Can 302's Negate Spam Link Profile?
-
To make a long story short, the previous SEO company we hired spammed us on LOTS of crappy links, many of which are still indexed. We're currently in the act of removing these links before we receive a manual spam penalty/notification + building new, stronger links to balance out our profile.
While most of these garbage links were sent to our homepage, many are linking our Services page (and a bunch to our .com/sitemap.html for some reason, lol).
Now we're in the midst of updating our entire website and the permalinks are going to change. While I'd normally 301 our old links to the new ones, Id rather not bring the horrible link profile with it if at all possible.
Would a simple 302 redirect effectively dodge the bad juju from these spam links to our Services page since they pass 0 juice? Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.
Thanks!
-
Hey Carson,
Thanks for the response. 404/410ing was going to be my game plan initially, but I was curious if a 302 was "better" than returning dead pages. In either case, it's only a few pages so I don't think it matters much. Our traffic was from this page being used across our local citations which did receive referral traffic. They've since been changed to our root URL, so no worries on not 301'ing or 302'ing that link. 404 it is.
The majority of the bad links are to our root domain, so I've been busy lately sending removal requests and such and preparing out disavow sheets. I was hoping for an "easier" fix to simply get rid of the dead pages, but killing them does indeed seem best.
I guess I'll go with the original plan to kill the pages which have the bulk of the spammy links, 301 the "cleaner" old structures without links aimed at them, and continue trying to remove the spammy links to the root URL.
Thanks for the input!
-
Hi there,
Sorry, I thought I answered this! I think I lost my internet connection for a bit.
On pages where you have no good links you want to salvage AND no significant incoming (organic/referred) traffic, I would just return a 410 response code and kill them off entirely.
On pages where you have no good links but you do receive traffic, I would 302 redirect them.
On pages with good and bad links, I would either leave them (200) or 301 redirect them, clean up the links as best you can, and disavow those spammy domains (or pages, in fewer cases) that are spammy if they fail to take their links down.
Hope that helps!
-
Does anyone have any insight into this issue?
-
Hey George,
Thanks for the response.
1. I am not concerned with the old link structure losing juice from quality links as their simply are none. The only links built to our non-root URL are spam from the SEO package that was purchased in the past. And even if there were a few decent links, the ratio between quality and spam is so out of whack that it'd be a worthy venture if we could ditch the spam links IMO.
Also, the non-root URL pages these links have targeted that I want to 302 aren't anything I'm interested in ranking for down the line. They were our About Us pages and our Sitemap. I'd just like to distance our domain from these spam links at any cost and start "fresh."
2. The upgraded page has been completely rewritten, so there's no risk of duplicate content issues when the new site goes live. It's entirely different from the current version. The old URL is also going to be removed from the domain entirely, so I'd imagine Google would eventually remove it from the index.
I'm planning on submitting a disavow sheet down the line, but that's a last resort if link removal and tactics like these can't help clean up my profile.
Thanks for the help.
-
Hi,
You're far from being alone with the issues you described, but personally I wouldn't recommend what you're suggesting:
- Using a 302 from the old to new URL structure will impact every link pointing at the old URLs be they a quality or spam backlink.
- Using a 302 rather than a 301 means there's a good chance that Google will index both the old and new URLs and cause duplicate content and PageRank splitting issues. This is likely to make things worse for you.
If I was you I'd disavow the spam links per Google's policy (https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/2648487?hl=en), set up 301s to your new URLs and following a bit of patience, start your SEO afresh with a clean slate.
George
@methodicalweb
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
-
Does Dofollow links from forumn profiles, blog comments, business directories or article directories etc have any impact?
Hi guys, So looking at my competitors in my city a lot of the people ranking on 2nd, 3rd pages and so forth have little or no quality backlinks, instead, their links are all from business directories, forum profiles and blog comments. I saw google employees saying easy to create links hold very little value and it's easy for the algorithm to distinguish been easy to obtain backlinks and difficult ones. From what I see on my competition backlink profiles, they may not get them to the front page but they do get them to pages, two three and four. I was wondering if creating say 20-30 easy links per week and also focus on obtaining high-quality backlinks. Would they be any penalties for 20-30 easy to make links a week from Google? Cheers
Link Building | | sydneygardening0 -
Value of Links? What is each link worth?
Morning Everyone, I just had this thought and wondered what everyone's opinions were in terms of link value in monetary terms. We'll assume for the purposes of this that the links come from contextually relevant sites and that the sites in question have got the Moz DA from being high quality and have a good quality incoming link profile. Its a bit of a theoretical question, but i guess imagine if the only way you could get links was to pay for them, what would they be worth to you. This is link value for SEO purposes, they will have in addition value from traffic from good sites, that no doubt varies wildly depending on topic. I assume everyone also agrees on: The first link from a domain is the most valuable High DA sites are worth more than low ones. So could anyone who has an opinion on the link value suggest a monetary value for links. Its really just using a monetary amount to see how best to target my time. Here is my example of what might be expected, but I am hoping people with more knowledge will perhaps correct it. DA Rating First Link 2nd-5th Link 5th-10th Link 10Plus Links 5 $5 $2 $1 $0 15 $7 $3 $2 $1 25 $25 $10 $5 $2 35 $45 $20 $7 $3 45 $65 $30 $11 $4 55 $95 $45 $19 $5 65 $200 $100 $45 $6 75 $350 $120 $65 $9 85 $700 $240 $95 $15 95 $1100 $450 $200 $30
Link Building | | wellandpower1 -
Post index of quality back links; How long should you leave it to see if it's had any impact?
The question is pretty much in the title. We had a link from a Charity site (high PA/ DA) and from Metro online recently. Indexed about 3 weeks ago and 5 days ago respectively. No movement to speak off. (Previously we've seen significant boosts from far lesser links). Should I assume they have had no effect? Or is too early to tell I know it takes up to 2 months for some of our new pages to rank, same with passing authority from links? (Note: I appreciate the competition will play a significant part in this, but my question is specifically about how long one should leave to know one way or another. )
Link Building | | isaac6630 -
Does a hashtag link pass the same amount of link juice as a link without a hashtag?
Example 1: link to: http://www.domain.com/#something-inside-the-page Example 2: link to: http://www.domain.com/
Link Building | | adriandg0 -
How do sites have so many 'total links'?
I've been analyzing some of our competitors: essayedge.com and papercheck.com Both sites have a large number of 'total links'... about 93,000 each. The former has about 1,200 linking root domains while the latter only has 195. Even for 1,200 linking root domains, 93k total links seems like a ton to me. Our site has 101 linking root domains and only 299 'total links'. I'm quite new to this whole SEO game and admittedly still learning a TON. Am I missing something here? How do sites generate so many links? This seems nuts to me. Thanks for any help!
Link Building | | TBiz0 -
Would notifying visitors that they can put text link ads on your site destroy you in terms of Google?
I am debating buying this product for Joomla on that note: http://www.jv-extensions.com/content/_/joomla-extensions/jv-contentlinks-r52 Would you advise for or against this purchase?
Link Building | | Uramark1 -
Link Spamming or Not? Block Internal Search Results From Indexing?
We are looking at providing our customers with the best experience when performing a site search for a product. Would it be bad SEO practice to have our internal search results show results for all 4 Brands linking to different domains? This would mean multiple outgoing links to other owned sites from the same IP. Is it a best practice to block internal search results using robots.txt?
Link Building | | SEO-Team0