Google Disavow File Update
-
Is there any specific format to update the Disavow file? Also if I submitted the file a months ago, and need to update it now... should I leave the old 'excluded domains' or should I remove them?
Lets say this is what I have: How would you update it?
#explanation from to Google went here... and ended here.
"domain:exampledomainalreadysubmitted1.com"
"domain:exampledomainalreadysubmitted2.com"
"domain:exampledomainalreadysubmitted3.com"Thanks for your input
-
Yes. I did keep in most of the old domains that had been in the original Disavow file.
Since the things I learned after doing the original file showed that I had mistakenly disavowed a few domains that were OK, I did omit them from the new file. And I added some that had not been in the original.
Nobody but Google knows for sure, but my understanding is that a particular Disavow only has an effect while that particular file is active on your Google Webmaster account. So if you delete it or upload a new one, then you will eventually see the old effect disappear and be replaced by the effect of having no or a different disavow file.
I just wish the effect wasn't so slow on Google. The effect of disavowing linking domains in Bing Webmaster Tools seems to be very quick. But it's rarely needed there since Bing doesn't have nasty Pandas and Penguins to battle...
-
Thanks Gregory,
When you Re-Submitted the file, did you include the old domains? I am unsure as to whether or not keep the original domains into the updated file, as i haven't read anything against it or in favor for such method.
Daniel
-
Hi Daniel,
I also submitted a Disavow file, then learned new things and updated the file to reflect the new knowledge.
You can only have ONE disavow file. So you simply create a new file (which may or may not contain many domains that were in the original) and then go to Google Webmaster Tools and delete the original file and upload the new one.
This article has good info on how you should create your Disavow file: http://moz.com/blog/google-disavow-tool
Especially this part from the article:
Google rejects many disavow files because of bad formatting, but webmasters usually never know. Guidelines state the file type should be .txt only and “must be encoded UTF-8 or 7-bit ASCII.”
Good luck!
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
-
Quick way to review Disavow?
We've recently taken on a new client that has a very large Disavow file. I'm wondering if any good backlinks are being disavowed in the list and want to do an audit but wondered if there was a tool I could use that could give me some high level stats on each of the domains in the Disavow? Ideally, I'd love to be able to drop a list of domains into a tool that can tell me PR, DA, Spam Score, Citation Flow, Trust Flow in an exportable table. Does such a tool exist?
Link Building | | Marketing_Today1 -
Submitting pages to google to expidite them finding links to my site
Is it a good practice to submit a page linking to my site to expedite google finding the link or is it better to wait for the google spider to find it? Thanks, Ron!
Link Building | | Ron100 -
Does Google drop links from page rank N/A sources?
Hi Everyone,
Link Building | | AMA-DataSet
I've started doing some link analysis on one of my site that has over nearly 800 links in total (which I got from the webmaster tools downloading the latest links). When I go on to Google and use the "link:www.mysite.com" directive it will only display 12 links. Does this mean Google is only counting 12 links from the link profile? Iv checked the freshness of some the links it wasn't displaying within Google to check they hadn't all expired. Links from march 2013 still don't appear. This sites link profile has been untouched for at least a year now and is full of directories many of which have a page rank of N/A hence my question. (I'm surprised it hasn't been hit by penguin!) Thanks in advance.0 -
Google Penalty
Hi all, I've been having some trouble with Google lately. Awhile back I came across a quality site that had a "Useful Links" directory. I searched the site and finally found an email. I emailed the webmaster and requested a link. They obliged but wanted a link back, so I wrote a nice blog post that included a link to their site. This brings me to question number one: 1. Would Google see this as a link exchange? Problem number two with the link from this site. My site is fairly new with not much of a link profile. What I discovered was that they displayed random links from the "Useful Links" directory in the sidebar and in the footer. So all of a sudden we have a ton of links from one website. This site has hundreds maybe even thousands of pages. 2. Would Google see all of these links and think that they were paid or spam? We've had a nice steady increase in traffic from Google then all of a sudden it dropped to nothing for two days and has come back a little. Here is my data from open site explorer: 1/15/2013 PA=27/100 DA=14/100 LRD=5 Total Links=42 2/12/2013 PA=31/100 DA=19/100 LRD=9 Total Links=137 3/19/2013 PA=28/100 DA=18/100 LRD=5 Total Links=212 We experienced the drop in Google traffic on 2/4/2013. So according to open site explorer everything is ok. But is this big jump in links a problem? Thanks to anybody that reads this long post. 🙂
Link Building | | brandzz0 -
Are paid links on your brand name considered bad by Google?
I've been intrigued recently by the penalty applied to a site we have just started working with. They were penalised back in summer last year as their previous link builder had built 60,000 links all with the same hard to get keyword anchor text....we're still sorting it out. My question now is that if the client pays for inclusion on some relevant sites, such as niche directories and those sites automatically produce 'follow' links, would the client be penalised if they link on their own company name? For example if they manufacture blue widgets and the anchor text on the link is 'ABC Manufacturing' rather than 'Blue Widgets' would Google see that as a reasonable link? I appreciate that if they linked back on the keyword anchor text 'Blue Widgets' it would be wrong but I'm seeking clarification on using the company name. Any thoughts?
Link Building | | aqueous0 -
Disavow Anchor and EMD
Lets say you have an legitimate EMD for a domain that is a ecommerce site with reasonable content. The site traffic was cut in half by Penguin. You think one of the main reasons that you were hit is old SEO black hat link building with Anchor that is exact match.....The catch 22 an exact match achor is the EMD. I want to disavow some of these old black hat backlinks and obviously I will nuke the ones from the spammy sites first and see what happens. What about the backlinks that have achor of emd.com (the company name and as it so happens a valid EMD) or just EMD. If the hit is coming from every single link becuase they are all exact match becuase that is the proper legit match and not some attempt to game the system......What the heck do you do? I get the War on spammy EMDs but I hope the legit ones are not hit even more. For one thing google should just have this ironic creteria for excluding EMDs....if they are running AdWords....they are 95% spam sites.....I love the irony of that one. I am betting lots of these mange to still get listed.
Link Building | | freestone0 -
Which parameter does google value more: number of incoming links or on-page optimizations (meta data and keywords)?
I am just starting with the SEO and I have a client in the travel industry whose website is not ranked well on the search engines. After doing the seo audit we see that the website's on-page optimization (meta titles, meta description, meta keywords and h1, h2, etc tags) is bad. At the same time there are very few incoming links into the website. These are the key 2 issues we found. In order to proceed most effectively, what do you think would be more effective to focus on first? Doing the on-site optimization or focusing more on the link building? Do the search engines, in particular, google - weight more either of these parameters? thanks so much for all your advice! all the best egle
Link Building | | queenz0 -
When is Google going to sort their act out?
I work with a couple of clients in the finance and debt area. I've been doing loads of work examining the link profiles of the commercial sites at the top of the rankings and 70% of the links I am seeing are low value directories and sites obviously built for links with multiple outgoing links to completely unrelated sources! When I examine the other links their isn't enough value in them to outweigh what looks to me like very obvious and spammy low quality link building. Why can't Google see what I'm seeing - it's so obvious? I know there are multiple factors at play but links like these should offer no value or get a site penalised (isn't that what Google tell us) but these sites still seem to be ranking because of them rather than despite them!
Link Building | | SearchEngineRescue0