Should I Disavow More Links
-
My SEO website got hit with a very severe penalty about a year ago and it was totally banished from the rankings for all of the money terms like SEO, SEO company and search engine optimisation (before the penalty I ranked in the top 10-15 for all of those phrases, top 3 for SEO company). I was probably hit for being listed in shed loads of paid directories, low quality free directories, footer links in client sites, keyword forum signature links and articles with keyword rich text links.
A month or so after I got hit I started trying to clean up my link profile, I got rid of all of the client website links, I changed the link text on the majority of forum signature links and article links, I managed to get rid of about 50 directory links and the ones that I could not get taken down I disavowed - about 150.
During that time I sent 2-3 separate reconsideration requests and I got this message each time:
"Links to your site violate Google's quality guidelines"
After doing all of that work and being rejected I pretty much gave up - things just seemed to get worst, not only was I no longer ranking for the money terms, but all of my blog posts tanked as well.
I got my site redesigned and switched to Wordpress - I used 301 redirects and everything but they totally didn't work. My organic traffic went down to less than 50 hits a day - before the penalty I was getting over 300 a day.
Then on Saturday just gone, almost exactly a year after I got hit with the penalty I noticed my site ranking in position 23 on Google.co.uk in the UK for the competitive phrase SEO company from being absolutely nowhere and I do mean nowhere.
This sign has given me hope and the motivation to get rid of the penalty altogether, update all of my articles, get rid of bad advice in old blog posts and get rid of the rest of the bad links.
Thing is that I am nervous to go getting rid of more links and disavowing, what if I do more harm then good? Do you think the penalty has been removed and I should just leave the rest of the bad links or should I continue trying to clean things up?
By the way, my website is http://www.seoco.co.uk
-
Hi David,
It sounds like you have had a partial recovery and looking at your other replies below, that the manual action you have applies to the links themselves which means Google have reduced their value and your rankings accordingly. So whilst they may not be actively hurting you, it is always good to have a clean slate and remove manual penalties if you can so that you know there is nothing holding you back from ranking.
In terms of your actual question, if you have links that are clearly outside of Google guidelines, you may as well get rid of them if you can. They're probably not helping and if you are able to get rid of them, then it may help prevent any future problems if Google tweak how they treat those links.
It sounds like you have recovered a little though with your ranking returning, so removing other links may not be a high priority for you, but like I said, it's good to get a clean slate and be sure that you can move forward building good links with nothing else holding you back.
I hope that helps a bit!
Paddy
-
That's a tough one. At one time, John Mueller (Google employee) said that WMT links were all that you needed in order to get rid of a link related problem. But, when Google started giving example links for failed reconsideration requests they commonly would give links that are not in WMT. Sometimes they can be found in ahrefs or majestic but sometimes they can't be found in any of the backlink checkers!
I use WMT (both sample and most recent), OSE, Majestic and Ahrefs. You can also get links by registering for Bing WMT and Yandex as well. Plus, you can look at your GA referral data over the last few years which may find you more.
If you kept any records of where you had made links then that can help as well.
-
I have another question, because I have over 1000 domains linking to my site in webmaster tools I cannot see all of the domains linking to my site, how do you recommend I get around this? I have already gone through all of the links in Open Site Explorer.
-
Thanks Marie, I think I am going to take your advice and keep going with cleaning up bad links.
Most of the organic links use my company name "The SEO Company", my domain name "Seoco", my name "David Eaves", or the name of the article/blog post, but there are a few that simply say "SEO company".
-
OK, so now that you know you have a manual action, you know that you've got work to do. Some people would argue that if you have a partial action that you don't need to do anything because Google has already discounted those links. So, in other words, if you take action to remove the warning message it's not like Google is going to start counting them already. But, I would disagree. If you have a manual action, in most cases it's almost a blessing because if you do the work to get the warning lifted then you will have also done the work needed to escape the Penguin algorithm.
If what you are saying about self made links is true then aren't you breaking the guidelines by having a link to your real estate website in your moz profile?
