Manual Action - When requesting links be removed, how important to Google is the address you're sending the requests from?
-
We're starting a campaign to get rid of a bunch of links, and then submitting a disavow report to Google, to get rid of a manual action.
My SEO vendor said he needs an @email domain from the website in question @travelexinsurance.com, to send and receive emails from vendors. He said Google won't consider the correspondence to and from webmasters if sent from a domain that is not the one with the manual action penalty.
Due to company/compliance rules, I can't allow a vendor not in our building to have an email address like that.
I've seen other people mention they just used a GMAIL.com account. Or we could use a similar domain such as @travelexinsurancefyi.com.
My question, how critical is it that the domain the correspondence with the webmasters be from the exact website domain?
-
Thanks for the thanks, Patrick G.
An amusing sidelight: one company that refused my request for company email had previously entrusted me with use of their corporate credit card -- and continued to do so after refusing my request.
Go figure.
(sigh)
-
Is there any fear that the entire domain would be considered spam, if you use a company domain?
Or is it just that you want to use a separate email address, so it doesn't get intermixed with other items? Seems like some people on the web strongly advise to use a Gmail address.
http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2237534/Google-Unnatural-Links-Manual-Penalty-A-Recovery-Guide
What is the Best Email Approach?
Some prefer to use an email address associated with the penalized website: Joe@example.com.The thought is that a domain based email provides maximum credibility. My concern with this approach is getting a domain's email torched by having it marked as spam.
My preferred method is to use Gmail from the Dedicated Account created for the link removal campaign. A cc to Joe@example.com seems to add sufficient credibility. By having all of the email outreach documented there, it's easy to share with Google. Using Gmail canned responses further adds to the efficiency.
-
Thanks for the insights Daniel.
Yeah, it is difficult the bigger the company.
Do you have any insights into whether I need to worry a lot about getting spammed, if I use an email on my domain?
-
I agree is always better to use a company address when representing the company (for link removal requests to third parties... or anything else. e.g.. creating Linkedin profiles or acting as Privacy Officer.)
I have had many "lively" discussions with clients about getting company email addresses.
Bottom line: hopeless with Fortune 500 or large companies with rigid policies. They are not going to make an exception for you, however compelling your case. They are hung up on (often phoney and imagined) compliance issues. Even if you clear that hurdle, they can always fall back on the old "we have to treat all vendors equally" claim.
But I have had some success with medium sized companies. In one case, I offered to let the IT manager monitor my email to ensure I was using it only for agreed upon purposes....on pain of contract termination.
-
Thanks for the insight. Will have to check out your book.
One follow up. Is there a rule of thumb between the time you get a message in Google Webmaster Tools, and the time you get penalized for not getting rid of those links or sending a disavow report?
-
I've done both. If it's possible for me to use a domain email then I do so, not for Google's sake, but rather, so that it looks more official to the people who are receiving the email. If I can't, then I make up a Gmail account like sitenameemails@gmail.com and when I send the emails I include a line saying, "You may have noticed that this email did not come from an @sitename.com email address. Because we are sending a large number of emails out we did not want to risk our domain being flagged as a sender of spam. If you would like verification from a site owner of this link removal request, please email siteowner@sitename.com."
-
Thanks for the note. I really appreciate it.
@William Kammer, get this, my agency admitted they are using Rmoov, and need it for that reason. So you were exactly right.
-
Google doesn't care where the email comes from to request a link removal. I've never seen a disavow report where the email of the requester is even mentioned. All Google wants to see in a disavow report is which links you want to disavow, and how much of an effort your made to get them removed manually.
The reason your SEO is requesting an email address at your domain is likely because he's using software to request link removals, and that software requires the email. Services like Rmoov are great for streamlining the disavow process, but in order to use Rmoov, you have to prove you're part of company, which requires the email address.
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
-
Google adding text to SERP title which isn't relevant
Hi guys, I have a site with around 300 articles on it and these articles came from three old domains which were migrated during a Wordpress domain migration almost four months back. There The problem I'm having is that for quite a lot of the articles in the SERP, Google is adding '- Maine Coons' to the end of the title. One of our old domains was related to this breed of cat so at least in Google's eyes it must have something to do with this I guess. I've attached a screenshot that shows one such example. What's odd is a lot of the new content that has been created also has this suffix added and it doesn't show in any other search engine. So, it doesn't appear in other search engines and it's not coming from the article itself (proved also via developer tools inspecting the code). So, Google is adding it but as you can see in this example (there are many more) it has absolutely no relevance to the post. Has anyone seen this behavior or have any idea how to fix it? I've tried all kinds of things and have even hired SEO 'experts' that haven't been able to see any problems. Any clues? Thanks, Matt K71Y3P9
Technical SEO | | mattpettitt0 -
Link to AMP VS AMP Google Cache VS Standard page?
