Google launches their Disallow Tool
-
-
Hi Irving,
Today i have Compiled a comprehensive backlink report for one of my hotel client (http://www.fairfieldinnhotelcedarrapids.com/).I have identified all bad links and create one .txt file and upload via google disallow tool. now my question is, How do i know that all dead links has been removed? Is there any way to know status?
Thanks
-
If you Disavowed "good" links to your site, your rankings may be lowered as a result.
If you Disavowed "bad" links, then your Penguin issue could be reduced or resolved.
The best course of action is to allow a trained SEO professional examine each linking domain to determine if the links violate Google's Guidelines and only Disavow the links which do violate those guidelines. Also, the Disavow tool should not be used until after every possible action has been taken to remove the link. Google is quite clear on this topic. If you use the Disavow tool without "significantly" reducing the manipulative links to your site, it likely will not help.
-
I admit it... I panicked and disavowed a ton of domains that I didn't recognize as good links and I went from mid-page-2 to lower-page-3. So...my question is: what happens if I submit a new disavow file that has only a fraction of the links. Or, better yet, what if I delete the disavow file altogether with a file that has a comment saying Oops, sorry, we didn't know what we were doing with this tool and respectfully request to undo our mess".
A very good SEO told me to not chase after my disavow list, and I get what he's saying, but it's hard to not remember the days pre-disavow when I was at least on page 2 ... I was on page 1 for 14 years since 1998 until penguin hit! (I sell bean bag chairs and am speaking of serps for "bean bag chairs").
www.ahhprods.com in case anyone is curious
Thanks!
-
So far my webmaster response is about 10%, so you have no idea how much this tool can relieve some pain after so many attempts.
To the best of my knowledge, the Disavow Tool will have absolutely no impact on your success rate. It seems designed to help ensure webmasters who have a manual penalty lifted are not affected by Penguin.
-
This is gonna be interesting how everything works out.
I've sent a reconsideration request a day or two prior to the release. I will see how that request goes and then update the spreadsheet with new links I've removed as well as using disavow.
So far my webmaster response is about 10%, so you have no idea how much this tool can relieve some pain after so many attempts.
-
The damage was done before i came on the picture and there is no stats from before. the site rangs below other sites owned by the same clent with much weaker linking profiles. As i mentioend the site has the best of links, this is why i am prepared to get rid of any links that look even the slightest doggy. The site should rank number 1 when you look at the competition
I just dont have the time or budget to try to ask for removal, a attemp was made long ago with no sucess.
-
Very busy with a new project out of Arizona.
i have been following Mitt closely. He might just get over the line.
-
-
Thanks... Should have read the YouTube description.
-
This says to me that your site was spared an across the board penalty, but your rankings for specific keywords that have been overused in your anchor text have been suppressed. I would look at your incoming link anchor texts and see which one(s) you are no longer ranking for.
-
Excellent sir.
We will know pretty soon how everything shakes out once people start reporting back, but my suggestion would be that if you have a site that is not penalized you should NOT use this tool as an effort to try and clean up any spammy back links and clean up your good-to-bad backlink ratio. The reason is, this is a tool to be used as a last effort in trying to come back from a penalty when there are some links you tried to remove but simply cannot.
Sending this report will put eyeballs on your site and bring unnecessary attention to your site. Why ask Google to review your backlink profile and look at the nastiest links pointing to your site if your site is currently healthy.
An exception to this rule I think would be if you notice you are clearly under a negative SEO attack. Then it would make sense to be proactive.
-
Very solid analysis Ryan, good stuff.
-
Long time comming and quiite a messy interface. why they could not do somthing like Bing did with there tool is a mystery.
I have a client with a unatural link warning, saying "for this specific incident we are taking very targeted action on the unnatural links instead of your site as a whole"
to me this sounds like these links have been discounted anyhow and that the site is not punished, and maybe no need to do anything, but then goes on to say "If you are able to remove any of the links, please submit a reconsideration request, including the actions that you took."
so that makes me think i do need to do something. not very clear.
This client has a lot of very good links from CNN, NYT and a host of others, but partisipated in a link wheel. The blogs in this link wheel are real blogs rather than your obvious mass made for links blogs and makes it hard to identify what are what. i am thinking to disavow anything thats could be doggy, he has such good links I think it better to have a few false positives rather then leave any bad links in the profile.
Back to my first point, i was hoping for a click and job done approch link in BWMT.
-
Nice write-up Ryan, thanks.
Looks like an aggressive tool, I can see a lot of Webmasters running into trouble with this one.
If you contact a blog to get a link removed and then realise after actually I have made a mistake, or you login to a directory and remove it yourself and realise after you have made a mistake you can work on getting it back.
I get the feeling if you don't go through the process Ryan put down and you make a mistake with the Disallow Tool you wont be able to get those links back.
