Do you have to wait after disavowing before submitting a reconsideration request
-
Hi all
We have a link penalty at the moment it seems. I went through 40k links in various phases and have disavowed over a thousand domains that date back to old SEO work. I was barely able to have any links removed as the majority are on directories etc that no one looks after any more etc and / or which are spammy and scraped anyway.
According to link research tools link detox tool, we now have a very low risk profile (I loaded the disavowed links into the tool for it to take into consideration when assessing our profile). I then submitted a reconsideration request on the same day as loading the new disavowed file (on the 26th of April). However today (7th May) we got a message in webmaster central that says our link profile is still unnatural. Aaargh.
My question: is the disavow file taken into consideration when the reconsideration request is reviewed (ie is that information immediately available to the reviewer)? Or do we have to wait for the disavow file to flow through in the crawl stats? If so, how long do we have to wait?
I've checked a link that I disavowed last time and it's still showing up in the links that I pull down from Webmaster Central, and indeed links that I disavowed at the start of April are still showing up in the list of links that can be downloaded.
Any help gratefully received. I'm pulling my hair out here, trying to undo the dodgy work of a few random people many months ago!
Cheers,
Will
-
You seem to have a good handle on the issue but you might consider getting an experienced SEO in for at least a second opinion. We can only give very general help here on the Q&A, as we don't have access to your data
They do say to wait at least a few weeks for results
Cheers
S
-
Hi Stephen
I've been using the links downloaded from Webmaster (as directed to by Matt Cutts in one of his videos IIRC) plus also the data set from Link Research Tools. Is that insufficient? I've only got so many hours in the day as my day job is running this company...I figured taking the links that Google gave me would surely be enough...but these days who knows. G seems to want to make people jump through a lot of hoops...
-
Hey Marcus
Thanks for your input. Yeah, we have a lot of links but then we've been around for 7 years and weirdo scrapers and random replicants of DMOZ alone contribute a zillion links without us even having done anything. Not saying we didn't do link building back in the day (we did, just like everyone else, in what was at the time a white hat fashion but apparently no longer is) but we have had no permanent marketing team at all for the last two years as we've focused on some B2B parts of our business. So frustrating that bad links just kept growing and we're supposed to be responsible for them!
Anyway, as you say, will need to go in a bit harder I guess. eg just because a site is PR0, I didn't remove it before, as some random person with a no marks blog who used our birthday balloon picture on their blog didn't deserve to be disavowed as far as I thought. But, well, I can't take any chances now so will just have to bin anything under PR1 and take another look at links from themed websites (eg should I disavow other blogs that have added us to their blogroll unsolicited even if they're in our vertical? It's hard to tell. What about genuine flower directories? Who knows?).
What's really frustrating is that the whole message from Matt Cutts is "you really shouldn't use this tool" (ref disavow) as you could damage your site but 1. barely anyone takes links down when requested as far as I can tell and 2. given the amount of junk that's been pointed at our site that we're not responsible for (though we are are responsible for some), then I think the contention that very few people would need to use it is a bit optimistic and there's therefore a danger or people like me totally shooting themselves in the foot, given there are no clear rules on the grey areas I mention above.
PS understood that it's not some magic solution and we'll rank #1 for everything afterwards. I just want to get it cleared up and be able to get back to my day job. God knows how a smaller business than us would cope with something like this. Seems to me it pushes the advantage even further in the direction of bigger companies with the resources to manage a screw up like this.
Anyway, blah blah. Time to get the machete out.
-
In my experience, if you have this message again, you still have links they don't like. 35% of linking domains is not a great deal and as Stephen said, whilst Link Detox gives you a good starting place you really do have to audit these links in a brutal fashion.
You have 15000 external links from 2000 sites - that's a hell of a lot of links for a semi popular blog let alone a site that does not really publish any content that would attract links.
If you are holding onto links as you think they are 'ok' or because they 'don't look too bad' then you may need to get a whole lot more aggressive with what you remove.
Also, just because you remove the manual penalty, don't expect things to be amazing afterwards.
An alternative approach to finding the bad links and getting them removed is to identify the good ones and consider getting them repointed to a new URL and starting again with a rebrand / new URL. It can be easier to get a response from the good sites than it can be getting a response from the bad ones.
Failing that get a whole lot more aggressive with what you remove.
Hope that helps!
Marcus
-
How sure are you you have a full dataset of links? What did you use as you database for links to start cleaning from? (I would expect ahrefs, GWT, seomoz + majestic etc)
S
-
Well, I also went through all the links manually which was the world's most boring task, then followed up with a healthcheck. Gah.
We've disavowed about 35% of all linking domains now...
-
I doubt its a time thing, it's more likely that they still see dirty links that you have not disallowed
That's the problem with these jump one the bandwagon tools like Link detox et al - they give you a nice score but that doesn't mean anything
404ing burnt pages and starting again may be a much quicker process than messing around with link disavowal
How many domains were linking and how many domains did you disallow?
