How to idesntify "inorganic" links
-
I am intending to remove spammy link of my website http://cellspyexpert.com/ which has been ranking well but I noticed a sudden drop in its ranking. I took a lot of care while building links, I tried to get links from relevant high authority websites with high page rank. I used profiling and guest blogging method only and never participated in any link scheme but received following message in google webmaster tools "
Google Webmaster Tools notice of detected unnatural links to http://www.cellspyexpert.com/"
I got this message on 19<sup>th</sup> Sep and ranking dropped on 6<sup>th</sup> Oct
1- Is this EMD issue?? I am pretty sure it is not because of EMD (Exact match domain) as I have been using phrase match, brand name+phrase and other anchor texts. I used exact match also but only 2%.
2- If it is bad quality, inorganic link issue?? Then I am intending to remove inorganic links so that I could send reconsideration request but facing problem in detecting inorganic links.
Please advise!!
-
Uhhh, how much alcohol? I have a reasonably stocked wine cellar.... Good point re JCPenny.
Best to you,
-
**Is there a way to tell whether or not a penalty was caused by a webspam report to Google? **
Of course! Where there is a will, there is a way.
The question is, are you determined enough to find the answer by bribing Matt or another member of his team with enough alcohol / money / goodies to get them to violate their NDA? I have seen them share in a general manner they have taken action on sites based on spam reports, but I can't recall any example where they have said "we have taken action on your site based on a spam report".
If pressed for an example, I would use JC Penney's. According to the public story, a NY Times reporter called Google to inquire about JC Penney's amazing performance in Google. You could view this as a spam report.
Thanks for the kind words Robert.
-
Ryan,
I do not believe I have seen this laid out more clearly or succinctly. The most important part that most seem to gloss over in this quest of reconsideration is your statement, ..."** forums are full of angry site owners sharing stories of how they submitted 10 Reconsideration Requests and all 10 have been denied**."
If you rush to get site reconsidered, you are slowing yourself down. You might as well do it all first and not be unhappy because you did no research on links, got two or three you saw as bad (or knew were bad) removed and ask for reconsideration. Without documentation (proof you did all in your power to have the links removed) of what you have done, what reasonable person would believe you did it?
"It does beg a question for me:
Is there a way to tell whether or not a penalty was caused by a webspam report to Google?
Thanks for great response.
-
**Is this EMD issue?? **
No. You do not have a EMD.
Clearly you have an issue with unnatural links. Those links should be located and removed. The process involves three main steps:
1. Compile a comprehensive list of ALL known links to your site. That does not mean simply downloading the links Google shows as that often represents about 50% of the links to your site. It also does not mean using Google + OSE as that still is not enough. I generate a report using Google + Bing + OSE + Majestic + AHREFs. This report consistently finds enough links to remove a manual penalty or relieve a Penguin issue.
2. Visit every linking site and properly identify each link as organic or manipulative. This task sounds much easier then it is. It requires training and experience. A large percentage of SEOs are simply not calibrated to look at a link the same way Google does. In other words, they cannot properly identify a manipulative vs organic link.
If you identify manipulative links as organic, then Google is unlikely to honor your Reconsideration Request. If you identify organic links as manipulative, you are damaging your site.
3. A comprehensive Webmaster Outreach program needs to be implemented to contact every site providing a manipulative link and requesting the removal of the link(s). This involves sending emails to the site's WHOIS email address, the email address found on the site, and using the Contact Form on the site. At times you need to call sites, use regular mail or chase site owners down via social networks. You need to take any and all reasonable actions to remove the link.
For each of the above steps, you need to thoroughly document your actions if you are dealing with a manual penalty. You need to prove the above steps were taken. For example, when you send an email to the WHOIS email address, a copy of that email needs to be saved as a pdf or text file, uploaded to a file server and then a link to that message should be placed in a spreadsheet. This example is simply one of many.
The process takes a massive amount of time by properly trained personnel. I have examined numerous software tools designed to automate the link identification process, and they all fail quite badly in my experience. That is why the forums are full of angry site owners sharing stories of how they submitted 10 Reconsideration Requests and all 10 have been denied.
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
-
Is this campaign of spammy links to non-existent pages damaging my site?
My site is built in Wordpress. Somebody has built spammy pharma links to hundreds of non-existent pages. I don't know whether this was inspired by malice or an attempt to inject spammy content. Many of the non-existent pages have the suffix .pptx. These now all return 403s. Example: https://www.101holidays.co.uk/tazalis-10mg.pptx A smaller number of spammy links point to regular non-existent URLs (not ending in .pptx). These are given 302s by Wordpress to my homepage. I've disavowed all domains linking to these URLs. I have not had a manual action or seen a dramatic fall in Google rankings or traffic. The campaign of spammy links appears to be historical and not ongoing. Questions: 1. Do you think these links could be damaging search performance? If so, what can be done? Disavowing each linking domain would be a huge task. 2. Is 403 the best response? Would 404 be better? 3. Any other thoughts or suggestions? Thank you for taking the time to read and consider this question. Mark
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | MarkHodson0 -
Should I disavow links to a dead sub domain?
