If bad links are now ignored why bother to resubmit a reconsideration letter?
-
So what I don't get is that Google says it will not trust and ignore these Spam type links so you lose only the value from those specific links.So if someone was hit with a penalty why should you bother to write a reconsideration letter if Google is supposedly just ignoring the value of the poor links anyway?
On the other hand in their message they do state if you are able to remove any of the links you can resubmit --- this is sending conflicting messages.
Back in the day you get your entire site hurt, now it seems like it can potentially just be a few keywords or pages.Does it make sense with the new roll out in March 2013 to still do a reconsideration request?
-
So what about links that show a high number of links (hundreds or thousands) but are quality websites. Do I disavow all those links just because they have a lot of links pointing to my site?
-
A lot of people who do penalty work will recommend that you use other sources outside of WMT such as ahrefs, OSE and majestic. However, I only use WMT and it seems to work for me.
I think that the reason why people recommended to use the other sources is that in the past, WMT really only gave you a tiny sample of your links. This has changed though. Also, John Mueller said a while back in a WMF question that for most sites, using just the links in WMT really should be enough.
-
So then for links to remove do you think it should only be links that are found in Google Webmaster Tools?
As I could have many links outside of GWT is it possible all 'spam links' they have ignored and I won't find in GWT or are they All there and should only consider removing links from here since this is what they see
-
Did you get a message in your WMT? Some people lately have been getting the different type of unnatural links warning that says,
"We don’t want to put any trust in links that are artificial or unnatural. We recommend removing any unnatural links to your site. However, we do realize that some links are outside of your control. As a result, for this specific incident we are taking very targeted action on the unnatural links instead of your site as a whole. If you are able to remove any of the links, please submit a reconsideration request, including the actions that you took."
If you got this warning, and if there is no yellow caution symbol next to it in WMT AND you have not seen a drop in rankings then yes, you are correct that you can just ignore those unnatural links as Google has granularly discounted them.
The regular unnatural links message is:
"We’ve detected that some of your site’s pages may be using techniques that are outside Google’s Webmaster Guidelines.
Specifically, look for possibly artificial or unnatural links pointing to your site that could be intended to manipulate PageRank. Examples of unnatural linking could include buying links to pass PageRank or participating in link schemes.
We encourage you to make changes to your site so that it meets our quality guidelines. Once you’ve made these changes, please submit your site for reconsideration in Google’s search results.
If you find unnatural links to your site that you are unable to control or remove, please provide the details in your reconsideration request."
If you got that warning, OR if you got the first warning and you ARE seeing a ranking/traffic drop then, yes, you need to file for reconsideration. If you don't then your site will remain penalized and will have trouble ranking for some or all keywords.
-
Hi Nevil, first of all Google WAS ignoring the low value links pointing to your site. In the past having a link was always worthwhile. The least value they may pass was 0. Actually links may pass negative value to your site and the general consensus is if the ratio of those links pointing to your site is superior to a certain threshold (about 70% although portent says it would be 50% in the future) your entire site will be considered low value and "penalized".
Also there may be the case you were buying links. Google doesn't like people trying to game their algo so you want to get away from leaving patterns which may lead google to think you may have done this. If so you'll be probably negatively flagged.
About the reconsideration request it only have effect if your site received a manual penalty from google which normally confirm that with a message in your webmaster tools of unnatural links pointing to your website. In this case you want to send google a proof that you're really trying to change the way you build your links and tried to clean every sign of bad behaviour using all the tools you have, both contacting those sites to remove low value links and if not possible to disavow them.
This is to simplify a lot a widely more complicated scenario where many factors can act. Also you may be affected by Panda (as you said a number of low value pages are dragging your site down in rankings) in this case you want to get rid or improve those pages, but when this comes to links is a Penguin matter. People tries to get rid of bad links just becasue if Penguin hits you you'll need to wait until the next release (and they update very few times by now) until your site will see the light again.
Hope this helps clarify your doubts.
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
-
Better to place linked-back article or post article and seek multiple links?
Which option is better for SEO purposes: 1. Author article for trade journal in return for link back to my home page. 2. Post article on my site and solicit links from multiple sites. Assume links all have moderate authority.
