, it was prewarned by the publicity and subsequent discussion prevalance pertaining to the "patent"...

Why do we have multiple threads that pertain to essentially the same issue with every update?

How many of them did I start?, Yet how many threads do we have to look at that are basicly another Non-Relevant Directory or GOOGLE "Cardinal" Sin problem?

Everytime an update occurs we go thru this same hash, when all it really comes down to is another, more critical "Relevancy" adjustment, which are usually foretold by Google themselves?

Ken

crankin · #8 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 06:19 PM

okay, I found where the text was coming from, it was referenced in from some include code that referenced some other code in a different area altogether, sort of a russian doll effect. I killed it.

Why is linking to my *own* Yahoo store a problem? That's what I use as my ecommerce cart, when did using Yahoo become a sin? I can't put all my content and forum and etc on Yahoo, and I like the ecommerce-for-dummies functionality of the Yahoo store. I really don't see how that is a no-no.

But my main question still hasn't been answered: If I am banned, should I be showing a whitebar or a greybar? What is the definitive indicator of "banning"? Is not showing up in the index but having a whitebar mean purgatory (possible redemption) instead of hell (banned forever)?

Anyone know?

**crankydave** · #9 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crankin

okay, I found where the text was coming from, it was referenced in from some include code that referenced some other code in a different area altogether, sort of a russian doll effect. I killed it.

Why is linking to my *own* Yahoo store a problem? That's what I use as my ecommerce cart, when did using Yahoo become a sin? I can't put all my content and forum and etc on Yahoo, and I like the ecommerce-for-dummies functionality of the Yahoo store. I really don't see how that is a no-no.

But my main question still hasn't been answered: If I am banned, should I be showing a whitebar or a greybar? What is the definitive indicator of "banning"? Is not showing up in the index but having a whitebar mean purgatory (possible redemption) instead of hell (banned forever)?

Anyone know?

I did a search using the following text and using the quotes...

"Welcome to Contractor City, the online home for building pros"

The first two sites that come up redirect to yours. You may be getting busted over a duplicate content issue. Can you give us an example af any unique text on your site? Every time I try and search a string of text from your site it pops up everywhere.

Dave

greeneagle · #10 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 06:57 PM

crankin,

Nothing on your Site seems to be indexed by GOOGLE at this time:

site:www.contractorcity.com

Ken

**crankydave** · #11 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greeneagle

In which thread, specificly does the theory just not fit?
Ken

Since your "theory" revolves completely around the "relevancy" of OBL's, a theory that was dispelled in the thread you started, you've no doubt taken the time to analize all the outbound links on the site being discussed in this thread for it to be applicable to the questions being asked. Or have you simply thrown it to the wind?

What percentage of the posters OBL's might be penalized under your theory because they're being deemed "not relevent enough"?

Dave

greeneagle · #12 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 07:07 PM

Dave,

I know you can recollect the last update and the onslaught of changes for Directories! - Mostly down, for general irrelevancy and mostly up for relevant specific, Directories!

What do you suppose happened there?, and how is this update not following in the same tracks?

I'd like to seriously discuss this issue as opposed to ghosting in imaginary disproofs in another thread, or maybe I haven't seen it yet.

Ken

crankin · #13 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 07:12 PM

Yes, thank you, I noted in my original post that nothing was listed for site: or links: searches, but you can see me in a cache: search. But I still show a whitebar? What's that mean?

Snippets of proprietary text (basically, anything on the blahblah of the front page) brings up sites that don't even have the text in them. For example, search this phrase: "You need specialized knowledge, specialized tools, and a whole lot of elbow grease to build your business right and keep it growing strong." First two listings redirect to me, second is a directory, all the rest are some baloney sites that don't have the text or my sitename/URL in them.

Other snippets return sites that are trash directories that include what is obviously slurped front page content, or in one case, hundreds of pages from a website that has been suspended altogether and returns a generic placeholder notice.

