First attempt at manual penalty removal fails - all example links provided by Google not in Majestic, GWT, Ahrefs, LinkDetox, or OSE.
-
Hello all,
I am trying to recover a site from a manual penalty. I already submitted once. Here's what we did. We took the link profile from webmaster tools, majestic seo, ahrefs, link detox, and ose. We manually looked at every link to exclude good links. Then used a tool to run the removal campaign. Submitted a disavow file and reconsideration request.
Google came back with a denial. When I looked at the three example links that Google provided, they were definitely spammy (forum profile and comment spam). But none of them were in any of the original csv downloads from GWT, Ahrefs, Majestic, OSE, or LinkDetox.
What can I do?
Thanks in advance for any help.
-
One of the example links provided isn't even in the index apparently.
I've had that happen to me before. I usually explain in my reconsideration request that this example is no longer in the index. But, I also try my best to see if I can find similar indexed links that I have not dealt with. Usually there are others there.
For your search, don't use the link: operator. Google's link operator does not work well. The rest of your search should work well, but if your keyword phrase is a popular one then you'll have to be more creative. Have they used the same username in profiles? That would be something to search for.
-
Okay, interesting. One of the example links provided isn't even in the index apparently. Also, I am trying the following search, but I think I am doing something wrong because I am getting zero results back.
inurl:member -site:clientsite.com + "keyword phrase" + link:clientsite.com
I am trying to find pages link to my client's site, that are not on my client's site, that have member in the url, that use keyword somewhere.
What am I doing wrong?
-
I find that this is really common for sites that have utilized low quality forum and spam comment links. Google will often come back with example links that are in the index but nowhere to be found in any of the backlink checkers. I usually find though that with some creative thinking you can find more of these links to try to remove and disavow.
Look for patterns in your forum links. For one of our clients, the forum links given to us by Google were all Russian forum profiles all on a phpBB platform (I believe...can't remember all of the details right now.) We did some Google searches like the following:
inurl:user/profile "keyword"
inurl:user/profile "username"
"powered by phpbb" + "keyword" <--This only works if you have a relatively unique keyword or username
"powered by phpbb" + "username"
Of course, these are just examples though. You may need to be more creative in the searches that you do.
Similarly, we will often get example links that are press releases and not in our backlink checkers. You can search for text from your press releases in quotes to find more. This also works well if you have used boilerplate author bio text for low quality articles.
I believe that the reason why Google wants you to find these before they remove your penalty is that these links will hurt the site in the Penguin algorithm if not removed. It is unfair that these links are not in WMT, but the work must be done to try to find them.
One other thought is to ask your client if they have a list of known links that were made. This may seem obvious, but I've had a couple of cases where clients were able to contact the offshore linkbuilding firm that made links for them and suddenly we have a list of hundreds of links that we can deal with.
Best of luck!
-
How do you obtain a complete link sample indeed. You really can't. Even the best programs may show only 25-30% of your entire profile at any one time (and in some cases only 15%). According to Google, all you are "supposed" to need is the export from GW Tools, that's clearly not the case.
Unfortunately, if you are only at 52% removal on your existing links that's not nearly high enough. I'd personally recommend trying again to get that number up, on your existing links, but make sure to run a NEW download from GW Tools regularly, they appear to be updating that bi-monthly now so new links are probably already in your account.
Keep working and consider adding www.linkrisk.com into your analysis as well. That's another pretty good source of links and it does a good job of sorting the links into suspect classes for you so also very helpful.
Sorry I can't be of more help.
-
Thanks for responding. I actually did exactly what you suggested the first time around. I pulled from every available source including Majestic, GWT, OSE, LinkDetox, and Ahrefs. I was only able to achieve a 52% removal. But I ran it for a month and contacted some webmasters up to 9 times. I did disavow at the domain level and linked to both the disavow and link pruning sheets within your the request.
And again, the link examples that came back were not in ANY of the tools and sources used. So my question is, how do I obtain a more complete link sample.
-
Ouch, I just lost my entire response to you so unfortunately, this one won't be as detailed.
What you described is common. Google doesn't provide a full backlink view of your links and I've personally experienced what you've experienced, receiving sample links that are not referenced at all in the Google link download I originally worked from. To combat this, use multiple sources: Majestic SEO, Open Site Explorer, Google Download, Ahrefs, etc. I then take these links and import ALL of them into the Link Detox tool over at www.linkresearchtools.com. The tool does a fantastic job of auto-sorting the duplicates for you. Do this so you work with a larger sample going forward.
Unfortunately, now that you've been denied Google won't even consider looking at another recon submission for at least another 3-5 weeks. Take that time to run a more complete link sample then refine your analysis around the sample link classes and anchor texts they provided. Finally, the standard for Unnatural Link Manual Action removal campaigns is high: think 70%. So try your best to remove as much as you can. What you can't, make sure to DISAVOW at the domain level and link to both your Disavow File AND your Link Pruning Sheets within your next Reconsideration Request.
