Can I be banned by Google for one keyphrase only?

Please NOTE the date: December 23, 2004

I can pick up 1000's of links overnight which will improve my rankings 1000's of positions over in hours. Some of these links will disappear as the NEWS! dies but links can't hurt you coming in.

 

"They LET YOU rank...not for the highly competitive ones"?

It's common knowledge. New sites can rank for "unimportant kewords" easily,
unimportant = not relevant on the advertising market, but not for any of the important ones, that's what the "sandbox" scenario is all about.

 

no.. unless you make some keyword stuffing of that certain key phrase in your page.. google will penalized your site or maybe ban..

 

The site that I mentioned in message 11 has the domain name widget-widgeting.co.uk. My main KW phrase is "Widget Widgeting". When the site was eventually released from the sandbox a few months ago it started attracting Google traffic for lots of the lesser phrases on the site but not the main one, which is clearly the one I was targeting.

The site was built to be found for this phrase but yesterday it was not in the first 300 results in Google. I am not saying that the site deserves to be number one but it is much more relevant than many of the top 300 and it should be in the top twenty or so. The fact that it is not is a strong indication that there is a keyphrase filter in play. (Some may call it an over optimisation penalty).

 

No you shouldnt be banned for this but could get penalised

 

I know that there's one 2 keyword phrase I've been "wiped out" for a year. There's nothing I can do to bring it back.

 

So it sounds like Google can peanlise for specific keywords, questions is how do you repair this or will this last forever? What is the cause?

 

When one has been penalized by google, one can ask them what one has done wrong, correct it, and ask for drawing back the penalization.

Visio, i know from when it is, but, is it wrong?

The sandbox effect is only a theory...the opinions why this effect happens are different. They say, it's a matter of time, or it's a matter of the age of inbound links, or it's a matter of penalisation for too fast unnaturally grown inbound links, or other unknown algorithms.
Sure is, that googles improves continually their algorithms to give highest quality search results to it's users. When you gather very much inbound links fast, this is no sign of quality to your site, but rather of spammy efforts to get artificial high rankings. It is logical if google wants to penalize this.

 

You just answered your own question. Google improves their algo and that is why if it ever was before there is no longer any penalization for gaining too many links too fast even if they are all banned from google. The sandbox does exist and all you need is to build up good links to skip it or get out fast.

 

Just adding to what V said.... Ask said 'Guru' if has ever seen a partial ban??? Cause what's what U R saying Andy... tanked for a single KW/Phrase... nope... U are either tossed completely.. or your in the index.. there are no 'partial bans' based on a term...

 

Event Google not banned their own phrase "google", so its possible to use only one word

 

You all miss the point here on this issue because you fail to think it through.

What you call a "Penalty" -- 'G' calls a "open inviation to spend money on adwords"

you cannot truly get this unless you understand WHAT made goog shares
go from $80 to nearly $500 currently. Start with that in mind and work your way back
to your problem - then you know why the problem actually exists. Your theories
are all presumptions from someone's angle other than the shareholder. Guys, this
is about business, not about "penalties for kids that don't comply with a rule" Get over it.

 

Debating on whether to add you to a list like: http://www.rinkworks.com/stupid/cs_revenge.shtml

[BTW your reply was funny ;-)]

 

That's only a claim. Can you give reasons or proof for that also?

Here is a nice overview of the dangers of backlink building strategies from a SEO expert: http://www.ebiztutors.com/index.php/?p=266

To the sandbox i have also found here, that google seems to acknowledge the existence of a sandbox, however new sites don't automatically go there, but need to trigger a filter, for example getting too many inbound links too fast:
http://www.bradfallon.com/2005/08/discuss-google-dance-2005-grill-the-google-engineers.html
(see posting from August 22, 2005 12:16 PM)

 

Thanks for clarifying that. I always heard that google could penalize your for getting too many links too fast. But, as you mention, if that were the case, your competitor could easily have you banned. Makes sense.

 

Funny I seem to have this idea that what your saying is all just a claim. Where is the difference except that I have tested mine.
Also BRAD did NOT say that it was a poster. It came from Google/Matt and I don't go by what Matt says. He is a nice guy but biased. I go by research and other gurus research.

Yes many don't think of it from that angle. Seo has to be looked at from all angles.

 

zorro-magic, seo-voodoo and the myth that seo is difficult, right.

of course you cannot understand the driving dynamics behind the mechanics
you're trying to deal with. That's why it's hard to find good seo people, most of
them subscribe to myths, and seo-magick that is based on pure crap.

A special mention is in order of the so called " gurus " that with the exception
of 2-3 people I know are just good at keeping "seo magic" alive, but let's be
honest for a moment and spit it out: 97% of all seo gurus suck. And nothing
they know is not based on assumptions. Everyone can be 1 step ahead of them
by just working on new sites on a weekly schedule. Practice beats the theoretics
each and every time.

 

You just contradicted yourself. A seo guru is a guru and doesn't suck. 97% of all seo suck would be a little more accurate but not gurus because gurus are smart.

And no seo isn't hard it is just hard to get people to listen to such simple stuff. because it is so easy to understand many are looking for something much more complex like deciphering the algo and chasing the google updates. When the answer is right under their nose.

 

Holy Crap V.. this post shoulda been open/close.... still going huh?

Once again folks... back links alone can never hurt U. Penalties are generally based from satisfying one or more areas... if a site adds a whack of BLs, has aggregate dupes, cloaking or other factors... sure, U could be looking at a Ban penalty... 100 backlinks - unique, non-networked sites - show up over night and your site is otherwaise legitimate? You should not be at all concerned.


and this???

Bloody hilarious stuff.. Grab the tin foil hats gang....