How WPMU.org Recovered From The Penguin Update

Last Friday, Google pushed out the first refresh of their infamous Penguin update, bringing many webmasters to stumble towards their analytics, SERPs and the like in hopes of signs of a recovery from previous ranking drops, and/or to hope that they had not seen a precipitous drop in rankings. For most, the algo refresh seemed to do little, and for good reason - Cutts informed us that it apparently only impacted .01% of search results. Not many SERPs changed, and most of the voices heard over the weekend only seemed to be coming from people that were newly crushed by Google's pet Penguin.


Soon after the algorithm hit, we learned that Penguin refreshes, as it did last weekend. This makes it unique and similar to Panda in formation. For most, there was a lull period where these Penguin-impacted webmasters would sit around, gather the facts about the update, and then take action towards recovery where there were negative impacts in a week or two after the event. Many removed and/or edited links - others simply moved completely away from their manipulative linking strategies. However, because of this time lull between implementation and action, it's possible that moves towards recovery were not rapid enough to see full changes, as links take time to crawl, new actions take much time to implement, and the new refresh took only a month to once again take effect.
In that respect, it may leave some to think "is a Penguin recovery even possible?", or "should I just start over with a new domain?". These are real questions that will come with edits to links and strategy, a refresh and no changes to our rankings. To that end, I don't have absolute answers, nobody does - just strong suggestions about the data points we know about what survived, what didn't, and how Google has treated penalties in the past. What I do now know, though, is that a Penguin recovery is possible, and possible in a short amount of time - because I've seen a big, seemingly complete recovery from the update at the first refresh. This recovery came for a website that felt a previous, critical impact from Penguin at the first iteration - that website being popular Wordpress portal, WPMU.org.

The WPMU Story

On April 24th, 2012, WPMU.org was hit by the Penguin Update. Traffic from Google dropped over 81% week over week, causing a real, massive hit in revenue for the business over night. This was not the "three or four spots" Google Penguin drop, this was the "almost disappear completely" type Penguin hit that was among the worst kind of impact most websites felt - and for the owner, James Farmer, this came as a real, completely unexpected shock.
WPMU is a Wordpress information hub with resources, plugins and more  - but the most important of its resource portfolio is its themes. WPMU's themes function like many Wordpress installs usually do - they create citation footer links to declare the theme type being used, so when its popular theme packs get installed, they generate a "Powered by X" link in the footer of the site back to the theme page.
Although it made sense in the context of these blogs, and for these types of themes, it also generated a high volume of sitewide links on low quality sites. It also, in its majority iteration, used the anchor "Wordpress Mu" - which is a somewhat valid iteration of "WPMU" - but to Google, it was likely seen as an attempt to get commercial anchor text pointing at the site.
To WPMU founder James Farmer (as well as others), this was extremely frustrating. Wordpress and web design installs are a unique use case that might have been caught in the crossfire of this update. It simply makes sense for these sites to have a link in the footer back to the theme and/or designer - this is definitely what users expect, and is good from a usability perspective overall. However, when looked at purely from what we normally consider "clean" link profile characteristics, its raw numbers fell outside those "good" ratios - and surely, the nature of Wordpress themes and the majority of people who select them mean that a good amount will be low quality and/or spam.
However, WPMU clearly had many other things going for it. 10,700+ Facebook likes, 15,600+ Twitter followers, more than 2,500 +1s, and over 4,250 people subscribed to Feedburner in total. Its backlink profile includes links from Technorati, Ars Technica, Wired, Huffington Post, SEOBook, Business Insider, Boing Boing and more. Surely, this isn't a site that deserves to get penalized, right? Well, apparently Google thought differently.

Post penalty, Farmer reached out to the Sydney Morning Herald, the biggest news site in Australia, in hopes to get coverage of the events. He got what he asked for, and the Herald, according to Farmer, got his site in front of Cutts to ask why a domain like WPMU would get hit by Penguin. Cutts replied, pointing out links that in particular lead to the penalty - for example, the below pages. Copy and paste to view.

• http://baydownloads.info/11580-Wordpress-Membership-Plugin-Wordpress-PayPal-R-Plugin-show-5starserve.htm - A site pirating WPMU software.
• http://computerofficechair.blogdetik.com/category/tak-berkategori/ - A splog using an old theme pack with a link to WPMU in the footer - with said potentially "commercial" anchor (my words, not Matt's).
• http://computerchairs.blogdetik.com/ - Same splog.

