Should I remove all vendor links (link farm concerns)?
-
I have a web site that has been around for a long time. The industry we serve includes many, many small vendors and - back in the day - we decided to allow those vendors to submit their details, including a link to their own web site, for inclusion on our pages. These vendor listings were presented in location (state) pages as well as more granular pages within our industry (we called them "topics). I don't think it's important any more but 100% of the vendors listed were submitted by the vendors themselves, rather than us "hunting down" links for inclusion or automating this in any way.
Some of the vendors (I'd guess maybe 10-15%) link back to us but many of these sites are mom-and-pop sites and would have extremely low authority.
Today the list of vendors is in the thousands (US only). But the database is old and not maintained in any meaningful way. We have many broken links and I believe, rightly or wrongly, we are considered a link farm by the search engines.
The pages on which these vendors are listed use dynamic URLs of the form: \vendors<state>-<topic>. The combination of states and topics means we have hundreds of these pages and they thus form a significant percentage of our pages. And they are garbage So, not good.</topic></state>
We understand that this model is broken. Our plan is to simply remove these pages (with the list of vendors) from our site. That's a simple fix but I want to be sure we're not doing anything wring here, from an SEO perspective.
- Is this as simple as that - just removing these page?
- How much effort should I put into redirecting (301) these removed URLs? For example, I could spend effort making sure that \vendors\California- <topic>(and for all states) goes to a general "topic" page (which still has relevance, but won't have any vendors listed)</topic>
- I know there is no distinct answer to this, but what expectation should I have about the impact of removing these pages? Would the removal of a large percentage of garbage pages (leaving much better content) be expected to be a major factor in SEO?
Anyway, before I go down this path I thought I'd check here in case I miss something.
Thoughts?
-
"a significant rankings boost"
Here is how I see it.....
If a page of mine moved from #5 to #4, I would call that a significant rankings boost. If it moved from #50 to #40, I would call that trivial. If I am on the first page and get any movement up I would call it awesome.
About domain authority... I almost never look at it and can't tell you the DA of my websites. It has just slightly more than "entertainment value" to me. But, plenty of people worship those numbers.
-
Thank you - this is very helpful. I did some basic investigation around this.
The number of these vendor pages that have had at least one hit in the last year is 590. Across these pages I have had a total of 2249 hits. One of the pages (for some reason) accounts for 410 hits, but the vast majority (> 570 of these pages) have less than 20 hits for the entire year. Collectively, these pages have resulted in < 0.5% of our total page hits for the year.
So, they are meaningless in terms of volume of traffic but form a large percentage of our page count.
I am not really sure about the impact of a panda hit (or how to verify) but it does seem that the data above just points to deleting them. Since I think I can 301 redirect with a regular expression to the appropriate "topic page" that seems like the most appropriate approach at this stage.
By the way, I not sure how easy this is to answer, but how would I best assess "a significant rankings boost". Would that manifest itself in remaining pages being ranked better or is this as simple as looking at the domain authority after these pages are removed?
Thanks again.
-
we have hundreds of these pages and they thus form a significant percentage of our pages. And they are garbage
First, I would look at analytics to see if these pages pull in any meaningful traffic. If they do then you have learned something -- that the keywords that these "types of pages" are optimized for might be valuable. If they are bringing in good traffic, I might make massive improvements to them. If you keep them or make new ones on the same URLs be sure that they are useful for the visitor. If no traffic is coming in through these pages I would redirect them to a relevant page or simply to a related category page or my homepage.
How much effort should I put into redirecting (301) these removed URLs?
This depends on how much traffic enters the site through these pages and also the overall value of this website. If no traffic enters you can simply delete them and allow them to 404. If there is a little traffic or if other sites link to them then I would redirect.
What expectation should I have about the impact of removing these pages? Would the removal of a large percentage of garbage pages (leaving much better content) be expected to be a major factor in SEO?
If your site has taken a panda hit then removing these pages could result in a significant rankings boost when (if) recovery occurs. If the site has not taken a panda hit then removing the pages should make your site "lighter" and any authority and power that it has will be increased in these pages.
I would be optimistic - especially if this site has a lot of value on the pages that will remain.
