Link building - changed time-frames

[sesertin]

Agreeing Scott, that it is probably not due to backlinks. Imagine a link bait when you get hundreds of links in a very short time. Nobody would do link bait as it would hurt their SEO of google was penalizing this way.

Falling back from 5th place to nowhere is a serious signal. I am pretty sure you have done something else to your site other than building links. The problem should be there. Have you tested your site with the on page reports for example? Maybe that can give you an idea to start with.

[Devin_Anderson]

5 high-quality backlinks within 3 days is never going to raise an eyebrow - even 5 spam links within 3 days shouldn't cause a problem. Its when you've got loads of links coming in on a daily basis, from clearly spammy websites, that you might want to be concerned.

The SERPs fluctuate so rapidly that in most cases it's impossible to correlate your daily ranking changes to anything you have done to your site a day or two beforehand. Since it's only been a few days, it's very possible that Google hasn't even crawled your new backlinks (and applied them to your site) yet.

Was this week the first time that you appeared on page 1? - If so, I would suggest you continue the work you are doing and monitor your results over a longer period of time (2 weeks would provide more solid info to work with)

If, on the other hand, you've been ranking on page 1 for a good while now, then I'd suggest you look into any other changes you have made to the site in the past week...meta titles, copy changes, outbound links etc

[Guest]

This post is deleted!

[Bartell]

A website that is only 2 weeks old is going to have lots of fluctuation in the SERPs. It could have nothing to do with any changes that you have made but instead be related to the age of the website.

I suggest taking a look at the changes you made (on-page). Make sure you didn't accidentally do anything black-hat, such as having a white link on a white background.

[Guest]

This post is deleted!

[jotham2]

Could be that page received rankings initially because content was so fresh. When algorithm determined that fresh was all you had, that people weren't sharing your page frequently to the point of virality, that fresh wore off quickly and the page disappeared from SERPs (as it should).

[Guest]

This post is deleted!

[sesertin]

You need unique content. If content is copied than all other efforts are wothless

[Bartell]

I agree with Zsolt, you really need unique content.

Think about it this way: if google has two copies of the same document why would it save both copies? What additional benefit would it provide to searchers?

People that go to your website don't read HTML5, they read the content on your page and Google's #1 concern is helping people find great content.

[Guest]

This post is deleted!

[sesertin]

70-30 is good as well, but the more unique the better. I won't save my time on this.

[KeriMorgret]

Hi Zsolt,

I'd love to hear more about your experience and references in determining the right amount of original content versus copied content.

Kirill, unique content is important. When you are saying the content is not unique, are you saying it is copied on other parts of your sites, or that it is copied from other sites online? Make sure that you're not violating any copyright laws with your content.

[Guest]

This post is deleted!

[sesertin]

I was trying to say that if there are some snippets repeated or copied from other sites or pages that is not considered a duplicate content. I think that if 30% of content is copied than it is not duplicate, however I did not invastigate the exact amount where google starts to consider your page duplicate. Did I say something wrong?

[KeriMorgret]

Hi Kirill,

You're going to have a hard time ranking if your content isn't original and you don't have a real good reason for visitors to come to your site. You'll want to add your own information and rewrite the manufacturer's description. Give Google a good reason to show your site in search results, and give value to your visitors.

[KeriMorgret]

Zsolt, I am both an associate here trying to make sure that people who ask questions get the best answers, and a person who wants to learn. When a number is thrown out as "x is OK", I'm always interested in learning more about how that recommendation came about, as it can help me learn from the experience of others, or from a statement from Google that I may have missed. I do get worried when numbers are thrown out without any context or other details and someone may treat them as gospel because it was published on the SEOmoz domain.

[TechMama]

I apologize for the bluntness, but that is categorically false.  Google absolutely punishes sites for 'bad neighborhood' affiliations through back links.  You can find many instances on the SEO boards of this occurring.  We actually report spam sites through GWT that link to us about once per month due to a prior penalty that occurred this way.

And no, it is not 'Fair' but who ever said Google cared?