Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Google will simply filter out duplicate content unless you do it really badly and then you would probably get a message in GWT saying that you had copied something.  If you have multiple sites in the same niche and are genuinely contributing original and valuable content then I don't see an issue.  If I'm not mistaken match.com and chemistry.com largely run dynamic content and do a good job of it too.  Dynamic content (which makes sense) is the easiest way to go with this in terms of building maintainable sites going forward.

_I have checked some of the posts of the Home page and I see certain patterns and this is quite predictable: 1. Most of the posts are basically complication of images already available in other sites. Though the content is unique, the images are nothing new. 2. I have found two content heavy posts in the home page and what I believe that they are guest posts. Now, guest blogging is great but what I mean to say is that you should not be too dependent on guest blogging here. You need to come up with two or three posts [I prefer content heavy posts] before_ _3. Seems like you are publishing reviews. Make sure if these reviews are paid, you should be adding no follow tag against them. Though it is the linked sites that should be penalized for this, I prefer to be safe than sorry. I know this may sound a bit harsh. I hope you would not mind. _

As far as I'm concerned, gone are the days of requesting anchor text and, one step further, outright requesting links. Bloggers aren't living under a rock, they're hip to the SEO game. Requesting links in outreach emails is a bad tactic for several reasons, the main reason being it gives the blogger the impression that you could care less about what they actually think of the product and are only interested in the link. The 'ask' section of my blogger outreach emails therefore never include link requests.

Hi Keri, I have actually checked out that post numerous times in the past. Seems to be a great "manual" for anyone just starting out. Thanks for the information!

Thanks for the responses guys, looks like an SQL Injection. We have cleared the import and all is back to normal. We'll be looking in to beefing up protection. Thanks for the advice. Will be keeping my eye on the traffic via analytics and watching out for messages in Webmaster Tools

_Seems like the website is just another listing site. I do not think sites like of these types are going to add any value to your website. So, if you feel that links coming from this site is affecting the visibility of your website in one way or the other, you can ask the webmaster to add no follow attribute against the links or remove it completely. But before you decide to remove the links, you need to check the analytics account to see if you are getting any referral traffic from the website. So, adding no follow attribute would be a safe bet. _

I have seen in some instances where sites will add iframes if they have to use duplicate content, then nofollow the iframes, and tell the robot file to ignore them so they aren't analyzed.  It works actually, but it's sloppy code having a iframe on every page sometimes multiple.  Or at least it is to me for that purpose, but I guess it's better than getting penalized for dup content. Have a great night. Matthew Boley

Not sure what you exactly means by penalized... if you mean they are out of the index.. then this is not the case as i can see your domains appearing in the search results... why they are not coming up against the keyword is a completely different debate...

Hi Patrick, On the 27th of September, there were two major updates by Google - an EMD update and a subsequent Panda update. Seeing as you don't EMD, it's possible that it was the Panda update that seems to have hit you. Can I assume that the pages that dropped from rankings were shopping results pages, or pages with pagination? Whereas pages that remain are static pages? The Panda updates address duplicate pages and pages with pagination, so I can imagine that a site like yours probably has a fair amount of what search engines would consider duplicate content. Do you get duplicate content errors in your SEOmoz crawl diagnostics? If that is what you're seeing, then I would recommend canonicalising your pagination pages. http://www.seomoz.org/learn-seo/canonicalization The above is just an idea, and given that I don't think it's a penguin penality (penalises backlinks) overwise your above mentioned fixes should have made some noticeable difference, it will be worth looking into Panda. Best, Matt

_Ok let us assume that Site A has got sitewide link from Site B and Site B has decided to remove that link. Now, if he is concerned about passing PR juice, he can apply no follow tag against the link. I think this is the most logical approach while getting links from blog roll. Site A is not going to lose any referral traffic and it is kinda safe from Penguin refreshes which are primarily targeting sitewide links. Yes, I have removed sitewide links for one my websites and to be honest, there has some visibility loss but I managed to make up for the loss by earning some quality links for the website.   _

I've investigated a huge list of newswires. I really like the look of a couple of heavily business oriented wires - very regulated and unspammy, so for business stories I will be using those. I found one newswire which is very aware of the SEO implications of too much syndication to awful sites - they appear only to syndicate to a handful of reasonable quality sites. Others do much heavier syndication. I will stick with the 3 that appear to be safest for now...

If you are providing affiliate links to another site, or anything similar, the links need to either have the "nofollow" attribute applied or be 302 redirected. The major affiliate programs I am aware of do such.

Hello, For Me, you can answer well to your question. My question is that have you noticed any drop in traffic and other changes for which you're thinking about this bakclink? I suggest you to renew your listing on that directory as this is well known directory and Google still not intimated on directory submission. They have against only one thing LOW QUALITY / SPAM CONTENT.

Just a followup to this old thread for anyone working through similar issues. We are monitoring what Google finds through their "Download Latest Links."  We add the domains where the bad links are to the Disavow Links tool. Google no longer ranks the site for any "sex" terms. No warnings have been issued to the site in 4 months. Things are stable at the moment, but we're going to be picking the lint out of this link list for a long time.

Do you know what, I knew that was going to be your response The amount of times I have heard of "reputable" SEO companies doing the same old things is truly horrifying. If they are like the others I have heard of, the likelihood is that they have probably made it quite easy for you to disavow the links by adding approx 20+ links across various pages from each domain? Therefore, when and if you disavow, just disavow the whole domain and that's all of them done. This is of course you are left with no choice but to disavow. Best of luck Anthony! Matt

Hi Bromtec, You're not alone in this situation, lots of site owners have had to go through this process. Firstly it can take several months for Google Webmasters to update the links it knows about. The time period depends on when the pages with the links removed get indexed. If they are back pages, that only get indexed every 6 months or so, it will take a while. Unfortunately you'll just need to be patient. Google employees will be looking at live links, not what's reported in GWT. They have much more detailed tools to analysis your links. If they are rejecting your reconsideration requests, you have more links to clean up. Have you been using the disavow tool? Thanks Iain - Reload Media

Hi, Yes, perhaps I am being overly critical of Rand's remarks.  However, the site I am referring to is a legitimate mid size company.  I do not know if they simply entrusted their seo efforts to someone who has promised quick rewards at a budget price?  However, they have been camped out at all the top spots for 4-6 months now. Perhaps Google's zoo will one day catch up with them (and their ilk) but it is cold comfort to a small family business owner like myself whose finances don't guarantee that we will be around for long haul white hat efforts pay off.  Maybe the message should be a little more nuanced....a little grey is okay but just don't over do it.