-
You are so right Ryan! This tool is not a shortcut at all. I fear that a lot of webmasters who have an unnatural links warning are going to jump straight to the disavow tool and ignore the actual reconsideration request process. As Matt says in the video, you still need to make a thorough attempt at trying to get the links removed on your own in order to have a manual penalty revoked.
-
Thanks for opening this discussion Irving. I have had calls from clients today regarding this "change" and it seems many site owners are simply caught up in the idea without realizing the true impact of this change. Resolving a manual Google penalty for manipulative links involves 4 steps prior to the release of this tool:
1. Compile a comprehensive backlink report. Many sites which suffer from a manipulative link penalty are absolutely doomed to have their Reconsideration Requests declined before they are even submitted. Why? Because they have not captured all the links to their site. You cannot rely on any single tool or even 2 tool combination. For each client I work with we compile a list of every known backlink to their site. How? By combining Google + Bing + OSE + Majestic + AHREFs data. Each data source offers links the others do not seem to find.
2. Properly identify all the manipulative links to the target site. Once again, many site owners repeatedly fail their Reconsideration Request and have no real chance at success because they try to take the easy way out. Attempting to replace real effort with fake work is what caused the penalty in the first place.
a. A thorough understanding of the difference between an organic link and manipulative link is required. In short, you must calibrate your understanding of links to match Google. How do you view free directory links? The reality is 99%+ of them are manipulative. How about press releases? Do you think most press releases are organic links? When site owners pay another company to publish articles they wrote with links back to their site, does that sound natural to you?
b. How about broken links? Can you use an automatic link checker and then if the link is not on the URL simply cross it off the list? In a significant percent of cases the link has simply moved to another page on the linking site. Some sites have very dynamic link structures where one day a URL is at ?page=20 and the next it is at ?page=21. Other sites make URL changes over time. You must search each site using their search widget and a Google site: search before assuming the site's link is gone.
c. Is the link marked NoFollow? You need to keep searching the page to ensure there are not other followed links on the same page.
The above are just some examples of gaps in the process of many who attempt to resolve this type of penalty. The disavow tool's introduction does not impact this step.
3. Webmaster Outreach. Once you have a comprehensive list of all known links to your site and have properly identified all the manipulative links, there is a need to contact every site on the list. Another common issue is those attempting to resolving a manipulative link issue give up far too easy. Site owners can be contacted via their WHOIS email address, the email address on their site AND the contact form on their site. You can call them, send a letter and chase them down on social networks. This type of sincere effort can lead to 50%+ reduction in links to your site.
Once sincere and comprehensive efforts have been made to remove the links, Google can clearly tell because there will be a "significant" reduction in manipulative links. At that point, THEN the Disavow tool can be used.
4. Filing a thoroughly documented Reconsideration Request. Three days later, the Reconsideration Request can be submitted.
So the introduction of this tool actually did not reduce any step in the process at all. Matt clearly outlined Google's expectation the tool is only used after a webmaster outreach campaign has been completed. If you expect to be able to simply submit a list of links without webmaster outreach, you are likely going to be disappointed.
Watch the first 2 minutes of the video a few times. Matt clearly says "...when you have contacted each webmaster multiple times....and there are only a small fraction of links left....that is when you can use the tool."
-
Nice summary at SEWatch:
http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2217602/Google-Disavow-Links-Tool-Now-Available
I'm curious about the "Most sites shouldn’t use this tool,” Cutts said. “Use caution." caveat. I've basically got only one client out of many that I'd even need to consider using this for. But I can't help but imagine hyper paranoid SEOs trying to massage their link profile down to the last drop of relevance. My gut feel is that this is a 'last resort' tool, and not a 'everyday SEO' tool.
-
Based on what Matt said, it sounds like Google only wants you to use the tool for links that you've tried to remove manually but couldn't. My guess is they may ignore your disavowals if you rely too much on the tool.
-
The links are in the YouTube video description.
"Access the feature here:
https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/disavow-links-main" -
Cutt's did not indicate how to download the tool. Did I miss that?
-
Thanks for the heads up. Just watched the video.
-
Really looking forward to this tool... But Joeys question is Really important. Does anyone have suggestions?
-
Awesome tool. How can I tell which links to my site I should disavow? We get a bunch of random links per day that look spammy, but how can I tell for sure that removing them will help rather than hurt?
