I think my inbound link anchor text looks un-natural to google - How to fix?
-
Hi all,
For a bit of back ground see this question i posted recently: http://www.seomoz.org/q/lost-over-65-of-organic-visits-since-sept-please-help
From the responses there and looking into my backlinks and my competitors i can see an issue with the anchor text on my inbound links... nearly all keywords and very very few brand names etc...
From what i can gather (using open site explorer) the page in question has:
- 1100 inbound links from 900 domains
- These use 90 different anchor texts
- 106 of these links use my brand / website name in the anchor text
- These 106 links are spread over 18 domains (73 from 1 directory)
- About 5-10% of the links are from directories, the rest are from what i would describe as "proper websites"
From my very limited knowledge of this, the issue is my brand / website should have a far higher ratio of links using it as the anchor text then any keyword... which as you can see from the above is not the case... If it wasnt for that 1 directory there would only be 33 links with my brand from over 1000...
I need to start fixing this, but was wondering how to start... Below are a list of options i could try, i have no idea if these would help or hinder, any advice you could give on the potential affects of below options would be very helpful:
Options (the below are hypothetical, i have no idea if i will be able to get it done - Just thinking out loud here):
Get as many as possible of the "directory" links removed
Remove keywords from 50-60% of links and replace with branding
Or
Try to add branding to 50-60% of the anchor texts something like [Brand] + [keyword]
Forget about whats been done previously / changing it will not help in anyway / and focus on branding in anchor text for any future link building?
Thanks
James
-
Hi James,
I think you are on the right path with these three statements:
- Get as many as possible of the "directory" links removed
- Remove keywords from 50-60% of links and replace with branding
- Forget about whats been done previously / changing it will not help in anyway / and focus on branding in anchor text for any future link building?
I wouldn't consider #3 to be exclusive from 1 and 2. If it was my site, I'd work on all of these.
I don't know your website URL, but if you feel like it is very Keyword Heavy, I would also consider "de-optimizing" it a bit. Bascially- just make sure you've written page titles and copy for humans.
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
-
Google sidebar advertising dropped
Has anyone noticed how the google sidebar advertising has completely disappeared? They only display top 4 adwords and then remaining on the bottom of each search page. I can't find any info on it or when it actually happened?
Algorithm Updates | | Purplesars110 -
Looking to condense SERP reults
For several of our keywords we have two listings on page 1 of the SERP's, both pages on the same domain. It's the "top"
Algorithm Updates | | absoauto
level category and than sub category within that top level category. Ideally, we could condense and have just the one result, at a higher position in the SERP. I thought Google would eventually do this for us as I've seen in the past, but it's been a few years now and still hasn't happened. Any suggestions?0 -
Is it possible that Google may have erroneous indexing dates?
I am consulting someone for a problem related to copied content. Both sites in question are WordPress (self hosted) sites. The "good" site publishes a post. The "bad" site copies the post (without even removing all internal links to the "good" site) a few days after. On both websites it is obvious the publishing date of the posts, and it is clear that the "bad" site publishes the posts days later. The content thief doesn't even bother to fake the publishing date. The owner of the "good" site wants to have all the proofs needed before acting against the content thief. So I suggested him to also check in Google the dates the various pages were indexed using Search Tools -> Custom Range in order to have the indexing date displayed next to the search results. For all of the copied pages the indexing dates also prove the "bad" site published the content days after the "good" site, but there are 2 exceptions for the very 2 first posts copied. First post:
Algorithm Updates | | SorinaDascalu
On the "good" website it was published on 30 January 2013
On the "bad" website it was published on 26 February 2013
In Google search both show up indexed on 30 January 2013! Second post:
On the "good" website it was published on 20 March 2013
On the "bad" website it was published on 10 May 2013
In Google search both show up indexed on 20 March 2013! Is it possible to be an error in the date shown in Google search results? I also asked for help on Google Webmaster forums but there the discussion shifted to "who copied the content" and "file a DMCA complain". So I want to be sure my question is better understood here.
It is not about who published the content first or how to take down the copied content, I am just asking if anybody else noticed this strange thing with Google indexing dates. How is it possible for Google search results to display an indexing date previous to the date the article copy was published and exactly the same date that the original article was published and indexed?0 -
Google doesnt index my Google+ Profile
Hey guys! I know it sounds like a novice question, but I have checked ALL THE BOXES THAT TELL GOOGLE TO INDEX MY GOOGLE+ PROFILE. It is Visible for search - 100%. It's been 3 weeks since I opened a Google+ profile and it still hasn't been indexed for its name. Any guesses what's going on? (It's not this name so don't try to google me)
Algorithm Updates | | Yoav_Vilner0 -
When to remove bad links.
Hi everyone. We were hit on the 5th Oct with manual penalties - after building some good links and building good content we saw some gains in our SERPS, not to where they were, but they are definately improving for some low competition keywords. In this case would people recommend still trying to remove bad links? We have audited our links and identified ones which seem spammy. We were going to go through a step by step process, emailing bad link providers where possible, and then sending a disavow for any links we were not able to remove. If we have started to see gains through other means is it wise in people's opinion to start contacting google? We watched Matt Cutts video on disavow usage and he states not to use it unless in extreme situations, so we don't want to 'wake the beast'. Many thanks. James.
Algorithm Updates | | Quime0 -
Why has my homepage been replaced in Google by my Facebook page?
Hi. I was wondering if others have had this happen to them. Lately, I've noticed that on a couple of my sites the homepage no longer appears in the Google SERP. Instead, a Facebook page I've created appears in the position the homepage used to get. My subpages still get listed in Google--just not the homepage. Obviously, I'd prefer that both the homepage and Facebook page appear. Any thoughts on what's going on? Thanks for your help!
Algorithm Updates | | TuxedoCat0 -
Google +1 link on Domain or Page?
Since its release, I've seen Google +1 being used across an entire domain but only reference the root href in the code snippet. At the same time, you see other sites use +1 more naturally with the button being specific to the page you're on. What's your take on this? To clarfiy, do you add: or .. on each page.
Algorithm Updates | | noeltock0