Cutts said, according to Farmer, "that we should consider the fact that we were possibly damaged by the removal of credit from links such as these". Sure, based on what we now know or assume about the update, this makes sense. Low quality links, and also spammy, rarely-clicked footer links with over-optimized anchor text. Right.
Although this information was helpful to Farmer, what also came from it was Google awareness of a site that potentially might not have really "fit" within what they were hoping to accomplish with this update. On top of Cutts now knowing about the changes, Farmer then went on to blog the details of the penalty on WPMU, leading to more coverage and links, tweets from Rand, and also, according to Farmer, Danny Sullivan of Search Engine Land putting the site in front of Google once again.
With the burst of awareness this created in the SEO community, many people, such as myself, ended up commenting on Farmer's post on WPMU. The community was gracious in offering advice, suggestions, and other reasons why the site may have been penalized - and from there, what Farmer might do to recover. Based on my comments and tweets at WPMU about the subject, Farmer reached out to me about taking next steps in undoing the impacts of Penguin. I obliged, and work began.

We had two choices for WPMU - get the nofollow attribute added to the links, or simply remove them completely. The first goal was to cut down on as many of the sitewide, "Wordpress MU" anchor text links as possible. I initially thought nofollowing would be the best solution because of the potential for these links to drive leads for Farmer and WPMU, but Farmer thought, to make it easy to change and correct for bloggers, the best solution was to simply ask for removal.

The EDUBlogs.org Removal

The most perilous piece of WPMU's link profile came from one site - EDUblogs.org. EDU Blogs is a blogging service for people in the education space, allowing them to easily set up a subdomain blog on EDUblogs for their school-focused site - in a similar fashion to Blogspot, Typepad, or Tumblr, meaning that each subdomain is treated as a unique site in Google's eyes. Coincidentally, this site is owned by WPMU and Farmer, and every blog on the service leverages WPMU theme packs. Each of these blogs had the "Wordpress MU" anchor text in the footer, which meant a high volume of subdomains considered unique by Google all had sitewide "Wordpress MU" anchor text. In what might have been a lucky moment for WPMU, this portion of their external link profile was still completely in their control because of WPMU ownership.
In what I believe is the most critical reason why WPMU made a large recovery and also did it faster than almost everyone else, Farmer instantly shut off almost 15,000 'iffy' sitewide, footer LRDs to their profile, dramatically improving their anchor text ratios, sitewide link volume, and more. They were also able to do this early on in the month, quickly after the original update rolled out. A big difference between many people trying to "clean up their profile" and WPMU is time - getting everything down and adjusted properly meant that many people simply did not see recoveries at refresh 1.1 - but that doesn't mean it won't happen at all if the effort persists.

Additional Cleanup

Once .EDUBlogs got cleaned up, the majority of the link profile had been fixed. However, much of the junk still remained from independent bloggers who put up WPMU themes. Because of time constraints, I was really unable to move at all on the link cleanup outside EDUblogs as we attempted to get an effective strategy in place for people to remove footer links, and also avoid Memorial Day weekend for e-mailing. Despite this, we still may move forward with cleaning up the remainder "junk" links to prevent Penguin hitting again on a second iteration.

Although Penguin seems to be a link penalty, I would be remiss to only mention the large link-based changes that were made to the site in the month between updates. Farmer and the WPMU team also made the following changes during that time, any, all, or none of which may have made an impact on recovery. I want to clarify, here, that these cleanups were all done by Farmer as overall quality value-adds, and were not Penguin-specific improvement suggestions made by me, although some, many, all, or none of them may have contributed to the recovery.

• Pinged blogs that were originally highlighted by Matt Cutts in a conversation with the Syndey Harold - only one removed links, but they did come from a significant volume of splogs on the Blogdetik.com domain
• Submitted WPMU to the Penguin review form, twice, specifically referencing this article that was being beaten out by the links that referenced it
• Used SEOmoz campaign data to implement some canonical URLs to clean up crawl errors and also kill some unnecessary links across the site
• Did a bit of "SEO cleanup" that revealed WPMU.org sitemaps did not exist and/or were broken. Implemented sitemaps and submitted the feeds to Webmaster Tools, which was not happening previously
• Cleaned up numerous duplicate title tag issues as reported by Webmaster tools
• Continued to build natural links to the site and promote other positive signals such as referring traffic and social shares
• Very notably and importantly, got this specific use case in front of Google and also the greater SEO community that highlighted it

These aren't the only changes that occurred, certainly, but were the most notable in reference to the Penguin update, and may help in your own decision making in order to better recover your own website rankings in the future.