Duplicate filter you say. Then why the PR0 whitebar and cached returns?

greeneagle · #14 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 07:23 PM

crankin,

When you were once listed and become "unlisted" that's just not a good sign. There is some disagreement whether you are just penalized or banned, when that occurs.

You may "just" be "delisted" which is a fairly strengent penalty. Many believe that you aren't "banned" unless your site expresses a gray bar for PR... I don't know and I don't know if anyone does, for sure.

IMO - Your recovery plan should be: find the offending problem/s, fix it/them and contact GOOGLE for reinclusion.

There may not be that much difficulty involved, especially if your site has been around for a while.

Ken

crankin · #15 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 07:39 PM

Thank you for your candid answer about whitebar/greybar. I'd rather folks say 'nobody knows for sure' than fill up the air with fluff.

Do banned sites still show up in "cache:mysitename.com" searches?

Part of my problem is that I can't get any reply out of Google whatsoever. I'll be glad to cooperate with anything they say they have a problem with, or wait if its something they need to do, or whatever. But I just can't get them to even acknowledge me, and that makes it very difficult to fix problems.

Thanks to the folks here for helping me find that line of text, I've killed it. I don't think linking to my own store is a problem, if it is I would like more substantial proof before I go around ripping out the guts of a well-established store that pays my rent nicely.

If it is just that line of text, it's gone. There were also some dead pages, I scrubbed out old internal links to those so now you don't get 404 error anymore. If there's anything else, who do I need to kill to get Google to tell me what it is ;)

Duplicate content filter - how good can this thing be if it cans the real site and leaves the crappy garbage fake stuff behind?

**crankydave** · #16 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crankin

Yes, thank you, I noted in my original post that nothing was listed for site: or links: searches, but you can see me in a cache: search. But I still show a whitebar? What's that mean?

Snippets of proprietary text (basically, anything on the blahblah of the front page) brings up sites that don't even have the text in them. For example, search this phrase: "You need specialized knowledge, specialized tools, and a whole lot of elbow grease to build your business right and keep it growing strong." First two listings redirect to me, second is a directory, all the rest are some baloney sites that don't have the text or my sitename/URL in them.

Other snippets return sites that are trash directories that include what is obviously slurped front page content, or in one case, hundreds of pages from a website that has been suspended altogether and returns a generic placeholder notice.

Duplicate filter you say. Then why the PR0 whitebar and cached returns?

What are the sites that are redirecting to you and how are they being redirected and why.

I'm also seeing this paragraph...

Quote:

Your contracting business is your livelihood, so let us help you work smarter, not harder! You need specialized knowledge, specialized tools, and a whole lot of elbow grease to build your business right and keep it growing strong. You want to stay on the cutting edge, and ahead of your competition.

On more than one site, and they're not scraper sites. Your content? Theirs?

When Google finds duplicate content they will generally only index the site that used it first, ignoring the others.

Dave

crankin · #17 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 07:42 PM

absolutely positively 100% MY CONTENT. That came out of MY fat head, nobody else's.

That really frosts my shorts - *my* copy from my site, how the hell can Google possibly think it belongs to anyone else? They had to grab it from me, which means they put it on their sites after mine was published and spidered!

Dang, that REALLY makes me angry, I worked really hard on that marketing copy...

**crankydave** · #18 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greeneagle

Dave,

I know you can recollect the last update and the onslaught of changes for Directories! - Mostly down, for general irrelevancy and mostly up for relevant specific, Directories!

What do you suppose happened there?, and how is this update not following in the same tracks?

I'd like to seriously discuss this issue as opposed to ghosting in imaginary disproofs in another thread, or maybe I haven't seen it yet.

Ken

You going to answer my question?

Apply your theory to the the site being discussed.

What percentage of the OBL's of the site being dicussed meet your theory?

Put up or shut up I believe the phrase goes.

Dave

**crankydave** · #19 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 07:56 PM