Disavow links established in 2009??
-
Sorry for the length, but I believe this is an interesting situation, so hopefully you'll enjoy thinking this one over a little. Thanks for taking the time!
Historical Information
- We’ve owned and operated printglobe.com since 2002.
- In late 2009, we acquired absorbentprinting.com and operated both sites until Mar, 2015, when absorbentprinting.com was redirected to printglobe.com.
- The reason we chose to redirect absorbentprinting.com to printglobe.com is that they were same industry, same pricing, and had a lot of product overlap, although they did have unique product and category descriptions. We saw a long and steady decline in organic traffic to absorbentprinting.com in the last couple of years leading up to the decision to redirect.
- By the way, while I understand the basics of SEO, neither I nor anyone else at our company could be considered an SEO practitioner.
Recent Information
- An SEO firm we used to be engaged with us reached back out to us and noted: “I started looking through your backlink and it looks like there has been a sharp increase of referring domains.” They included a graph that does show a dramatic increase, starting around November, 2015. It’s quite dramatic and appears anything but natural. The contact from the SEO firm went on to say: “After doing a cursory review, it looks like a handful of these new links are the type we would recommend disavowing or removing.”
- We do little in the way of “link building” and we’re in a relatively boring industry, so we don’t naturally garner a lot of links.
- Our first thought was that we were the victim of a negative SEO attack. However, upon spot checking a lot of the recent domains linking to us, I discovered that a large % of the links that had first shown up in AHREFS since November are links that were left as comments on forums, mostly in 2009/2010. Since absorbentprinting.com was redirected to printglobe.com in Mar, 2015, I have no idea why they are just now beginning to show up as links to printglobe.com.
By the numbers, according to a recent download from AHREFS:
- Total # of backlinks to printglobe.com through mid-Feb, 2016: 8,679
-
of backlinks “first seen” November, 2015 or later: 5,433
- Note that there were hundreds of links “first seen” in the months from Mar, 2015 to Oct, 2015, but the # “first seen” from November, 2015 to now has been 1,500 or greater each full month.
- Total # of linking domains through mid-Feb, 2016: 1,182
-
of linking domains first seen November, 2015 or later: 850
- Also note that the links contain good anchor text distribution
- Finally, there was a backlink analysis done on absorbentprinting.com in April, 2013 by the same firm who pointed out the sharp increase in links. At that time, it was determined that the backlink profile of absorbentprinting.com was normal, and did not require any actions to disavow links or otherwise clean up the backlinks.
My Questions:
- If you’ve gotten through all that, how important does it seem to disavow links now?
- How urgent?
- I’ve heard that disavowing links should be a rare undertaking. If this is so, what would you think of the idea of us disavowing everything or almost everything “first seen” Nov, 2015 and later?
- Is there a way to disavow at the linking domain level, rather than link-by-link to reduce the number of entries, or does it have to be done for each individual link?
- If we disavow around 5.5k links since Nov, 2015, what is the potential for doing more harm than good?
- If we’re seeing declining organic traffic in the past year on printglobe.com pretty much for the first time in the site’s history, can we attribute that to the links?
- Anything else you’d advise a guy who’s never disavowed a link before on this situation?
Thanks for any insights!
Rob
-
Just because it says "first seen" by aHrefs, doesn't meant that Google hasn't been looking at it for years. Google, could have seen and discredited any of the value those links passed long ago. First seen in aHrefs, simply means their crawlers (significantly less resources than google, and maybe link was built before they even had crawlers out there) are just now getting to that page on the web.
For your specific questions:
- If you’ve gotten through all that, how important does it seem to disavow links now?
Given the "impending" Penguin update, I would strongly urge you to do an audit and cleanup anything that looks nasty. You don't want to get stuck in some filter because of old crappy links, waiting until the next Penguin rollout to "unfilter" you. That being said, if you survived this long without getting a Penguin slap, then you might be okay assuming they having further "dialed in" the thresholds with the upcoming release.
- How urgent?
See above regarding potential Penguin update. Only issue is we still don't know when. Google claimed by end of year, then by end of Q1, and now most recently "when it's ready". So the sense of urgency is always there.
- I’ve heard that disavowing links should be a rare undertaking. If this is so, what would you think of the idea of us disavowing everything or almost everything “first seen” Nov, 2015 and later?
Disavowing links is the step you take under one of the following circumstances:
- You've tried to get webmasters, unsuccessfully, to remove links identified as potentially harmful, and you do not wish to receive credit for them. This could be part of any proactive link monitoring approach.
- You have a penalty, and part of showing you don't care about those past paid links, is "taking the hit" and disavowing them.... note: you should have tried removal for these as well.
If you don't have a penalty/filter... typically, you don't need to disavow links, as some level of "crap" builds up for everyone. The real question is if you are noticing a pattern of low-quality backlinks or links from sources you know to be in violation of Google guidelines, and obviously or algorithmically so... and you want to minimize your risk.
- Is there a way to disavow at the linking domain level, rather than link-by-link to reduce the number of entries, or does it have to be done for each individual link?
You can disavow entire domains/subdomains.
- If we disavow around 5.5k links since Nov, 2015, what is the potential for doing more harm than good?
Fairly large. You don't want to blanket disavow anything. This should only be done after careful consideration of the value that link likely passes to your site, as well as a consideration to the risk is poses. You don't want to disavow links that could be supporting your existing authority/rankings. Disavow is not a tool to be taken lightly, and it is much easier to do more harm than good.