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 submit an additional sitemap to speed up indexing
Hi all, Wondered if there was any wisdom on this that anyone could impart my way? I'm moving a set of pages from one area of the site to another - to bring them up the folder structure, and so they generally make more sense. Our URLs are very long in some cases, so this ought to help with some rationalisation there too. We will have redirects in place, but the pages I'm moving are important and I'd like the new paths to be indexed as soon as possible. In such an instance, can I submit an additional sitemap with just these URLs to get them indexed quicker (or to reaffirm that indexing from the initial parse)? The site is thousands of pages. Any benefits / disadvantages anyone could think of? Any thoughts very gratefully received.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ceecee0 -
URL indexed but not submitted in sitemap, however the URL is in the sitemap
Dear Community, I have the following problem and would be super helpful if you guys would be able to help. Cheers Symptoms : On the search console, Google says that some of our old URLs are indexed but not submitted in sitemap However, those URLs are in the sitemap Also the sitemap as been successfully submitted. No error message Potential explanation : We have an automatic cache clearing process within the company once a day. In the sitemap, we use this as last modification date. Let's imagine url www.example.com/hello was modified last time in 2017. But because the cache is cleared daily, in the sitemap we will have last modified : yesterday, even if the content of the page did not changed since 2017. We have a Z after sitemap time, can it be that the bot does not understands the time format ? We have in the sitemap only http URL. And our HTTPS URLs are not in the sitemap What do you think?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ZozoMe0 -
Regex in Disavow Files?
Hi, Will Regex expressions work in a disavow file? If i include website.com/* will that work or would you recommend just website.com? Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Fubra0 -
Disavow post Penguin update
As recent Penguin update makes quick move with backlinks with immediate impact; does Disavow tool also results the changes in few days rather than weeks like earlier? How long does it take now to see the impact of disavow? And I think still we must Disavow some links even Google claim that it'll take care of bad backlinks without passing value from them?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vtmoz0 -
Disavow straightaway? - Urgent
Is there any implication with disavowing straightaway from Google's perspective? I know good practice is to request removal from the web host, however I don't have the time to contact and process the requests. Any thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoman100 -
Art website is being spammed for NFL Jerseys - should I disavow?
I have no idea why or what their mistake/intent would be, but my mom's artist website (kathleenmrobison.com) has been link/anchor text spammed for NFL jerseys - so weird. As seen in SEMrush, her site is actually ranking for some of these keywords - but we don't want/need these at all. Do we proactively disavow all of these sites in with the disavow file, or just ignore until we get problems with warnings? **Edit: **I also see that some fake URLs have been created, so it is definitely a spam/hacked issue. 6495ws 6496zi
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Joe.Robison0 -
Doubt with no follow links: disavow or no action?
We have a google penalty (artificial links) we have checked our link profile with link detox, and we found that a group of links that has no follow tag have been classified as toxic (stats websites mostly). But should we remove those links or what? They are no follow, it shoud be enough. Should we include this links on the spreadsheet anyway? Should we include and add "no action taken"? How would you proceed in that case? Note: I know link detox is not great, but it helped us to collect data. But we have now to make decisions about the results, and I'm new on this and I have doubts. I would appreciate your help Thank you!!!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | teconsite0 -
Not sure if I should disavow these links or not
I am on the marketing team for CandyGalaxy.com we are an online candy store that specializes in bulk candy for events. Were just about a year and a half old and i'm running into some SEO strategy road blocks lately. When we started the company we used an oversee's seo company. For the first few months results were great then things took a massive dive as google began rolling out updates early and mid last year. After that point we started taking things in house and have been trying to create content and begin content marketing. We launched a blog @ blog.candygalaxy.com and also launched and educational resource at candybuffet101.com - However the question i'm up against now is what to do with those bad old links? Are they actually hurting us? Or just neutral? I'm also trying to decided what to do about the links in my footer? We put those there because those are truly our most popular products and we wanted customers to have easy access, but are those links potentially harmful? I'm questioning these issues because I feel like there is something holding back some of my pages from ranking. For example "blue candy" is a very popular section of our website. We have worked on a lot of content for the blog related to blue candy, made videos, photo shoots ect. We have customer reviews on page and unique category content. According to open site explorer our DA and PA are around the range of most of the sites in the 8-12 serp position. But we have more social activity then all but the top 2-3 spots. However the page almost impossible to find via search. Its not in the first 300 results and surely the page is more relevant then an entry about quilts.. Similar situations like this have led me to think that maybe there is a technical underlying issues that I have not addressed. ? The content is definitely there because if i type in a line from the content directly to google it is the first result. So the site seems indexed properly.. Would love to hear any feedback from similar experiences or ideas. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jonathan_Murrell0