Link Building / Link Removal
-
Hey,
I'm in the process of learning SEO, or attempting to, for my company and am chipping away at the process ever so slowly!
How can I tell if a site that links to my company's site, www.1099pro.com, has a negative effect on my page/domain authority?
Also, if a page doesn't show up in the search rankings at all for it's keywords when it really should (i.e it has the exact keywords and page/domain authority far surpasses even the top results) how can I tell if Google has removed the page from its listing and why?
Thanks SEO Gurus
-
Thanks for all the help!
-
Ah my apologies! If those pages have a canonical tag pointing to the main site then you're ok with them.
I'd say to just noindex the unnecessary pages.
I'm really not sure on the pagerank sculpting question. I likely would not worry about nofollowing outgoing links, but I'm not an expert in that area.
-
Hey Marie,
Thanks so much for the in answer - it helps a lot. Just to be clear, I don't buy links but always hear about bad ones and wanted to double check. Also, I don't use the other domains, i.e 1042-t.net, to rank for more terms (they are all canonicalized to my main website). Our company purchased the domains to keep competitors from using them or if new types of taxes came out in the future then we could use them.
I've got a few more questions that I'm hoping you can help with!
- Because these pages are already canonicalized, should I still meta noindex them?
- Should I list the unnecessary URL's in my robots.txt and disallow them or metanoindex them (or both)? What are the benefits.
- Because I have so many links on a page, would it benefit me to put the "nofollow" tag on the links that I don't need any pagerank to flow through?
-
There really isn't a quick answer to this question. A link is a good link if you didn't create it or pay for it. Otherwise, there's a good chance it's unnatural. There are some exceptions to that rule though.
I had a quick look at your link profile and I do have some concern over what looks like a bunch of microsites. For example, are 1042-t.net, 1042s.net, 1097-btc.com and other similar sites all yours? On a quick look they all look very similar. These can be called doorway pages by Google and can get you a thin content penalty. Also, if all of them are linking to your site then this can invite a manual unnatural links penalty. At this point those links are probably not being devalued by the Penguin algorithm, but it's possible that this might happen with the next Penguin refresh. If these are pages that you set up so that you can rank for more terms in Google then I really would remove them or incorporate them all into your main site. If they're landing pages for PPC campaigns then noindex them so that Google doesn't see them as an attempt to manipulate your rankings.
You could have issues other than bad links though. You've got a bunch of pages indexed that you probably don't want to have indexed such as
https://betasite.1099pro.com/downloaditem.asp?did=469
http://host.1099pro.com/ftp/product/2005/
Google's got 1410 pages of your site indexed and I think that a lot of them are ones that probably would be viewed as thin content by the Panda algorithm. Take for example this page: https://www.1099pro.com/taxforminfo.asp?pid=157. It's unlikely that it is useful to searchers to have a page like this in the Google index. If you've got lots of thin pages indexed then Panda is a big concern.
Unfortunately it looks like there are quite a few issues for you to deal with!
-
Michael, check your PMs, I just sent you a quick note there.
-
Our home page doesn't have any problems but my individual software pages, listed below, don't show up for their keywords at all. I can't figure out why they wouldn't show up in the first 50 listings when they used to show up as number 5 or 6.
Keyword: "1099 Printing Software" (https://www.1099pro.com/prod1099pro.asp)
Keyword: "1099 eFile Software" (https://www.1099pro.com/prod1099proEnt.asp)
-
The site appears to be okay. When I searched "1099 pro" on Google, www.1099pro.com was the first result. Using the Moz plugin for Chrome, I found that the site has Domain Authority of 39 and Page Authority of 48, both of which are decent scores. The Moz plugin also shows that www.1099pro.com has 34 +1's on Google+, which is a good sign of the company's validity and their trustworthiness as a link.
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
-
How does Google handle product detail page links hiden in a <noscript>tag?</noscript>
Hello, During my research of our website I uncovered that our visible links to our product detail pages (PDP) from grid/list view category-nav/search pages are <nofollowed>and being sent through a click tracking redirect with the (PDP) appended as a URL query string. But included with each PDP link is a <noscript>tag containing the actual PDP link. When I confronted our 3rd party e-commerce category-nav/search provider about this approach here is the response I recieved:</p> <p style="padding-left: 30px;">The purpose of these links is to firstly allow us to reliably log the click and then secondly redirect the visitor to the target PDP.<br /> In addition to the visible links there is also an "invisible link" inside the no script tag. The noscript tag prevents showing of the a tag by normal browsers but is found and executed by bots during crawling of the page.<br /> Here a link to a blog post where an SEO proved this year that the noscript tag is not ignored by bots: <a href="http://www.theseotailor.com.au/blog/hiding-keywords-noscript-seo-experiment/" target="_blank">http://www.theseotailor.com.au/blog/hiding-keywords-noscript-seo-experiment/<br /> </a> <br /> So the visible links are not obfuscating the PDP URL they have it encoded as it otherwise cannot be passed along as a URL query string. The plain PDP URL is part of the noscript tag ensuring discover-ability of PDPs by bots.</p> <p>Does anyone have anything in addition to this one blog post, to substantiate the claim that hiding our links in a <noscript> tag are in fact within the SEO Best Practice standards set by Google, Bing, etc...? </p> <p>Do you think that this method skirts the fine line of grey hat tactics? Will google/bing eventually penalize us for this?</p> <p>Does anyone have a better suggestion on how our 3rd party provider could track those clicks without using a URL redirect & hiding the actual PDP link?</p> <p>All insights are welcome...Thanks!</p> <p>Jordan K.</p></noscript></nofollowed>
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | eImprovement-SEO0 -
Product Reviews – Link Building Strategy
I own Simply Bags and have been sending sample bags to bloggers as a link building strategy. The following four links are a sample of recent product reviews. http://bit.ly/Mk6Z1t http://bit.ly/Mk6Smq http://bit.ly/Mk7atN http://bit.ly/Mk7wR8 Product reviews were considered a good link building strategy. After Panda & Penguin is Product Reviews still a good strategy? Please comment on the quality of the four sample links. Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | b4tv