Just as I was about to start manually e-mailing the remaining blogs to remove WPMU links, a great thing happened - recovery. On Friday, May 25th, a clear return from the 1.1 refresh of Penguin occurred, bringing ranking and traffic levels to what look like the same spot they were previously. Given that it's a holiday weekend, traffic is considerably down, so it's hard to tell for certain - but considering what we know about traditional impacts from the holidays, it looks like WPMU has made a full recovery from its original hit from the Penguin update.

This Penguin recovery is a great sign not just for WPMU, but also other Penguin impacted webmasters as well. WPMU had a lot of things going for it that allowed for immediate and quick recovery - such as getting in front of Google (which may have caused an algorithmic adjustment for this use case), being a site that DESERVES to rank with tons of other great signals already, and also the ability to pull down tons of manipulative linking root domains instantly. However, these "quick fix" solutions that allowed WPMU to quickly come back also means that the long term fixes that you're working on for your domain should also work - that is, if you implement them properly and move towards a longer term, higher quality site as you should be.

It should also be noted and taken very seriously that this post should not be considered a "blueprint" for recovery for your site. Read it and make your own educated decisions based on what you know about your link profile, your business, your vertical, and the Penguin Update in general.

Best of luck - and happy Penguin hunting!

More Bang for Your Buck: Maximize New Links on Old Pages - Whiteboard Friday

We know that different links pass wildly different values for SEO purposes. Sometimes you build links that shoot your website to the top of the rankings, while other links are worse than worthless. The value of a link varies according to different factors, including:

• Internal vs. External Links
• Authority and Trust of the Linking Domain
• Position of the Link on the Page
• Alt Attributes vs. Text Links
• ... and many other ranking factors.

What happens when you build new links on old pages? Often when link prospecting, we SEOs look towards older, high-authority pages for link targets. Do these links pass the same value as links from brand new pages?  In this week's Whiteboard Friday, I discuss why Google may treat these links differently, and provide 3 solid strategies for maximizing the value of all your new links, on all types of pages.

Video Transcription

Howdy, SEOmoz fans. Welcome to another edition of Whiteboard Friday. My name is Cyrus. I'm an SEO Consultant. I'm also an associate here at the world-famous SEOmoz. Today we're talking about links. Now this is a little advanced SEO, but it's such a simple concept and so fundamental, it's going to change the way you look at your link prospecting in the future.
Here's a situation. You're dying to get this link. You've got this new page and you want to get a link to it. So you've got this old page sitting around on your site. It's got plenty of authority. It's got high PageRank. It's perfect. It has a lot of incoming links. And so you just put a little link to your new page.
You're really excited. You wait a few weeks and nothing really happened. You don't see the boost in traffic. It's kind of like you didn't even do anything.
This works for external links as well. You've been link prospecting, and you find this great old page that you want to get a link from. The webmaster agrees and he puts a little link. Again, you wait and nothing really happens.
I've noticed this over the years, and I've talked to other link builders who have noticed this phenomenon, that links from old pages don't always seem to have the oomph as a link from a brand-new page. We're wondering is there anything that you can do about this.
A guy by the name of SEOWizz, Tim Grice, who is over in the U.K., did a study about this. I'll link to it in the post below. He built a bunch of old links on old pages, and he built a bunch of similar new links on new pages. He compared the two. He compared the boost in rankings between those two, and what he found was this exact same thing, that the old links that he built just didn't raise his rankings as much as the new links he built. He concluded that old links just weren't worth it anymore.

SEOWizz: Old Content Links vs. New Content Links

Source: Links In Old, Crawled Content Don’t Pass Weight

What do we mean by an "old page" when we talk about these old pages? From a technical, Google definition point of view, we're talking about something that has been previously crawled and indexed by Google. Stale content, by stale we mean content that hasn't been updated in a long time. It was written and it just stayed that way. There are no new blog comments. It has just been for two or three years the same way it was written. And old links. So this old page, all of the links that it got, it got years ago or months ago, and there are no new links coming in. That's what we're talking about when we talk about an old page. If it doesn't meet these definitions, then it's a new page.
Why would this happen? Why would Google care if it's an old page or a new page? We don't know exactly, but we do have some hints from some patent filings that Google has filed, specifically, Document Scoring Based on Document Content Update. It's been filed over and over again in different variations throughout the years. It's kind of like the manifesto of how Google runs its search engine. It's well worth a read. I'll also link to that in the content below.
Basically, in there, there are a couple of paragraphs in that most recent patent filing that talk about scoring a document based on the amount of change in a document. What Google is trying to do here is ignore minor edits. If you are making just a small link on that page, that qualifies as a minor edit. Google wants to ignore that because that could look kind of fishy, kind of scammy, kind of like you are doing some link manipulation or maybe you're buying links.