Hi guys, During the link building strategy, which version should i prefer as a destination between: to the normal version (php page) to the Amp page of the Website to the Amp page of Google Cache The main doubt is between AMP of the website or standard Version. Does the canonical meta equals the situation or there is a better solution? Thank you so mutch!
Technical SEO | | Dante_Alighieri0 -
Google UK and the slog of Link building
Background:
Technical SEO | | Brinley
I have a number of sites built using the open eCommerce software zen cart. One of these sites was penalised by the original Penguin algorithm back in April 24, 2012. The reason for the panalty was that two ecommerce sites in Hong kong had a link to the above site in the footer of their 2000 & 4000 product website. I have no idea why the site had these links and even though I did contact them a few months before the Penguin massacre asking them to remove the footer link I was technically unaware of the ticking time bomb that they presented. The result, as is now engrained in SEO history, was that the site was moved to sit alongside Googles equivalent of the restaurant at the end of the universe and stayed there for 2 years until April 2014.
As I had never indulged in link building for the simple reason that I found it laborious I was obviously infuriated with the resulting loss of revenue but that was balanced with an understanding that I had not kept pace with the changing landscape of SEO according to Google. The quest I am now on is to increase my 3 sites profile on the web without getting another spanking from Google in the near future. The problem I have is that white hat today may well be black hat tomorrow. (I can recall the days when Google said links are good and everyone went out and asked other websites to link with them and look where that led.) So do I ignore actively cultivating links as some suggest and look to produce good content (which is quite difficult when you make mugs and candles by the way.) or do you go out and look to intentionally build links by studying competitors links, reviewing link opportunity or get bloggers to review products. For a small lifestyle entrepreneur like myself, the ever changing seo landscape and the amount of time & effort it requires is slowly and inevitably pushing us back out to that restaurant mentioned earlier. If only Google had a little brother that was designed purely for small businesses - like it was in the good old days before the dinosaur that is big business grunt and thought hmmm! whats that?
And if there were such a thing I would add a caveat that it would be illegal to generate pointless amount of cyber content because the web is becoming something akin to a landfill. Which leaves me nowhere really - but I think I am okay with that. Waiter !!0 -
The word 'shop' in a page title
I'm reworking most of the page titles on our site and I'm considering the use of the word 'Shop' before a product category. ex. Shop 'keyword' | Brand Name As opposed to just using the keyword sans 'Shop.' Some of the keywords are very generic, especially for a top level category page. Question: Is the word 'Shop' damaging my SEO efforts in any way?
Technical SEO | | rhoadesjohn0 -
I have 404 errors but can't find where these links are?
The 4xx report had 0 errors, and then on the recent crawl it found over 200. They are all variations on real URLs e.g.: Real URL: http://www.bullseyeuk.com/10-up-deluxe-literature-holder.html 404 Error URL: http://www.bullseyeuk.com/10-up-deluxe-literature-holder.html �� None of them are linked to the root domain and I can't find where they are coming from. Any ideas? Thanks Jack
Technical SEO | | JackMurphy0 -
Blank pages in Google's webcache
Hello all, Is anybody experiencing blanck page's in Google's 'Cached' view? I'm seeing just the page background and none of the content for a couple of my pages but when I click 'View Text Only' all of teh content is there. Strange! I'd love to hear if anyone else is experiencing the same. Perhaps this is something to do with the roll out of Google's updates last week?! Thanks,
Technical SEO | | A_Q
Elias0 -
How to remove the 4XX Client error,Too many links in a single page Warning and Cannonical Notices.
Firstly,I am getting around 12 Errors in the category 4xx Client error. The description says that this is either bad or a broken link.How can I repair this ? Secondly, I am getting lots of warnings related to too many page links of a single page.I want to know how to tackle this ? Finally, I don't understand the basics of Cannonical notices.I have around 12 notices of this kind which I want to remove too. Please help me out in this regard. Thank you beforehand. Amit Ganguly http://aamthoughts.blogspot.com - Sustainable Sphere
Technical SEO | | amit.ganguly0 -
Access To Client's Google Webmaster Tools
Hi, What's the best/easiest way for a client to grant access to his Google Webmaster Tools to me? Thanks! Best...Michael
Technical SEO | | 945010