Before you rewrite a third-party section, split its Google traffic by country (2026)

Google changed the effect of site-reputation manual actions on August 30, 2026. For searches outside the European Economic Area (EEA), a manual action can affect the part of a site covered by the action. For searches inside the EEA, that impact does not apply; Google may instead separate the affected section so it ranks on its own over time. 1

That split changes the first question after a traffic drop. A site that mixes its own product or editorial pages with third-party sections can show a regional loss rather than a sitewide loss. Google's Search Status Dashboard lists no recent crawling or indexing incident, and its ranking history shows the August 2026 spam update as the latest listed ranking event. 2

The one action: split the evidence by country before editing

Use this check when a trusted domain carries a section built by another party: sponsored articles, affiliate pages, marketplace content, paid reviews, or a forum and other user-generated area. Third-party content alone does not violate Google's site-reputation policy. The policy concerns third-party content published mainly to use the host site's established ranking signals. 3

Open Search Console's Manual actions report. Look for an issue named Site reputation abuse and record the URL pattern Google lists. The report can cover a subset of pages or the whole site. A green status with no manual action sends this investigation down a different path. 4
Open the Performance report and select Countries. Compare the same date range before and after August 30. Read the country rows alongside the Pages and Queries views. The Performance report supports all three dimensions and reports clicks, impressions, click-through rate, and average position for the selected view. 5
Separate the two patterns. A loss concentrated in countries outside the EEA, with the same URL pattern named in Manual actions, fits the policy's documented scope. A loss spread across EEA and non-EEA countries, or a loss with a clear Manual actions report, needs a broader diagnosis. Keep the country result and the affected URL pattern in the same note so the next edit has a testable target.
Sample the affected pages before changing them. Check whether the pages are genuinely third-party and whether they were added mainly to borrow the host site's reputation. A clearly disclosed, edited, first-party piece can have a different policy position from an unrelated page copied or commissioned for search traffic. Google's policy documentation gives content quality, editorial responsibility, and whether the content appears elsewhere as factors considered together. 3

What to change after the scope is clear

Keep the repair inside the affected section. Google lists four possible directions for content that is inconsistent with the policy: move it to a new domain with qualifying outbound links, use noindex, remake it as first-party content, or remove it. A subdomain or subdirectory on the same site may leave the underlying policy problem in place, and a redirect from the old site can create another policy concern. 4

Choose the direction that matches the content's real purpose. A useful editorial section can be rebuilt with clear ownership and original work. A page family that exists only to host unrelated commercial copy can be removed or excluded from Search. A separately operated publication can move to its own domain when the new domain actually owns and operates the content. Keep affected URLs accessible to Google while a noindex directive is being processed; robots.txt blocking prevents Google from reading that directive. 3 4

Verification

The check has done its job when four observations line up:

Manual actions identifies the relevant issue and URL pattern, or it shows a clear report that rules out this specific manual-action path.
The Performance report shows whether the loss is concentrated outside the EEA, inside the EEA, or across both groups.
Sampled pages match the policy concern, while unaffected first-party sections remain outside the repair.
After every affected page is fixed, the Manual actions report accepts a Request Review with the changed editorial or publishing process described. Google says review begins after the site owner fixes all pages covered by the issue and can take days or weeks. 4

A country split diagnoses scope; it does not promise an immediate ranking recovery. A traffic loss by itself cannot identify site-reputation abuse, and one practitioner's report cannot establish a Google-wide cause. Use the result to keep a regional, section-level problem from turning into a sitewide rewrite.

References

1
Update to the Site Reputation Policy
developers.google.com
2
Google Search Status Dashboard
status.search.google.com
3
Spam policies for Google web search
developers.google.com
4
Manual actions report
support.google.com
5
Performance report (Search results): Overview and basic setup
support.google.com

The one action: split the evidence by country before editing

Open Search Console's Manual actions report. Look for an issue named Site reputation abuse and record the URL pattern Google lists. The report can cover a subset of pages or the whole site. A green status with no manual action sends this investigation down a different path. 4

Open the Performance report and select Countries. Compare the same date range before and after August 30. Read the country rows alongside the Pages and Queries views. The Performance report supports all three dimensions and reports clicks, impressions, click-through rate, and average position for the selected view. 5

Separate the two patterns. A loss concentrated in countries outside the EEA, with the same URL pattern named in Manual actions, fits the policy's documented scope. A loss spread across EEA and non-EEA countries, or a loss with a clear Manual actions report, needs a broader diagnosis. Keep the country result and the affected URL pattern in the same note so the next edit has a testable target.

Sample the affected pages before changing them. Check whether the pages are genuinely third-party and whether they were added mainly to borrow the host site's reputation. A clearly disclosed, edited, first-party piece can have a different policy position from an unrelated page copied or commissioned for search traffic. Google's policy documentation gives content quality, editorial responsibility, and whether the content appears elsewhere as factors considered together. 3

What to change after the scope is clear

Verification

The check has done its job when four observations line up:

Manual actions identifies the relevant issue and URL pattern, or it shows a clear report that rules out this specific manual-action path.

The Performance report shows whether the loss is concentrated outside the EEA, inside the EEA, or across both groups.

Sampled pages match the policy concern, while unaffected first-party sections remain outside the repair.

After every affected page is fixed, the Manual actions report accepts a Request Review with the changed editorial or publishing process described. Google says review begins after the site owner fixes all pages covered by the issue and can take days or weeks. 4

Before you rewrite a third-party section, split its Google traffic by country

The one action: split the evidence by country before editing

What to change after the scope is clear

Verification

References

Related content

Before you rewrite a third-party section, split its Google traffic by country

The one action: split the evidence by country before editing

What to change after the scope is clear

Verification

References

Related content