I think in Google's eyes it's mostly about scale and intent to manipulate the search results. The link that I have from my Moz profile could potentially be seen as unnatural on a manual review, but the odd link like that is not likely to do me harm. It's not anchored with a keyword and it's obvious that I have not used links in profiles as an attempt to manipulate Google. I'm not saying that your profile links are necessarily bad as I haven't analyzed your site, but if you've got lots of them, and if a good number of them are keyword anchored, then they could be causing you problems. Also, if there are profile links made on sites where you don't actively participate then Google may pick up on this as a manipulating scheme. (I'm not saying that you have links like this...just throwing it out as an idea.)
My website has hundreds of totally organic links from websites like Techcrunch, Mashable, this site, search engine land and loads more thanks to blog posts and a popular infographic I did
What kind of anchor text are they linking back with? If it's a money term then this can definitely be a factor in your penalty even if the links are on high quality sites.
Manual penalties and Penguin are created to catch sites that are cheating their way to the top. They're not created to demote sites that have the odd unnatural link here and there. I have yet to analyze a Penguin hit site or a manually penalized site that I thought was hit unfairly.
I have far more organic links then almost any other UK SEO company.
If you've got good links beneath the unnatural ones then this means that if you do a good cleanup of the unnatural links then you have a good chance for an excellent recovery. You may need to wait for the next Penguin refresh to fully see the effects though.
-
I have just checked in WMT and in the partial matches section it says:
"Some manual actions may apply to specific pages, sections or links
Reason
Unnatural links to your site - impact links"
If what you are saying about self made links is true then aren't you breaking the guidelines by having a link to your real estate website in your moz profile? The links I have in forums are signature links and have been earned through participation just like your links on your moz profile - I have not spammed or anything to get them.
My website has hundreds of totally organic links from websites like Techcrunch, Mashable, this site, search engine land and loads more thanks to blog posts and a popular infographic I did, I have far more organic links then almost any other UK SEO company.
Thanks for your response.
-
When you get an unnatural links penalty, Google wants to see that you have made attempts to remove almost every single link that was self made. It's not enough to get most of them...you need to address close to 100%
Just changing anchor text in self made links is probably not going to work. If you control the link then it's probably unnatural and needs to go.
Do you have naturally earned links to your site? If not, then you may not be able to rank again unfortunately.
The main question that you are asking though is why you have popped back up to position #23. It's possible that you had a manual penalty that has expired. Take a look in WMT under Search Traffic --> Manual Actions and see if you still have manual action there. Even if the penalty has expired though it's important to do the work to clean things up completely because you can get re-penalized again.
I am suspicious that Google has been testing Penguin refresh data as I have seen a couple of my Penguin hit clients make slight recoveries and then drop back down again. It's possible that when Penguin refreshes you will bump up higher which would be good!
-
Thanks, will bare that in mind
-
While I agree with your advice, I am not sure that getting rid of more links right away is the right thing to do.
@David
Without knowing the entire story of this site, it seems to me that your appearance on page three indicates that the penalties are no longer affecting your site as it has positively improved. I think in this case spending your time trying to get some very authoritative and trusted links would do you the most good. Remember, most sites have spam links pointing to them for one reason or the other but if those links make up only a small portion of the total link profile, they often do not harm the site. If this wasn't the case negative SEO would be the only way people boosted their own sites.
Good luck and keep at it!
-
Hi Bill, with the 150 directory links that I disavowed I sent each of them two separate link removal requests before I disavowed and I marked all of it down in a google doc and sent it to google in the reconsideration requests. The only thing I didn't do was actually send Google a copy of the emails I sent. Are you saying that I need to send Google a copy of the emails I send to each directory owner/website owner?
Thanks for your response by the way.
-
David, whenever you get that message from Google, they're looking for you to make a considerable effort to remove the links, not just disavow the links. So, before you submit another reconsideration request, you'll need to do a few things:
-
identify all of the links. Don't just get the links that OSE gives you, get the webmaster tools links, the ahrefs links, and the majestic SEO links, as well
-
review all of the links and identify the toxic/bad/unhealthy/paid links (the ones that Google is having a problem with).
-
contact site owners to get those links removed. You'll need to document everything, even show the emails you sent as well as when you sent them, etc. etc.