---

"In order to not update every link's freshness from a minor edit of a tiny unrelated part of a document, each updated document may be tested for significant changes... and a link's freshness may be updated (or not updated) accordingly. "

- Google's US Patent Application

---

What Google is looking for is not so much what changes, but how much changes and how many parts of the document change. This leads to a few solutions as to how we can address this problem of the old links in the new pages.
Now, I want to be clear. These links still pass value. Should you be building these links? Absolutely, but we want to make sure that we're getting as much oomph out of them as completely possible.
Let's look at some solutions to make sure that we're getting as much value out of these new links and old content as we possibly can. The first idea is that if you're going to update the link, it's a good policy to update the content around the link. Don't just change or add a little text link at the bottom of the page. Why are you adding that link? That's what Google is asking. Why is this changing? If you're changing the paragraph, the content, the surrounding text around that, that means this is new information, this is worth paying attention to, and Google is going to pass much more value from that link.
While you're updating that, don't forget the title tag. If you're updating the content, this is a perfect time to re-eval your title tag. That's another freshness signal that Google is going to use in order to evaluate how important this change is and how significant it is.
If you're building external links, this is on an old website, it used to be a broken link, and you convinced a webmaster to update it to point to your site, don't just have them update the link. Give them some information about your site. Give them as much content as you can to add to his content so that content gets updated as well. The more changes, the more significant the change, the fresher this is going to appear and the more that little link is going to count. It's going to start to look just like a fresh link in the eyes of the search engines.
What if you can't control this? What if that webmaster says, "No, I'm just adding a link," and you can't really get him to update any of the content? Well, you still have some options. The main one you can do is take that old page that you don't control and start building new links towards it. That way, the link to your site is going to count a little bit more because that page is going to appear fresher in the eyes of the search engine. Just build some third-party links - they're called bank shots in the link building world - and that's going to pass more value. They do a tremendous job of helping that link seem more relevant.
On the same token, social signals. If you start tweeting, sharing, getting this page shared in your social circles, those are going to be more freshness signals for Google to look at. It's going to appear more fresh.
And D, all of the above. Do whatever you can to make this old page as fresh as it can be and get as much relevance out of that link that you possibly can.
The final option would simply be to just build a new page. Get new pages and new links, diversify your link profile. Regardless, we want you to get as much value out of all the links that you build.
That's it for today's Whiteboard Friday. If you're a link builder, if you have experience with this, please share your thoughts in the comments below. Thank you.
Video transcription by Speechpad.com

Kaspersky Internet Security Free download-2013

 Download kaspersky free trial-full paid version 2013

Many people on the Internet offer free download of paid version. Some even claim to provide activation code for 3 months or 1 year. But most of the time it's fake and kaspersky never offered any free download of  its paid versions for Online Internet security and antivirus products. If you are interested to download paid version you must purchase it and download directly from Kaspersky Labs. Kaspersky Labs offers many types of online Internet security products for office and company use alongwith its most popular Kaspersky antivirus products for Home users. Download real and valid paid or free trial version of kaspersky Internet security and Kaspersky anti-virus-2013. You can download free trial version of Kaspersky antivirus and use it on your computer system to see the results, if you find Kaspersky useful, just upgrade to a paid version to use it for a year otherwise you can try another antivirus software in the market. You can also read the real antivirus market share reports about how all the popular antivirus making companies are performing on the basis of paid/free registered user base all over the world.  

Best Buy Price-Kaspersky Antivirus and Kaspersky Internet Security Suite-2013

Kaspersky Internet Security 2013

Kaspersky Anti-virus and Kaspersky Internet Security Suite-2013 is one of the best and premium anti-virus software program for Home users,Small offices and business enterprises alike."Kaspersky anti-virus" and "Kaspersky Internet Security 2013" suites come in varied forms and formats.

But Kaspersky anti-virus and Internet Security Suite are the most popular among all the internet security systems offered by Kaspersky Labs. They come in single user,2-user,and 3-user licence. If you want to try Kespersky Anti-virus before purchasing the full version, you can free download the trial version of Kaspersky anti-virus and Internet Security 2013.

Kaspersky Anti-Virus Products - protect your PC against security threats with industry leading software!

For Asian and US countries- In the past few years Kaspersky has emerged as the best anti- virus software program and now, undoubtedly, as of 2013 it has become the top best #1 paid anti-virus software among all the top 10 best anti-virus software programs 2013.