- If we’re seeing declining organic traffic in the past year on printglobe.com pretty much for the first time in the site’s history, can we attribute that to the links?
If it is a steady and gradual decline, it is likely not link related, but rather site quality related... whether in the quality of the site/content itself (read: panda?) or in the experience of users (e.g. pogosticking, not clicking through on serps, etc.)
- Anything else you’d advise a guy who’s never disavowed a link before on this situation?
Since you are doing this proactively, I would recommend you closely review all of the links in question and only disavow the link if you look at it and think "ugh, spam".
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
-
Link conundrum - losing nav/footer links in mobile view
Hi Moz folks! I'm currently moving a site from being hosted on www. and m. separately to a responsive single URL. The problem is, the desktop version currently has links to important landing pages in the footer (about 60) and that's not something we want to replicate on mobile (mainly because it will look pretty awful.) There is no navigation menu because the key to the homepage is to convert users to subscription so any distraction reduces conversion rate. The footer links will continue to exist on the desktop view but, since Google's mobile-first index, presumably we lose these important homepage links to our most important pages. So, my questions: Do you think there is any SEO value in the desktop footer links? Do you have any suggestions about how best to include these 60-odd links in a way that works for mobile? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | d_foley0 -
Internal links to preferential pages
Hi all, I have question about internal linking and canonical tags. I'm working on an ecommerce website which has migrated platform (shopify to magento) and the website design has been updated to a whole new look. Due to the switch to magento, the developers have managed to change the internal linking structure to product pages. The old set up was that category pages (on urls domain.com/collections/brand-name) for each brand would link to products via the following url format: domain.com/products/product-name . This product url was the preferential version that duplicate product pages generated by shopify would have their canonical tags pointing to. This set up was working fine. Now what's happened is that the category pages have been changed to link to products via dynamically generated urls based on the user journey. So products are now linked to via the following urls: domain.com/collection/brand-name/product-name . These new product pages have canonical tags pointing back to the original preferential urls (domain.com/products/product-name). But this means that the preferential URLs for products are now NOT linked to anywhere on the website apart from within canonical tags and within the website's sitemap. I'm correct in thinking that this definitely isn't a good thing, right? I've actually noticed Google starting to index the non-preferential versions of the product pages in addition to the preferential versions, so it looks like Google perhaps is ignoring the canonical tags as there are so many internal links pointing to non-preferential pages, and no on-site links to the actual preferential pages? I've recommended to the developers that they change this back to how it was, where the preferential product pages (domain.com/products/product-name) were linked to from collection pages. I just would like clarification from the Moz community that this is the right call to make? Since the migration to the new website & platform we've seen a decrease in search traffic, despite all redirects being set up. So I feel that technical issues like this can't be doing the website any favours at all. If anyone could help out and let me know if what I suggested is correct then that would be excellent. Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Guy_OTS0 -
Need suggestion for link-building
Link Building Question i want to get rank in google for www.topnotchlawsuitloans.com so have to build backlinks with lawsuit loans alt tag but main question is this have to build or gain backlinks for this domain only or one of my website sub domain www.topnotchlawsuitloans.com/lawsuit-funding-philadelphia.html on page #6 so have to build backlink for this URL ??? what are the effective strategy to gain backlinks for main page or all sub pages have to build backlinks ?? how many back-link per keyword & per page is good for website.???
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JulieWhite0 -
Http, https and link juice
I'm working on a site that is built on DNN. For some reason the client has set all pages to convert to HTTPS (although this is not perfect as some don't when landing on them). All pages indexed in Google are straight HTTP, but when you click on the Google result a temp 302 header response to the corresponding HTTPS page for many. I want it changed to a 301 but unfortunately is an issue for DNN. Is there another way around this in IIS that won't break DNN as it seems to be a bit flaky? I want to have the homepage link juice pass through for all links made to non HTTPS homepage. Removing HTTPS does not seem to be an option for them.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MickEdwards0 -
Easiest way to disavow single links on an on-going basis?
We frequently get random super-sketchy looking blogs linking to us with no author or contact information. I believe we are being targeted by a competitor setting up garbage links to us. I am hoping to use the Google disavow links tool to deal with this but is it: Safe to use or does it flag us as link spammers by using it Possible to use on an on-going basis for single links (as them come in, as opposed to a bunch of backlogged links) Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BlueLinkERP0 -
How do I find the links on my site that link to another one of my pages?
I ran IIS Seo toolkit and it found about 40 pages that I have no idea how they exist. What tool can I use to find out what internal link is linking to them so I can fix them or get rid of them?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EcommerceSite0 -
Big Site Wide Link
Hi Guys, I've noticed that Google is starting to de-value site-wide links... Our previous SEO agency sourced us a site wide link on a big website and at the moment within Google Webmaster Tools its showing 749,726 links from this 1 source. Do you think this is too many? Could this be being flagged by Google? Here is the site: http://tinyurl.com/7bttw3b Cheers, Scott
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ScottBaxterWW0 -
Too many links!
Hi, I'm running a wordpress blog (modhop.com) and am getting the "too many links" on almost all of my pages. It appears that in addition to basic site navigation I have plug-ins that create invisible links that are counted in the crawl...at least that's my guess. Is there a good way to control this in wordpress? A nofollow in the .htaccess? A plug-in that does this? (I'm sort of at novice-plus level here so the simplest solution is ideal.) Thanks! Jake modhop.com
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | modhop0