I'm analyzing a client's website today and I found that they have over 300 spammy sites linking to a subdomain of their main site. So for example, say their site is clientsite.com, well they have hundreds of links pointing to deadsite.clientsite.com. That subdomain was used at one time as a staging site, and is no longer active. Are those hundreds of spammy sites hurting or potentially hurting my client's SEO? Or is it a non-issue because the links point to a dead subdomain? We believe that that staging sub domain site was hacked at one time, and thats where all those spammy links came from. Should I disavow them?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | rubennunez0 -
What to do with these toxic links?
Back in July I had posted here that I thought someone was doing negative SEO against us. We monitor our links on a daily basis, and a lot of toxic links came in quickly within a few days. So we were pro-active and ended up disavowing those links soon after we saw them. Shortly after that our ranking start to drop and we lost a good amount of traffic, though I do not know if its really connected since we only disavowed those toxic links and we weren't ranking FROM those links since they were disavowed so quickly. Now, its happening again. 20 new inbound domains linking to us from complete crap websites with crap content and not done by us. I want to disavow them, but I am thinking that maybe the first time we disavowed the links, it hurt us, and maybe disavowing now will hurt us further? I think Google should be able to filter out this crap but who knows, too much depends on this being handled correctly. Here are some of the crappy links: http://optibike.com/?home.php=page/loans/student-loan-without-a-cosigner-2.html
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | DemiGR
http://designsbynickthegeek.com/?index.php=finance/loans/loan-for-you-3.html
http://www.nuvivaweightloss.com/?index.php=article/loans/300-loan-today.html
http://ecommercesalesmultipliersystem.com/?home.php=board/loans/fast-loan-with-monthly-payments-2.html They are mostly duplicate content across a network of sites. How would you guys handle this?0 -
Opinions sought on outbound Links page.
Hello Forum, I'm about the remove my outbound Links page at: http://www.pictureframe.com.au/---obs--picture-frames-links.html I think that Google could be assessing this page as a link scheme, ie: I-link-you-if-you-link me. I haven't received any messages from Google about this but I think the page may be devaluing my site. What do you guys~gals think? Thank you for any and all feedback Paul the Picture Framer
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Picframer0 -
Attacked with spam links.
Our website was hit with the "Pharma hack", "Google Cloaking Hack", or "Blackhat SEO Spam". and Google showed in the results this website may be compromised. After cleaning out the hack from the website I chacked with the Seomoz tool Open Site Explorer and I found that they hacked 1000 of other websites and created links to my website. They were building a few 1000 links to the website with the clickable text "buy cheap online pharmacy". and more like that. This website www.washington23.com has been hacked and gives over 200 links to your website for pharmacy items. And Google considers this from your impotent links as i can see in webmasters. What can I do about it?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Joseph-Green-SEO0 -
Retail Site and Internal Linking Best Practices
I am in the process of recreating my company's website and, in addition to the normal retail pages, we are adding a "learn" section with user manuals, reviews, manufacturer info, etc. etc. It's going to be a lot of content and there will be linking to these "learn" pages from both products and other "learn" pages. I read on a SEOmoz blog post that too much internal linking with optimized anchor text can trigger down-rankings from Google as a penalty. Well, we're talking about having 6-8 links to "learn" pages from product pages and interlinking many times within the "learn" pages like Wikipedia does. And I figured they would all have optimized text because I think that is usually best for the end user (I personally like to know that I am clicking on "A Review of the Samsung XRK1234" rather than just "A Review of Televisions"). What is best practice for this? Is there a suggested limit to the number of links or how many of them should have optimized text for a retail site with thousands of products? Any help is greatly appreciated!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Marketing.SCG0 -
Competitors have local "mirror" sites
I have noticed that some of my competitors have set up "mirror" homepages set up for different counties, towns, or suburbs. In one case the mirror homepages are virtually identical escept for the title and in the other case about half of the content id duplicate and the other half is different. both of these competors have excellent rankings and traffic. I am surprised about these results, does anyone care to comment about it and is this a grey hat technique that is likely to be penalized eventually. thx Diogenes
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | diogenes0 -
Why are these sites so high with poor relevant links...
Hello, Keyword: TV Stands. I have been researching competitors for a client and we seem to be unable to understand why certains pages are ranking on page 1 of Google UK for keyword TV Stands. eg: http://www.furnitureinfashion.net/plasma-TV-stand.html (Google UK 8 - TV Stands) http://direct.tesco.com/q/N.1999542/Nr.99.aspx (Google UK 9 - TV Stands) The furniture in fashion has links from sites like: http://www.ummah.com/forum/ and http://www.muslimco.com/ which is totaly irrelevant to the site. Any ideas on other things as the tesco.com site does not have direct links to it. Cheers
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | JohnW-UK0