What makes Kaspersky anti-virus and Kespersky Internet Security 2013 a strongly secure, and oh-so- great security system ?

• Faith and trust shown by over 300 million users worldwide who protect their system through Kaspersky Internet Security. Every product has some unsatisfied customers,but that many users cant be wrong! 

• Kaspersky Lab has been providing Internet Security Systems for more than 15 years around the world.

• Kaspersky labs has a large number of offline partners around the world who are selling internet security products directly to their loyal customers.

• Kaspersky Internet Security products are greatly versatile,effective, sophisticated ,and above all worth their price.    

What Benefits you get from Kaspersky anti-virus and Kaspersky Internet Security 2013  

• Kaspersky Internet Security provides a very secure way to online banking and shopping.
• It provides effective protection from unknown threats through its malware detection capacity.
• Kaspersky Internet Security securely undo changes made by malware,threats,trojans.
• Identity protection from phishing attacks and Kaspersky anti-virus and Internet Security also provides hybrid protection.

Kaspersky Anti-Virus and Internet Security Features

• Kaspersky URL Advisor.
• Kaspersky File Advisor.
• Kaspersky Internet System Watcher.
• Application Control.
• Safe Run Mode.
• Two-way personal firewall .
• Anti-Phishing and Anti-Spam technology.
• Parental Control.
• Completely redesigned interface      

System requirements for Kaspersky Internet Security 2013-

• Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition (SP2 or above)
• Microsoft Windows XP Professional (SP2 or above)
• Microsoft Windows XP Professional 64-bit Edition (SP2 or above)
• CPU Processor 800 MHz or above
• 512 MB RAM
• Windows Vista Home Basic (32/64-Bit)
• Microsoft Vista Home Premium (32/64-Bit)
• Vista Business (32/64-Bit)
• Windows Vista Enterprise (32/64-Bit)
• Microsoft Vista Ultimate (32/64-Bit)
• Windows 7 Starter
• Windows 7 Home Basic (32/64-Bit)
• Windows 7 Home Premium (32/64-Bit)
• Windows 7 Professional (32/64-Bit)
• Windows 7 Ultimate (32/64-Bit)

Buy Kaspersky Internet Security 2013 directly from the Kaspersky Labs

Kaspersky Internet Security 2013 has everything you need for a safe and secure Internet experience.

Buy Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2013 directly from kaspersky Labs

Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2013 -

Protect your PC year with an expert antivirus solution specially created for home users.

kaspersky free trial download

If you want to take advantage of a free trial version of Kaspersky you may download free trial version of Kaspersky and you can use kaspersky free for 1 month. If you are satisfied with the Kaspersky antivirus in terms of security, protection and services, you can convert it to paid version for single user,2 users-3 users license.Kaspersky Lab has full confidence in its Antivirus and Online Internet security products and that's why Kaspersky offers its users one month full trial version for evaluation of Kaspersky antivirus and Kaspersky Online Internet security products Kaspersky Free Trial  Download.

If you dont wish to spend on purchasing Kaspersky Internet Security, you may free download one month trail version.Or if you want to get any other anti-virus software which is available free of cost then go to my another blog post based on Top 10 Best Free Anti-virus programs 2013  -I am sure you will get a good anti-virus software with full version and that even without spending a single penny! 

Download Kaspersky Internet Security Free and Paid Version 2013 for 2 -3 Users License 

The anti-virus programs mentioned in the above list are all good except the few things: You get the anti-virus for free of cost but the main problem with free antivirus programs is that they either dont provide the standard support or their validity period expires after a month.

Thats the scenario where Kaspersky Internet Security comes in the picture. I myself used to use free anti-virus lately but due to the above reasons i switched to Kaspersky paid version ( That is Kaspersky Internet Security ) and since then i have been using it and i have never looked back for any free anti-virus neither i faced any problem. Not a bit! And its worth every single penny !!

Most of you readers must be already aware about the fact that Kaspersky is a very popular,potent, widely used anti-virus software program and Kaspersky Lab is the lead anti-virus software program company among all the top notch anti-virus companies.   

You may buy Kaspersky Internet Security with lowest price and you can get 2 users,3 users 1 year paid version license in as low as $ 9.95- the best price for Kaspersky Internet Security 2013. Click below links to buy/get the full details directly from kaspersky Lab.

Best Buy Kaspersky's 2 Users and 3 Users paid version in as low as  $9.95

Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2013 - 3 Users
If you want to download free Kaspersky anti-virus, you may download the trial version of Kaspersky Internet Security from here   

Watch Detailed Video of Kaspersky Internet Security 2013