Are links safe from friendsite.com?
-
I have just checked my backlinks in Majestic and was shocked.
It appears I've gained 1500 back links in 1 day all from the domains friendsite.com.
I checked a few of the links and the links to my site have disappeared.
Looking at friendsite.com, it seems that peopel can bookmark a site, and when they do it appears on the "latest bookmerk" section which is site wide.
So my concern is that:
-
1500 links have appeared in one day from one domain
-
1500 links disappeared the next day
Wouldnt both of these cause Google to get suspicious?
What should I do? Should I ask friendsite.com to remove the links?
-
-
At MozCon 2011 Martin MacDonald asked the audience, "Who wants 3 million links pointed to their site?" Needless to say, I raised my hand. Live on stage, he pointed 3 million crappy links to my site, shipoverseas.com. I saw 100s of thousands new links in GWT. He kept them there for a couple days. I told Rand about this in a private email, bascially.... "All those links that were pointed to my homepage didn't have a positive impact on my rankings, but just as important it didn't have a negative impact."
Conclusion: Don't worry about it. Google knows that stuff happens. Do what's best for your prospects.
-
Ah ok I see what you mean.
I will keep checking the links to see how many hang around from that friendsite.
Or I may even just request them to remove the links, so I can sleep better at night.
I've suffered a manual penalty in the past along with a Penguin penalty from an external person using BMR. Lost a lot of business, so I am very concerned about getting hit again even though my intention was always to do legit SEO etc.
Thanks guys for helping out. Its appreciated
-
Hi John,
I think you're worrying too much here. Google's algorithms are not harsh enough to penalize little blips like this in a persons back link profile.
If worried, you could do as Fredrik suggested and setup a WMT account for your site but I honestly feel like you've nothing to worry about.
I've been victim of an unnatural link warning from Google but it was justified due to 1000's of unnatural links built by a previous agency. In your case, you had 1500 links live for 24 hours. I'd be surprised if Google crawled and acknowledged them all as backlinks to your site. And even if they did, that many links means very little since they all come from one domain.
-
HI Fredrik,
Tanks for replying but I dont feel safe waiting to actually get a warning.
Is there any other way to know if these links will affect my site.
It just seems far too "spammy" to get so many links from one domain and for them to disappear!
-
Hi
Hard to tell if those links could be bad for you without seeing them.
I would suggest:
Sign up for webmaster tools, they now offer warnings for unnatural links.
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/googles-unnatural-links-warnings
IF you get warnings in webmastertools then you could consider using the new Disawow tool.
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/googles-disavow-tool-take-a-deep-breath
Hope this helps
Fredrik
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 Brokers Yes or No?
We have a client who has asked us to talk to link brokers to speed up the back linking process. Although I've been aware of them for ages I have never openly discussed the possible use of 'buying' links or engaging in that part of the industry. Do they have a place in SEO and if so what is the MOZ communities thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | wearehappymedia0 -
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 -
On-site links
Hi everybody, There's a lot of information about getting sitewide backlinks, but so few about on-site optimization. Is there a maximum of links to put on a page ? Is there a maximum of link that a page should receive ? etc ... ? So, what is the optimal strategy ? And I'm only concerned about on-page and on-site link, not backlinks commming from other sites. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DavidPilon0 -
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 -
Why traffic to my link has dropped suddenly?
Hi I would like to know why the traffic for the website link http://theindustrymeasure.com/2010/07/15/rediffmail-login has dropped suddenly on google.I used to get around 5000 page views on this page and then suddenly dropped to 15-20 . I still get good traffic from yahoo (around 500). Just before the drop I noticed that I started to get spammy trackbacks from Many questionable sources. I have not approved any of these trackbacks. The trackbacks are regular frequency of. 1 per day. is there any action which I can take to ensure that I get back my traffic. Traffic to other links are fine , only this page seems to have dropped off ever since the spam attack. As per seomoz tool I have a grade a for keyword rediffmail
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ShoutOut0 -
Nofollow links in Google Webmaster
I've noticed nofollow links showing up in my Google Webmaster tools "links to your site" list. If they are nofollow why are they showing up here? Do nofollow links still count as a backlink and transfer PR and authority?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NoCoGuru1 -
Canonical Tag and Affiliate Links
Hi! I am not very familiar with the canonical tag. The thing is that we are getting traffic and links from affiliates. The affiliates links add something like this to the code of our URL: www.mydomain.com/category/product-page?afl=XXXXXX At this moment we have almost 2,000 pages indexed with that code at the end of the URL. So they are all duplicated. My other concern is that I don't know if those affilate links are giving us some link juice or not. I mean, if an original product page has 30 links and the affiliates copies have 15 more... are all those links being counted together by Google? Or are we losing all the juice from the affiliates? Can I fix all this with the canonical tag? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jorgediaz0 -
Link Request Email on Site`s Link Pages
Hello I have assembled a list of web-sites that have "Links" section that has a list of persons` favorite tools. Those pages have a link to my competitor. I know my tool is just as good if not better and want to request a link. I`m thinking of sending an email asking for a link and offering a small amount of money for it. Questions: A) How much should I offer? Should I offer anything at all B) Is there an email style that someone can suggest that has been tested and proven to work for this type of situtation?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | hellopotap0