Bob Shirilla0 -
Google Penguin w/ Meta Keywords
It's getting really hard filtering through the Penguin articles flying around right now so excuse me if this has been addressed: I know that Google no longer uses the meta keywords as indicators (VERY old news). But I'm just wondering if they are starting to look at them as a bigger spam indicator since Penguin is looking at over-optimization. If yes, has anyone read good article indicating so? The reason I ask is because I have two websites, one is authoritative and the other… not so much. Recently my authoritative website has taken a dip in rankings, a significant dip. The non-authoritative one has increased in rankings… by a lot. Now, the authoritative website pages that use meta-keywords seem to be the ones that are having issues… so it really has me wondering. Both websites compete with each other and are fairly similar in their offerings. I should also mention that the meta-keywords were implemented a long time ago… before I took over the account. Also important to note, I never purchase links and never practice any spammy techniques. I am as white hat as it gets which has me really puzzled as to why one site dropped drastically.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BeTheBoss0 -
Link Wheel & Unnatural Links - Undoing Damage
Client spent almost a year with link wheels and mass link blasts - end result was getting caught by google. I have taken over, we;ve revamped the site and I'm finishing up with onsite optimization. Would anyone have any suggestions how to undo the damage of the unnatural links and get back into googles favour a little quicker? Or the best next steps to undo the damage.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | ravynn0 -
What to do when majority of results have shady links?
So I am doing my back link research for the hosting industry and I am running across two different types of link schemes that make it hard to compete with straight white hat techniques. I am determined to keep our efforts white hat to retain long term value, but at the same time I am constantly tempted to slowly add links in the more grey ways. So here are some of the common practices I see a lot of (e.g. 8 of the top 10 sites for top terms use these). Link Buying/Article Links - You know this one well, their link profile has a 10:1 ratio of keyword links compared to brand name links, and the majority of those keyword links are on nonsensical blogs, or on related "tech" sites but obviously labeled as paid links. - I don't like this much, and have even reported some of these. "Hosted by" - So the majority of hosting companies out there have pre-built collections of templates for wordpress, joomla, and other CMS systems, and they have taken the extra step of putting "Server Hosting by XXXXXX" in the footer of those templates. This leads to thousands of small sites being hosted with the keyword backlinks. While I understand this, at the same time I would hope they wouldn't get credit for links all coming back from IPs that they own. While they aren't creating these sites they know the majority of users won't change the template (or know how to). Lastly there are some "Link to us and get discounts" programs going on with customers as well. So, seeing the linking setup this way, would you try to report each instance you see to Google? If so do you think they would really change anything considering how rampant it is among the results? Lets hear some opinions! In the mean time I am going to go work on my awesome content, press releases, and cross-company promotional campaigns ;).
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SL_SEM0 -
Does your website get downgraded if you link to a lower quality site?
My site has a pr of 4. My friends site has a pr of 2 but I think that he is doing some black hat seo techniques. I wanted to know whether the search engines would ding me for linking to (i.e., validating) a lower quality site.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | jamesjd70 -
40,000 High Value Links - Sold?
I'm a developer spending ever more time on SEO for SMBs. I've never had cause to buy links. Not one bit. I've done ok. Until now that is. Now I am getting my arse kicked into last year. By, I think, a top SEO company. Really, you know these guys and they are whiter than white. But what they have achieved seems an impossibilty to me using white hat techniques. Maybe they are from another planet than me. Or maybe something else is going on. In six months they have built 40,000+ links. These are unbelievably high quality links in their thousands. Really top notch. Keyword rich anchors slap bang in relevant content on great, great sites such as newspapers, univertsities, government, corporate, charity etc. Nothing spammy at all. Amazing. I was skimming but I found nothing to question at all until link 800 which was a cloaked link on a well known review site's product page. But generally the high quality sustained. Gradually, some began to feel somewhat worked into the content, although worked very well. 2000 links in and there are still magazine and review sites, still page authority 40+. There are still local government sites at 10,000 links when the export file ends. I go dizzy at the thought of the remaining 30,000. How far down could this quality have gone? Gulp. I am in awe, intimdated...and a little suspicious. How on earth do you do that with a pure white hat on? Actually, whatever colour your hat - how on earth do you do that? Rand's position is clear. He doesn't do it. Other's are less unambiguous. Comments like "I do it, you do it, we all do it" go unchallenged. Even on a recent link buying question here on SEOMoz most comments say don't do it but one advocates "Paid, targeted, individually prospected links". Am I too suspicious - a fool trying to rationalise my relatively pathetic link building? Honestly, you should just see these links. Of course, maybe some of you have. 🙂 Come on, please don't tell these guys simply worked hard. But maybe that's the harsh truth I cannot face. I have to say I cannot see the site generating an income to pay for the man hours needed for 40,000 high-value, white-hat links but then what do I know. Tell me, what do you think: Is it possible to build 40,000 very high value links in six months using pure white hat techniques - or is there another way? Phil
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Phil_2 -
Would linking out to a gambling/casino site, harm my site and the other sites it links out to?
I have been emailed asking if I sell links on one of my sites. The person wants to link out to slotsofvegas[dot]com or similar. Should I be concerned about linking out to this and does it reduce the link value to any of the other sites that the site links out to? Thanks, Mark
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Markus1110