Good luck and if you remember nothing from this answer remember this going forward:
Golden Rule of Link Building: "Any link on which YOU can control the placement and or anchor text rich nature, is an UNNATURAL LINK."
I hope this was helpful.
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
-
Base href + relative link href for canonical link
I have a site that in the head section we specify a base href being the domain with a trailing slash and a canonical link href being the relative link to the domain. <base <="" span="">href="http://www.domain.com/" /> href="link-to-page.html" rel="canonical" /> I know that Google recommends using an absolute path as a canonical link but is specifying a base href with a relative canonical link the same thing or is it still seen as duplicate content?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Nobody16116990439410 -
Panda penalty removal advice
Hi everyone! I'm after a second (or third, or fourth!) opinion here! I'm working on the website www.workingvoices.com that has a Panda penalty dating from the late March 2012 update. I have made a number of changes to remove potential Panda issues but haven't seen any rankings movement in the last 7 weeks and was wondering if I've missed something... The main issues I identified and fixed were: Keyword stuffed near duplicate title tags - fixed with relevant unique title tags Copies of the website on other domains creating duplicate content issues - fixed by taking these offline Thin content - fixed by adding content to some pages, and noindexing other thin/tag/category pages. Any thoughts on other areas of the site that might still be setting off the mighty Panda are appreciated! Cheers Damon.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Digitator0 -
Why do Local "5 pack" results vary between showing Google+, Google+ and website address
I had a client ask me a good question. When they pull up a search result they show up at the top but only with a link to their G+ page. Other competitors show their web address and G+ page. Why are these results different in the same search group? Is there a way to ensure the web address shows up?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ron_McCabe0 -
Client is paranoid about Google penguin penalty from getting links from a new website they are building
We have a client that is creating a new promotional website that consists of videos, brands and product reviews (SITE B). After a visitor watches a video on SITE B they will be given a "click to purchase" option that will lead them to the original website (SITE A). Our client is paranoid that since all the outgoing links on the new SITE B are going to the original SITE A there might be algorithm penalty (for one website or both). I find this very unlikely and even recommend "no follow" coding for a peace of mind. However are there any resources/links out there that can back up my argument that they will be alright? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | VanguardCommunications0 -
'Nofollow' footer links from another site, are they 'bad' links?
Hi everyone,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | romanbond
one of my sites has about 1000 'nofollow' links from the footer of another of my sites. Are these in any way hurtful? Any help appreciated..0 -
Does Google throttle back the search performance of a penalised website/page after the penalty has been removed?
Hi Mozzers. Back in 2013 my website www.octopus-hr.co.uk was hit by a Penguin 2.0 penalty owing to a harmful backlink profile built by a dodgy SEO consultant (now fired). The penalty seemed to apply to the homepage of the site but other pages were unaffected. We got what links we could removed, disavowed the rest and were informed in September 2013 that the penalty had been removed and our re-inclusion request had been successful. However our website homepage still ranks poorly for the search terms we're targeting in the UK: "HR Software" "HR Systems" On page factors are in my opinion pretty well optimised for these search terms. In terms of link building post penalty we've focused on high authority and relevant sites. I believe that compared to most of our search competitors the back link profile to our homepage is in pretty good shape, however it still ranks badly. Has anyone had any experience of a penalty hangover from Google in the past? Are there other things I should consider? Thanks David
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | OctopusHR0 -
What's the best way to check Google search results for all pages NOT linking to a domain?
I need to do a bit of link reclamation for some brand terms. From the little bit of searching I've done, there appear to be several thousand pages that meet the criteria, but I can already tell it's going to be impossible or extremely inefficient to save them all manually. Ideally, I need an exported list of all the pages mentioning brand terms not linking to my domain, and then I'll import them into BuzzStream for a link campaign. Anybody have any ideas about how to do that? Thanks! Jon
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JonMorrow0 -
I have removed over 2000+ pages but Google still says i have 3000+ pages indexed
Good Afternoon, I run a office equipment website called top4office.co.uk. My predecessor decided that he would make an exact copy of the content on our existing site top4office.com and place it on the top4office.co.uk domain which included over 2k of thin pages. Since coming in i have hired a copywriter who has rewritten all the important content and I have removed over 2k pages of thin pages. I have set up 301's and blocked the thin pages using robots.txt and then used Google's removal tool to remove the pages from the index which was successfully done. But, although they were removed and can now longer be found in Google, when i use site:top4office.co.uk i still have over 3k of indexed pages (Originally i had 3700). Does anyone have any ideas why this is happening and more importantly how i can fix it? Our ranking on this site is woeful in comparison to what it was in 2011. I have a deadline and was wondering how quickly, in your opinion, do you think all these changes will impact my SERPs rankings? Look forward to your responses!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | apogeecorp0