Google is looking for you to spend time getting the links removed, and a disavow will not be enough in order to get a manual penalty revoked.
-
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
-
Is it Okay to Nofollow all External Links
So, we all "nofollow" most of the external links or all external links to hold back the page rank. Is it correct? As per Google, only non-trusty and paid links must be nofollow. Is it all same about external links and nofollow now?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | vtmoz0 -
Weird Links Should I Disavow?
I have noticed some weird backlinks in Google Search console and Referals for Google Analytics. For example a reddit page I have never commented on or been on has referred over 900 visitors. The page has no relevance to my site whatsoever, when I check the source code I cannot see the link, so perhaps its been removed. Also seeing links in Google Search Console from sites that are just domain name for sale type pages, and sites/pages that don't seem to exist anymore, or which redirect to others. All of these links have disappeared as well, nothing in source code . And numerous pages that used to link to 404's on my site, many domain name for sale type pages, another which makes my bitdefender plugin go crazy. And seeing common referral patterns in Google Analytics, i.e. numerous /try.php pages on different domains that presumably used to link back but which now redirect to another site. I cannot say there are thousands of these, but I guess they are causing more harm than good. My instinct is to I go through all the links I can and disavow, the link types described above, but am I safe to do so? And is it a good idea or a waste of my time? NB: I haven't built any of them.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | GrouchyKids1 -
Boosting Equity-Passing Links?
Hello Moz folks, We have a SEO client who has exponentially fewer equity-passing links(inbound and internal) than their two major competitors, which I'm sure is a MAJOR factor in their rankings. In fact, the numbers are so drastically different seems to indicate that these competitors are participating in some sort of black hat link farm. For example: Internal and Inbound Equity-Passing Links Our client - 2274 Competitor 1 - 496k Competitor 2 - 143k How is this possible or legit? I don't understand. Our well-known client has been in business for 10+ years and they have a content-rich, WordPress website consisting of thousands of pages that have been optimized for search, including keyword-rich URLs, page titles, metas, H1 tags, etc. The things that keep coming to mind are the need for more links and more content. One thing that comes to mind is that the client launched a new site about 1.5 years ago and changed their domain prefix from http to https. I'm not sure if this would have an impact on inbound link equity or not. 301 redirects are in place so from what I understand, all of the old http pages should have passed at least partial domain equity to the new https site. I'm also wondering if changing the structure of WordPress categories, tags and author pages could somehow dynamically increase the page count and amount of perceived content. We may be overly restrictive with Google Search Console. Anyway, I'm at a loss and don't understand how our competitors, with seemingly similar content, could have exponentially more links and are dominating the search results. Thanks for your help and sage advice. Your input is very much appreciated. Eric pSzXl
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | EricFish0 -
Disappearing Links Black Hat ?
I have seen reports of Black hat spamming with dodgy links but we have another issue with a clients site. The site had a small number of solid following links about 60 which had been in place for years and in the past few weeks all but those directly under their control have ceased to link. At the same time a very aggressive competitor has entered their market which is owned by the officers of an SEO company. Could it be that they have somehow disavowed the links to the site to damage it how do we find out? there are now just 10 following links?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Eff-Commerce0 -
Linking C blocks strategy - Which hat is this tactic?
