Google webmaster tools Who links the most updates?
-
Has anyone ever seen in the section in GWT "Who links the most" actually update. I have sites listed in there that had me on a blogroll so I had 93,000 links to me and they removed those links months ago but GWT still shows that number of links. Does anyone else actually see those numbers go down as links are removed?
-
We were on the blogroll of a site that had 7,000 odd pages but these links weren’t yet being displayed in our GWT. We pre-emptively requested that the link was removed but 30-40 days later the now non-existent links started to be picked up and reported in GWT. Two months later and they’re still there.
It does appear there is somewhat of a staleness to the data.
-
Here is a senario I found with one of the sites that contained links to me.
domain.com linked to an internal page located at /page1/ so the link to that page was domain.com/page1/. This page contained a link to me but has been removed BUT the link to the internal page on that website has also been removed. So the website no longer has the link domain.com/page1/, but the page is indexed and still exists. Since Google will not find a link to that page on their site will Google ever recrawl that page?
-
Yes, on our case some links that were removed in April are still showing up in WMT. Some links removed in August just got out of the WMT list.
Some links from the April set are on pages with a high crawl rate (based on some initial data) so I was also wondering what is happening. Maybe those links are still on pages that are in the sup index and it can take more - although I would place "a few months" in the more bucket.
However I still strongly believe that is either a WMT update (display) issue or a sup index thing - or a combination of both.
Since you've mention the links were in the blogroll - it make sense to have most of those eon pages in the sup index but still the number should be at least smaller already since you've mention the links were gone a few months ago.
-
_Yes the number of links will eventually go down but it will take some while. Google needs to re-index those pages before you can see any difference in the GWT data. Nothing to worry about. Just get rid of those bad links and you will be good. _
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
-
What does google think about legit link exchanges where one is follow and one is no follow?
Hi Experts! Here is my Question for you. I am doing a link exchange in a legit way to increase sales for my site and my associate's site. My associate just wants a sales increase and no link juice. He has a very low DA so I want to give him a no follow link. Is it suspicious of fishy that I give a no follow link and receive a followed link in return? Please let me know how to proceed, I don't want to take any changes. Can you tell me the best way to proceed with this link exchange? Thanks
Link Building | | Ruchy0 -
Indirect Link Earning via dofollow Links In News Articles
Hello, MOZ SEO Gurus. I've been trying to think some deep thoughts on safe, effective link earning for news publishing sites, and wanted to run this up the flagpole and see if you salute. Our site is a biotech news service -- we pump out copious amounts of news content each day, which works well for driving traffic. That being said, we also want to rank some optimized landing pages as well. Take, for example, this page, which we'd like to rank for "secondary progressive MS" and related keywords: http://bionews-tx.com/secondary-progressive-ms/ Now, as far as I'm concerned, shopping this page around to MS influencers isn't easy. I can go to Foundational websites, blogs, etc., and say, "hey, we have this info page on SPMS, and I thought that you might find it helpful/want to link to it." But chances are, the MS influencers already have their own proprietary content on SPMS, and there isn't much value to linking to it. Therefore, I think that we'll get few link earning conversions on the effort. However, what if I take our Secondary Progressive MS landing page, and I link to it in a corresponding article about SPMS research, as I did here: http://bionews-tx.com/news/2014/01/30/secondary-progressive-ms-natalizumab-clinical-trial/ Then, I go to the drug developer who is at the center of this story and say to them, "hey, we recently covered your drug in the news, and I thought you might want to link to it." Then, we get a link from an MS drug developer to the news article, which in turn has a prominent anchor text, dofollow internal link to the landing page for SPMS. If the link from the drug developer is dofollow, then we flow page rank juice from the drug developer page to our news page to our landing page. To me, it's much easier to earn safe links this way than to try and shop the landing page itself. That being said, if we get a dofollow link on the news piece, we only get a diminished portion of page rank going to the landing page. Is this strategy viable? Is the indirect flow of page rank from a linking site to a news article to a landing page even worth it? I'd love to hear your thoughts. Thanks!
Link Building | | bionewstx2 -
Webmaster Tools Links
Am new to SEO so please be kind. I am working on link building (amongst other things) and notice that Google Webmaster Tools displays different links (and with different values) than Open Site Explorer. Some high value links which show up on Webmaster do not appear on OSE and vice versa. Which is the most accurate?
Link Building | | British_Hardwoods0 -
Link Pharming
My company has been using an SEO company for a while and have built up our pagerank to a 6. However, we have noticed that they're involved in link pharming - they're buildng extra websites and linking to our site on them. We are not happy with this as we know it will only be a matter of time before Penguin hits us. The contract with the SEO company is coming up for renewal soon and we're thinking of cancelling it. However, we are not sure if the company will delete all our backlinks, which will probably decrease our PageRank too. Has anyone here ever had a similar experience? What did the SEO company do when you cancelled the contract? Does anyone here work for an SEO company and what do you do when someone cancels your service?
Link Building | | AAttias0 -
About link again
I checked all links to my site (not too many at all) http://oasisoftheseasallureoftheseas.com/ and discovered that very important link – from my supplier,
Link Building | | NadiaFL
Royal Caribbean International is not listed at all. Some links with ‘nofollow’ tags show up but not this one. RCI source here http://www.royalcaribbean.com/customersupport/travelagent/processLocate.do?selectedCountry=USA&taname=&city=&state=&zip=34994&.x=22&.y=6 Any ideas?0 -
Link building / baiting in the Google zoo
I work for a consultancy, and in the past most of our links have been acquired by giving away privacy statements etc for websites, including a link back in the body of the document, and making it a licensing requirement that the link be kept. We're launchinga new site. We want this one to be whiter-than-white, and would appreciate some advice on the following options. Option 1: no links Remove the links from the documents, and don't require links for the use of the documents. Leave a non-linking credit in the documents. Perhaps ask nicely for links from other pages. Option 2: links on other pages Remove the links from the documents, but make it a licensing requirement that users will link to our site from another page on their site. I appreciate that most won't, but some will. Option 3: retain the links Keep the links in the document, using domain name (with and without http and www) and business name anchor text. Option 4: script the links Use scripts to generate randomized links in the documents, so that no two are the same, but with relevant linking text for the most part. We're risk-adverse with the new site, and it will pick up some links "naturally". We're therefore tending toward option 1, on the basis that it may well generate as many links as option 2. Which of these options would you choose? Are there any other options we should be considering?
Link Building | | seqal0 -
Text Link vs image link?
Which passes most link juice a text link or an image with the correct 'alt' attribute? Do the pass the same amount or is one more valuable than the other?
Link Building | | SamCUK0 -
Value no follow links from Google Content Network
Is there a value of using Google Content Network to add no follow links to the general linkscape of a website? I notice a lot of competion higher than me on SERPs for specific keywords have these links from website with high DA. We have tested the value of having Adsense adds, but they do not convert the traffic. We might consider using them for the purposes of ranking higher on SERPs though, and would appreciate any experinces with this.
Link Building | | inet-design0