Link Building | | Lysarden0 -
Linking to the same sites from more than one of my sites, is this bad?
If I work for a company that has more than one website within the same industry and we have separate websites within that industry. An example would be: CarLoans.com HomeLoans.com & PersonalLoans.com The only difference from this example is that we are a B2B Company. My question is: is it bad to acquire links from the same external websites for multiple websites that we own and want to rank for? If I establish a relationship with Forbes or some other website and I can get links to several of our sites, will it ever be bad to link to all of our websites from this one website. I am asking not just for high domain authority website like Forbes, but also for websites that may have a DA in the 30's 40's and 50's as well. Thank you
Link Building | | fersu0 -
We are moving to HTTPS and wanted to know if our link building efforts were in vain or will the link juice pass to HTTPS?
We are switching to HTTPS and want to make sure the links we've gotten in the past will still transfer since they are pointing to HTTP? I'd hate to go back through and ask people to please add an s to the link.
Link Building | | bryant25560 -
AllTop Linking Me to Other Sites Feeds, Webmasters Reporting Lots of Broken Links
I submitted my blog to All Top awhile ago and something seems to be wrong with their feed. They're sending people to mysite.com/truth-o-meter.com/this-is-a-post. It's not just truth-o-meter either. I'm getting links that are supposed to go to all kinds of political blogs. As a result, I'm getting a ton of broken links reported on Google Webmasters. I couldn't find any real support option on alltop.com, and when I log in, there are no sites for me to manage. Instead, I resubmitted the site with the correct feed address and in the comments, I mentioned the problem. All I got was a message saying the site was rejected. I believe because I already added the site. But I'm thinking they didn't pay attention to the comments. (In fact the message may have gone through an auto-filter considering how quickly it was rejected.) Is there a way to solve this? Is this a situation in which I would use the disavow tool? If All Top continues to create bad links, how do I stop the issue once and for all? Thanks!
Link Building | | eglove0 -
Reciprocal links now cancel out any benefit say Google. But what about if one of them is nofollow?
As a web agency we have some of our client sites linking back to us from their footer to show who built the site as is common practice in our industry. This seems to work fine for us generating both referral traffic and we think some help with rankings. Google recently said that reciprocal links do cancel each other out of any benefit which gives us a dilemma for when we want to link to a website as a case study on our own website. Normally we use nofollow on the link but is that enough? I'd rather have the inbound link benefit than provide a link to the website!
Link Building | | RedAntSolutions0 -
Buy links
I know that many of you are against the whole thing with buying links. Your feelings put aside. Will it be better for my site to buy links or even do link exchange? Haven´t the crawlers been thought by now how to find these untrue links? I have read somewhere that the stop after 100 links, aren´t they smarter than that?
Link Building | | mato0 -
Link building
Hello all ! I would love some opinions about one Link Building technical aspect from SEOs, link builders ... How important is the number of outgoing links on the page you have the opportunity to place a link ? (from a scale of 1-10 / what about where dose this factor fits overall with your check list , as important to consider as far as link building) Would you place a link on a page with 200+ outgoing external links if the page is ok (not involved in selling links, all links are related with the subject, target page, anchor text etc) or you would go with a link on a 10-15 links per page but not that 'powerful' and not that related (not spammy but more general on the subject that can contain links to some other non related resources). Eg: Option 1: www.whatever-name.com/links.html the entire domain is about x. It has 250 links in that page (in the links.html) all links on the links.html pages are somehow related / resources with x. Your link can be placed with an anchor text related with x that will target a page on your site related with x. Domain page rank : 6 (as a general indicator), Page PR, the links.html one, PR: 2 Option 2: www.some-other-name.com/x-is-so-great the entire domain is NOT about x, just the page. It has 5..10 links in that page (external links more or less related with x - but not spammy) Your link can be placed with an anchor text related with x that will target a page on your site related with x. Domain page rank : 3 (as a general indicator), Page PR, the links.html one, PR: 1 What's your best option ? Thanks !
Link Building | | eyepaq1 -
RSS links vs. contextual links
Which has more value? Passes more "link juice"? Auto generated rss links or contextual links?
Link Building | | nicole.healthline0