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
-
Should I Report A SEO Agency to Google
Our competitor has employed the services of a spammy SEO agency that sends spammy links to our site. Though our rankings were affected we have taken the necessary steps. It is possible to send evidence to Google so that they can take down the site. I want to take this action so that other sites will not be affected by them again.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Halmblogmusic0 -
Drastic surge of link spam in Webmaster Tools' Link Profile
Hello all I am trying to get some insights/advice on a recent as well as drastic increase in link spam within my Webmaster Tools' Link Profile. Before I get into more detail, I would like to point out, that I did find some relevant MOZ community posts addressing this type of issue. However, my link spam situation may have to be approached from a different angle, as it concerns two sites at the same time and somewhat in the same way. Basically, starting in July 2017, from one day to the other, a multitude of domains (50+) is generating link spam (at least 200 links a month and counting) and to cut a long story short, I believe the sites are hacked. This is because most of the domain names sound legit and load the homepage, but all the sub-pages linking to my site contain "adult" gibberish. In addition, it is interesting to see, that each sub-page follows the same pattern, scraping content from my homepage including the on-page links - that generate the spammy backlinks to my sites - while inserting the adult gibberish in between (basically it's all just text and looks like as if a bot is at work). Therefore, it's not like my link is being inserted "specifically" into pages or to spam me with the same anchor text over and over. So, I am not sure what kind of link spam this really is (or the purpose of it). Some more background information: As mentioned above, this link spam (attack?) is affecting two of my sites and it started off pretty much simultaneously (in addition, the sites focus on a competitive niche). The interesting detail is, that one site suffered a manual penalty years ago, which has been lifted (a disavowal file exists and no further link building campaigns have been undertaken after the cleanup), while the other site has never seen any link building efforts - it is clean, yet the same type of spam is flooding that websites' link profile too. In the webmaster forums the overall opinion is, that Google ignores web spam. All well. However, I am still concerned, that the dozens of spammy links pointing to the website "with a history" may pose a risk (more spam on a daily basis on both sites though). At the same time I wonder, why the other "clean" site is facing the same issue. The clean sites' rankings do not appear to be impacted, while the other website has seen some drops, but I am still observing the situation. Therefore, should I be concerned for both sites or even start an endless disavowal campaign on the site with a history? PS: This MOZ article appears to advice so: https://moz.com/blog/do-we-still-need-to-disavow-penguin "In most cases, sites that have a history of collecting unnatural links tend to continue to collect them. If this is the case for you, then it’s best to disavow those on a regular basis (either monthly or quarterly) so that you can avoid getting another manual action." What is your opinion? Sorry for the long post and many thanks in advance for any help/insight.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Hermski0 -
JavaScript encoded links on an AngularJS framework...bad idea for Google?
Hi Guys, I have a site where we're currently deploying code in AngularJS. As part of this, on the page we sometimes have links to 3rd party websites. We do not want to have followed links on the site to the 3rd party sites as we may be perceived as a link farm since we have more than 1 million pages and a lot of these have external 3rd party links. My question is, if we've got javascript to fire off the link to the 3rd party, is that enough to prevent Google from seeing that link? We do not have a NOFOLLOW on that currently. The link anchor text simply says "Visit website" and the link is fired using JavaScript. Here's a snapshot of the code we're using: Visit website Does anyone have any experience with anything like this on their own site or customer site that we can learn from just to ensure that we avoid any chances of being flagged for being a link farm? Thank you 🙂
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | AU-SEO0 -
How to add more quality backlink with moz tools or any good option
How to add more quality backlink with moz tools or any good option
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Poojath0 -
Unnatural inbound links message from Google Webmaster Tools!
Hi Everyone, I just got this message from GWT(image below) This is probably a penguin Penalty. What is clear is I have to find the best and most efficient way to tackle this issue. We will probably lose tons of traffic in the next couple of weeks so I would like to get the best suggestions and maybe a guideline on how to do this in the most effective way! Thank you! 1a0X2M2a1h0A
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Ideas-Money-Art0 -
Is bad English detected by Google
Hi, I am based in the UK and in a very competitive market - van leasing - and I am thinking about using an Indian SEO company for my ongoing SEO. They have sent me some sample artilces that they have written for link building and the English is not good. Do you think that google can tell the difference between a well written article and a poorly written article? Will the fact that articles are poorly writtem mean we will lose potential value from the link? Any input would be much appreciated. Regards John J
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Johnnyh0 -
Is Google now punishing anchor text?
Hi All, I was just wondering if Google is starting to punish anchor text links? I've noticed that one of my clients domains has slightly reduced and they have slipped a few places in rankings for a key term since. I found this bizarre as the last few links I built were both relevant and strong but I did use an anchor text? Any feedback would be useful, I'm slightly confused here?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Benjamin3790 -
How do I know what links are bad enough for the Google disavow tool?
I am currently working for a client who's back link profile is questionable. The issue I am having is, does Google feel the same way about them as I do? We have no current warnings but have had one in the past for "unnatural inbound links". We removed the links that we felt were being referred to and have not received any further warnings, nor have we noticed any significant drop in traffic or rankings at any point. My concern is that if I work towards getting the more ominous looking links removed (directories, reciprocal links from irrelevant sites etc.), either manually or with the disavow tool, how can I be sure that I am not removing links that are in fact helping our campaign? Are we likely to suffer from the next Penguin update if we chose to proceed without moving the aforementioned links? or is Google only likely to target the serious black hat links (link farms etc.)? Any thoughts or experiences would be greatly appreciated.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BallyhooLtd0