This related to a previous question I had about satellite sites. I questioned the white-hativity of their strategy. Basically to increase the number of linking C blocks they created 100+ websites on different C blocks that link back to our main domain. The issue I see is that- the sites are 98% exactly the same in appearance and content. Only small paragraph is different on the homepage. the sites only have outbound links to our main domain, no in-bound links Is this a legit? I am not an SEO expert, but have receive awesome advice here. So thank you in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Buddys0 -
Duplicate content or not? If you're using abstracts from external sources you link to
I was wondering if a page (a blog post, for example) that offers links to external web pages along with abstracts from these pages would be considered duplicate content page and therefore penalized by Google. For example, I have a page that has very little original content (just two or three sentences that summarize or sometimes frame the topic) followed by five references to different external sources. Each reference contains a title, which is a link, and a short abstract, which basically is the first few sentences copied from the page it links to. So, except from a few sentences in the beginning everything is copied from other pages. Such a page would be very helpful for people interested in the topic as the sources it links to had been analyzed before, handpicked and were placed there to enhance user experience. But will this format be considered duplicate or near-duplicate content?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | romanbond0 -
Google-backed sites' link profiles
Curious what you SEO people think of the link profiles of these (high-ranking) Google-backed UK sites: http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains?site=www.startupdonut.co.uk http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains?site=www.lawdonut.co.uk http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains?site=www.marketingdonut.co.uk http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains?site=www.itdonut.co.uk http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains?site=www.taxdonut.co.uk Each site has between 40k and 50k inlinks counted in OSE. However, there are relatively few linking root domains in each case: 273 for marketingdonut 216 for startupdonut 90 for lawdonut 53 for itdonut 16 for taxdonut Is there something wrong with the OSE data here? Does this imply that the average root domain linking to the taxdonut site does so with 2857 links? The sites have no significant social media stats. The sites are heavily inter-linked. Also linked from the operating business, BHP Information Solutions (tagline "Gain access to SMEs"). Is this what Google would think of as a "natural" link profile? Interestingly, they've managed to secure links on quite a few UK local authority resources pages - generally being the only commercial website on those pages.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | seqal0 -
Is OSE data reliable and removal of malicious inbound links?
I ran a report on my site (www.rentscouter.com) using OSE and it is reporting some very strange inbound links like: anchor text = Megan http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/mmnr/smr/Paul_Henderson_Interview_Full_Clip_REVISED.f4v?m=pc&a=bookmarkList.view&target_user_id=1&search_type=tag&keyword=蒲田・大森・羽田周辺 http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/mmnr/smr/Paul_Henderson_Interview_Full_Clip_REVISED.f4v?m=pc&a=bookmarkList.view&target_user_id=1&search_type=tag&keyword=熱闘!甲子園%2F高校野球ゲーム http://www.hawkeyesports.com/photos/schools/stan/sport/m-baskbl/04-05action/Thumbs.db?pages10=10&size=9?pk=1 anchor text = Alexa's Mom http://www.lg.com/it/products/documents/LE8800.epk?action=view&pageId=214&start=69164 http://www.michigan.gov/documents/techtalk/SEM-0601_191695_7.dot?blogname=mahdid&sub=5&tpl=0 anchor text = http://fansofdavid.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/4v5sh3k1.htm?seccion=busqarag_s&busq=Huesos&?seccion=basearag_c&id=3&?seccion=busqarag_s&busq=Huesos&?seccion=basearag_c&id=3&_pagi_pg=596 However, none of these seem to show up in my Google Webmaster account. And generally when I go to some of these links I can't find any reference to my site - is the OSE data bad or are these really shady links someone is building to knock down my site? What is showing up in GWT are a bunch of growing crappy links that redirect to some advertising site - does anyone know of a way to get these removed by Google as I doubt I'm going have any luck trying to contact the owner(s) of these sites: | http://harleydavidsonjacket.org/article/252213-best_penis_enlargement_methods.htm |
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BoulderJoe
| http://harleydavidsonjacket.org/article/252426-plumbers_and_gasfitters_needed_urgently.htm |
| http://harleydavidsonjacket.org/article/252451-the_importance_of_plumbers_and_more.htm |
| http://harleydavidsonjacket.org/article/253039-football_betting_systems_can_they_be_profitable.htm |
| http://harleydavidsonjacket.org/article/253131-my_teen_wants_to_know_how_sex_was_and_is_for_me_what_do_i_say.htm |
| http://harleydavidsonjacket.org/article/254364-why_marriage_counseling_is_good_for_you.htm |
| http://harleydavidsonjacket.org/article/254449-herpes_dating_service_what_is_it.htm | Yes, I know Google will theoretically and maybe eventually "ignore" such links, but that will be on Google time 4 weeks or 4 years - who knows. Plus, with a younger site with a thinner link profile - anything like the links above can't be helping me...... I'm trying to figure out why my site keeps bouncing between #5 and #255 for specific keywords and determining if I have a google penalty which is being discussed in this thread: http://www.seomoz.org/q/help-with-diagnosing-google-penalty0