A forum website published a post on Reddit expressing disbelief that Google issued a manual action for thin content, finding it hard to reconcile how Google could send so much traffic for nearly twenty years only to find fault with it now. Google is calling it a manual action for thin content, but SEOs believe it may be for AI-generated content<\/p>\n
According to the Reddit post, a forum received a manual action for thin content. The notification specifically pointed to over half a million posts in one specific category of the site, \/threads\/. They explained that it\u2019s a partial manual action and that the penalization does not affect the rest of the site, just this one part of the website<\/p>\n
They explained<\/a>:<\/em><\/p>\n \u201cThe message (WNC\u2011651700, ~17 July 2026) is: \u201cThin content with little or no added value<\/a>.\u201d The Affects field names exactly one thing: the URL pattern windowsforum.com\/threads\/. No example URLs were provided. Not one.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Google has multiple definitions of thin content. One of them,thin affiliate content, is content published on affiliate sites that are word for word duplicates of what is found on the merchant websites<\/p>\n Former Googler Matt Cutts has said<\/a> that thin affiliate content lacks \u201coriginal insight or research or analysis\u201d or any other kind of content like original videos that \u201cadd value.\u201d<\/p>\n Other forms of thin content:<\/strong><\/p>\n Cutts has also explained that the opposite of thin content is content that site owners have written themselves, contains additional value, is unique, and leans in on the author\u2019s actual expertise<\/p>\n That last part may be critical for understanding why the Redditor\u2019s forum received a thin content warning, but not in the context that the site owners were thinking of<\/p>\n The part that confused the site owner is that there were two other sections of the website that were more clearly thin content, yet those web pages were not subject to a manual action. One section was a feed of syndicated headlines. The other section was an archived knowledge base. They said both sections have been inactive for three years, yet neither of them was called out for a manual action. It was the forum section of the site that received a manual action.<\/p>\n They wrote:<\/em><\/p>\n \u201cThe part that doesn\u2019t reconcile<\/p>\n Two sections of the site are the obvious candidates for a thin\u2011content finding:<\/p>\n an old syndicated headline feed<\/p>\n an archived knowledge base<\/p>\n Together, that\u2019s 11,927 threads with a mean age of about 12.5 years<\/p>\n \u2026This material has been crawled, indexed, and ranked continuously through Panda, Penguin, the September 2023 helpful content update, and through the community\u2019s migration from its original domain\u2026 Fifteen years, two domains, every major ranking change Google has shipped and it never drew a manual action.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Redditors expressed outrage, with one saying that it\u2019s the result of Google\u2019s monopoly in search<\/p>\n Stablogger\u2019s response was representative of the outrage many felt:<\/em><\/p>\n \u201cThis is pretty shocking indeed, especially knowing the reputation of this forum. Is there some thin content? Most certainly, but you have repetitive or pretty much empty threads on every single forum, you have them on Reddit, too<\/p>\n It\u2019s the nature of user generated content, some threads attract loads of interaction, some don\u2019t at all, but it can\u2019t be the solution to simply delete thin threads without the consent of whoever posted them.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Well, contrary to what Stablogger wrote, pruning thin or outdated conversations is an option and many forum site owners do it<\/p>\n Google has in the past said that content that is AI-generated does not automatically mean it\u2019s bad. However, Australian-based SEO Gagan Ghotra suggested that AI-generated content may be the reason for the thin content manual action<\/p>\n Ghotra tweeted:<\/em><\/p>\n The points of interest are that the forum characterizes its AI chatbot as a staff member, it has been active since 2023, and the chatbot has posted over a hundred thousand responses to questions<\/p>\n The possible reason why AI-generated answers may be considered thin content is that the expected value add of forums is that the answers are based on actual human experience<\/p>\n AI does not have experience. It deals in received knowledge. Received knowledge is knowledge that comes from someone or somewhere else, like from a book or another website. There is no value add there in the context of a forum. It\u2019s not what users expect when they post a question on a forum<\/p>\n Featured Image by Shutterstock\/mundissima<\/em><\/p>\n CategoryNewsSEO<\/p>\n \n Related:<\/strong> \n <a href="https:\/\/yoursite.com\/automation-africa\/" title="WhatsApp<\/a> Marketing Automation Africa: 6 Dangerous Mistakes Brands Make in Nigeria”> Join Justfine Infotech<\/strong> and build real digital skills in AI, automation, web development, digital marketing, office productivity, e-commerce, freelancing and cybersecurity<\/a>.<\/p>\n Available Programmes:<\/strong> WhatsApp:<\/strong>\n
\nIt\u2019s a partial manual action, meaning a human reviewer looked at part of the site, judged it unworthy of ranking, and suppressed it pending a reconsideration request<\/p>\n
\nThat\u2019s 168,290 visible threads and over half a million posts, twenty years deep, suppressed together<\/p>\nThin Content<\/h2>\n
\n
Why Is Actual<\/em> Thin Content Not Penalized?<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
Maybe Thin Content = AI Generated Content?<\/h2>\n
Here\u2019s a closeup of the screenshot:<\/h3>\n
Authenticity And Value Add<\/h2>\n
\n
\n Digital Automation Training Benin: 5 Winning Skills Employers Demand in 2026
\n <\/a>\n <\/p>\n
\n WhatsApp Marketing Automation Africa: 6 Dangerous Mistakes Brands Make in Nigeria
\n <\/a>\n <\/p>\n<\/div>\nWant to learn this practically?<\/h3>\n
\n 6 Weeks Certificate \u2022 3 Months Professional Certificate \u2022 6 Months Diploma \u2022 Full Professional Diploma<\/p>\n
\n +229 01 57 57 99 15
\n +229 01 66 68 11 60<\/p>\n