-
Thank you for the prompt response. These pages are there specifically to show lists of vendors (links to their web sites). We do identify the relevant topic from the URL and, from the vendor list page, link to relevant content elsewhere on our site, in a sidebar. A typical page like this would link to 5-10 articles elsewhere on our site.
But the primary content is the list of vendors.
Thanks again.
-
My gut reaction to your question of whether to get rid of links which google may see as a link farm - is "Delete, Delete, Delete...."
In terms of whether it's worth putting in the time to do anything with these pages such as to 301 - the question would be, what is on the pages other than links to low authority websites?
If they contain very little content other than the link, I can't see any potential negative coming from cleaning up your website like this.
In terms of potential benefits, if you're right in your belief that this is considered a link farm by Google, then yes I would expect good things to come from removing this. In reality though, you just never know, but if you have thousands of pages of garbage with links, then there surely can't be any harm done by removing these pages - in my humble opinion.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
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
-
Back links with instant effect?!
I realise this is incredibly controversial! And I also realise I’ll get a ton of trolls pulling me to shreds but… I’m in need of running a short-term experiment, but to do the experiment I need to get a test site ranking high very quickly (not worried about if it gets penalised, it is only a short-term test).
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoman100 -
Links Questions and advice?
I have a website which has a fair few link assets that are doing very well (a lot of really powerful sites have link to them with follow links) but my commercial pages are not doing as well as a lot of sites without any other investment than (mediocre) links direct to there commercial pages with at least 10% of them carrying the money anchor text. Even pages we have had a few links for with generalized real anchor text and reasonable links do not do as well as the above due to none of them carrying the money keyword? Is it me or does google still rely on links to the commercial page and keywords with anchor text to match the money term?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobAnderson0 -
Infographic links were good?
I submit infographic to visual.li, source and a little description. Are these links were good for website link profile? And can I submit same inforgraphi to other websites? http://visual.ly/divya-ashwagandha-churna
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bondhoward0 -
Link building - still effective ?
Hi, I know 70-80% of the links on Google have no-follow keyword. What I need to know is if link building by using guest posting and a combination of no-follow links through social media is still effective ? What would you suggest in terms of link building. I have read all the articles on moz and everything, but I need a personal touch on this matter. Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kiraftw
Andrei0 -
Disavow Links & Paid Link Removal (discussion)
Hey everyone, We've been talking about this issue a bit over the last week in our office, I wanted to extend the idea out to the Moz community and see if anyone has some additional perspective on the issue. Let me break-down the scenario: We're in the process of cleaning-up the link profile for a new client, which contains many low quality SEO-directory links placed by a previous vendor. Recently, we made a connection to a webmaster who controls a huge directory network. This person found 100+ links to our client's site on their network and wants $5/link to have them removed. Client was not hit with a manual penalty, this clean-up could be considered proactive, but an algorithmic 'penalty' is suspected based on historical keyword rankings. **The Issue: **We can pay this ninja $800+ to have him/her remove the links from his directory network, and hope it does the trick. When talking about scaling this tactic, we run into some ridiculously high numbers when you talk about providing this service to multiple clients. **The Silver Lining: **Disavow Links file. I'm curious what the effectiveness of creating this around the 100+ directory links could be, especially since the client hasn't been slapped with a manual penalty. The Debate: Is putting a disavow file together a better alternative to paying for crappy links to be removed? Are we actually solving the bad link problem by disavowing or just patching it? Would choosing not to pay ridiculous fees and submitting a disavow file for these links be considered a "good faith effort" in Google's eyes (especially considering there has been no manual penalty assessed)?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Etna0 -
Blog links - follow or nofollow?
I need my memory refreshed here! Say, I've got a blog and some of the posts have links to recommended external sites and content. Should these be nofollowed? They're not paid links or anything like that, simply things relevant to the post.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PeterAlexLeigh0 -
Aside from creative link bait, what's a solid link building strategy involve?
All things considered, directories, blogs, articles, press releases, forums, social profiles, student discount pages, etc, what do you consider to be a strong, phased, link building strategy? I'm talking beyond natural/organic link bait, since many larger accounts will not allow you to add content to their website or take 6 months to approve a content strategy. I've got my own list, but would love to hear what the community considers to be a strong, structured, timeline-based strategy for link building.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | stevewiideman1