What is the average response time for Reconsideration request
-
I know that Google states 'several' weeks but just wondering if anybody has any experience with a Reconsideration request and if they got any type of reply and what their general experience was.
thanks
-
It took 2 weeks for us a few months ago, but we were simply told that the site did not have a penalty.
We made some changes both internally and created some better links and we were back up the rankings,
-
Hey Barry
Having a bit of insight into your problem from our email discussion, I think you will find that making the changes will be enough and your site will just pop out of the filter when the problems are resolved.
I may be wrong, it's a one way flow of information with Google on this so definitely make the request but expect anything up to the seven weeks. Though, even post panda when i guess they were getting hammered, one site I helped got responded to in around 4 weeks so... 3 is a good bet.
Cheers
Marcus
-
I recently filed a reconsideration request and got a response within a week. It was a standard form letter and appeared only in WMT (not in an email to me). In that particular case my reconsideration request was not approved. After I filed another request a few days later, it took about 3 weeks to receive the next response.
-
Actually I will correct my original response.
On Mar 22, I filed a reconsideration request. The site involved had received a manual penalty from Google which had previously been confirmed by Google in writing.
On April 2nd, I received a response from Google via WMT titled "We've processed your reconsideration request".
The response stated "We've now reviewed your site. When we review a site, we check to see if it is in violation of our Webmaster Guidelines. If we don't find any problems, we'll reconsider our indexing of your site."
Immediately upon receipt of that message, I was able to find the site had been added to Google's index.
-
Was that an acutal written response?
-
I have only filed one reconsideration request this year. It was a 3 week response time.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Moving from M. to Responsive: Rel Alternate Considerations
Hey Guys, We’re in the process of transitioning our key traffic generating pages on our website from m. to responsive. Today, our site uses Google’s ‘Separate URLs’ method. Rel alternate on desktop pages to m. pages 302 redirects pushing mobile visitors to m. pages Canonical on m. pages back to desktop pages As we make the transition to responsive we’ll be taking the following steps: Removal of 302 redirects pushing mobile visitors to m. pages 301 redirects from m. pages to desktop pages With those changes in mind, I’d love to get the communities opinion on how to best handle the real alternate attribute on desktop pages. I'm considering leaving the rel alternate attribute in place on desktop pages for 30-90 days so that search engines continue to see the alternate version without the 302 redirects in place, crawl it, and as a result discover the 301 redirects more readily. If we remove the 302 redirects as well as the rel alternate, then my feeling is that search engines would just index the responsive page accordingly and be less likely to catch the 301 redirects pointing from the m. pages and make the transition of mobile pages in search indices take longer than necessary. Ultimately, I'm probably splitting hairs and getting a bit nuanced because I believe things will work themselves out whether we leave the rel alternate or remove it but I thought it would be great to get any opinions or thoughts from community members that have made a similar transition. Thanks in advance for stopping by and providing your thoughts. All the best,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TakeLessons
Jon PS - for your reference, the only mention that I was able to dig up in Q&A for a move from m. to responsive are the following: Redirecting M Dot Mobile Website to Responsive Design Website Questions SEO Concerns From Moving Mobile M Dot site to Responsive Version?0 -
Sitemap with homepage URL repeated several times - it is a problem?
Hello Mozzers, I am looking at a website with the homepage repeated several times (4 times) on the sitemap (sitemap is autogenerated via a plugin) - is this an SEO problem do you think - might it damage SEO performance, or can I ignore this issue? I am thinking I can ignore, yet it's an odd "issue" so your advice would be welcome! Thanks, Luke
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
My page ranking dropped after I made it responsive
Recently, I made one of my site page responsive. It was ranking on 13th Position and after I made the page responsive, it dropped to 24 desktop and 35 on mobile rankings. I ran mobile friendly test and it said "awesome, your page is mobile friendly". Not sure, what went wrong here. Page in question is: https://www.itcontractorsuk.com/ Can someone please advice? Please Note: My site is partially responsive.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ThinkWebUK0 -
Our client's web property recently switched over to secure pages (https) however there non secure pages (http) are still being indexed in Google. Should we request in GWMT to have the non secure pages deindexed?
Our client recently switched over to https via new SSL. They have also implemented rel canonicals for most of their internal webpages (that point to the https). However many of their non secure webpages are still being indexed by Google. We have access to their GWMT for both the secure and non secure pages.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RosemaryB
Should we just let Google figure out what to do with the non secure pages? We would like to setup 301 redirects from the old non secure pages to the new secure pages, but were not sure if this is going to happen. We thought about requesting in GWMT for Google to remove the non secure pages. However we felt this was pretty drastic. Any recommendations would be much appreciated.0 -
What is a "good" dwell time?
I know there isn't any official documentation from Google about exact number of seconds a user should spend on a site, but does anyone have any case studies that looks at what might be a good "dwell time" to shoot for? We're looking on integrating an exact time on site into or Google Analytics metrics to count as a 'non-bounce'--so, for example, if a user spends 45 seconds on an article, then, we wouldn't count it as a bounce, since the reader likely read through all the content.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline0 -
Stop Google crawling a site at set times
Hi All I know I can use robots.txt to block Google from pages on my site but is there a way to stop Google crawling my site at set times of the day? Or to request that they crawl at other times? Thanks Sean
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ske110 -
Is this a Correct Time to Use 302 Redirects?
Hi Mozzers! We are going through a rebranding process, and as of this morning we have 3 domains, all with identical content. For example (not real domain names): www.fantastic.com
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Travis-W
www.fantasticfireworks.com
www.fireworks.com We are using 3 domains to ease the rebranding transition. We currently only want people to visit 'www.fantastic.com,' and if they visit the other 2 domains we want them redirected. Since we will be using these other domains eventually, should we use 302 redirects instead of 301s? The other domains are new and do not have any domain authority or sites linking in, so we do not need to worry about link juice. Does it really matter what type of redirect we use? Thanks!0 -
Is Google's reinclusion request process flawed?
We have been having a bit of a nightmare with a Google penalty (please see http://www.browsermedia.co.uk/2012/04/25/negative-seo-or-google-just-getting-it-painfully-wrong/ or http://econsultancy.com/uk/blog/10093-why-google-needs-to-be-less-kafkaesque for background information - any thoughts on why we have been penalised would be very, very welcome!) which has highlighted a slightly alarming aspect of Google's reinclusion process. As far as I can see (using Google Analytics), supporting material prepared as part of a reinclusion request is basically ignored. I have just written an open letter to the search quality team at http://www.browsermedia.co.uk/2012/06/19/dear-matt-cutts/ which gives more detail but the short story is that the supporting evidence that we prepared as part of a request was NOT viewed by anyone at Google. Has anyone monitored this before and experienced the same thing? Does anyone have any suggestions regarding how to navigate the treacherous waters of resolving a penalty? This no doubt sounds like a sob story for us, but I do think that this is a potentially big issue and one that I would love to explore more. If anyone could contribute from the search quality team, we would love to hear your thoughts! Cheers, Joe
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BrowserMediaLtd0