Should I remove all vendor links (link farm concerns)?
-
I have a web site that has been around for a long time. The industry we serve includes many, many small vendors and - back in the day - we decided to allow those vendors to submit their details, including a link to their own web site, for inclusion on our pages. These vendor listings were presented in location (state) pages as well as more granular pages within our industry (we called them "topics). I don't think it's important any more but 100% of the vendors listed were submitted by the vendors themselves, rather than us "hunting down" links for inclusion or automating this in any way.
Some of the vendors (I'd guess maybe 10-15%) link back to us but many of these sites are mom-and-pop sites and would have extremely low authority.
Today the list of vendors is in the thousands (US only). But the database is old and not maintained in any meaningful way. We have many broken links and I believe, rightly or wrongly, we are considered a link farm by the search engines.
The pages on which these vendors are listed use dynamic URLs of the form: \vendors<state>-<topic>. The combination of states and topics means we have hundreds of these pages and they thus form a significant percentage of our pages. And they are garbage
So, not good.</topic></state>
We understand that this model is broken. Our plan is to simply remove these pages (with the list of vendors) from our site. That's a simple fix but I want to be sure we're not doing anything wring here, from an SEO perspective.
- Is this as simple as that - just removing these page?
- How much effort should I put into redirecting (301) these removed URLs? For example, I could spend effort making sure that \vendors\California- <topic>(and for all states) goes to a general "topic" page (which still has relevance, but won't have any vendors listed)</topic>
- I know there is no distinct answer to this, but what expectation should I have about the impact of removing these pages? Would the removal of a large percentage of garbage pages (leaving much better content) be expected to be a major factor in SEO?
Anyway, before I go down this path I thought I'd check here in case I miss something.
Thoughts?
-
"a significant rankings boost"
Here is how I see it.....
If a page of mine moved from #5 to #4, I would call that a significant rankings boost. If it moved from #50 to #40, I would call that trivial. If I am on the first page and get any movement up I would call it awesome.
About domain authority... I almost never look at it and can't tell you the DA of my websites. It has just slightly more than "entertainment value" to me. But, plenty of people worship those numbers.
-
Thank you - this is very helpful. I did some basic investigation around this.
The number of these vendor pages that have had at least one hit in the last year is 590. Across these pages I have had a total of 2249 hits. One of the pages (for some reason) accounts for 410 hits, but the vast majority (> 570 of these pages) have less than 20 hits for the entire year. Collectively, these pages have resulted in < 0.5% of our total page hits for the year.
So, they are meaningless in terms of volume of traffic but form a large percentage of our page count.
I am not really sure about the impact of a panda hit (or how to verify) but it does seem that the data above just points to deleting them. Since I think I can 301 redirect with a regular expression to the appropriate "topic page" that seems like the most appropriate approach at this stage.
By the way, I not sure how easy this is to answer, but how would I best assess "a significant rankings boost". Would that manifest itself in remaining pages being ranked better or is this as simple as looking at the domain authority after these pages are removed?
Thanks again.
-
we have hundreds of these pages and they thus form a significant percentage of our pages. And they are garbage
First, I would look at analytics to see if these pages pull in any meaningful traffic. If they do then you have learned something -- that the keywords that these "types of pages" are optimized for might be valuable. If they are bringing in good traffic, I might make massive improvements to them. If you keep them or make new ones on the same URLs be sure that they are useful for the visitor. If no traffic is coming in through these pages I would redirect them to a relevant page or simply to a related category page or my homepage.
How much effort should I put into redirecting (301) these removed URLs?
This depends on how much traffic enters the site through these pages and also the overall value of this website. If no traffic enters you can simply delete them and allow them to 404. If there is a little traffic or if other sites link to them then I would redirect.
What expectation should I have about the impact of removing these pages? Would the removal of a large percentage of garbage pages (leaving much better content) be expected to be a major factor in SEO?
If your site has taken a panda hit then removing these pages could result in a significant rankings boost when (if) recovery occurs. If the site has not taken a panda hit then removing the pages should make your site "lighter" and any authority and power that it has will be increased in these pages.
I would be optimistic - especially if this site has a lot of value on the pages that will remain.
-
Thank you for the prompt response. These pages are there specifically to show lists of vendors (links to their web sites). We do identify the relevant topic from the URL and, from the vendor list page, link to relevant content elsewhere on our site, in a sidebar. A typical page like this would link to 5-10 articles elsewhere on our site.
But the primary content is the list of vendors.
Thanks again.
-
My gut reaction to your question of whether to get rid of links which google may see as a link farm - is "Delete, Delete, Delete...."
In terms of whether it's worth putting in the time to do anything with these pages such as to 301 - the question would be, what is on the pages other than links to low authority websites?
If they contain very little content other than the link, I can't see any potential negative coming from cleaning up your website like this.
In terms of potential benefits, if you're right in your belief that this is considered a link farm by Google, then yes I would expect good things to come from removing this. In reality though, you just never know, but if you have thousands of pages of garbage with links, then there surely can't be any harm done by removing these pages - in my humble opinion.
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
-
Breadcrumbs versus in context link
Hi, I remember reading that links within the text have more value than breadcrumbs links for example because in context links are surrounded by the right content (words) but google search engine optimisation starter guide says breadcrumbs are good, so which one is recommended ? Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
Social Links through Link Shortners. Does it count?
We use link shortner services like Bitly, Goo.gl, etc. Does the post used while making use of such link shortner services counts as a social signal. Or should we post the complete website url pointing to each page while posting on social sites. Secondly, should we write a new description while posting on Social sites or just copy paste a few lines of original posts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | welcomecure0 -
Linking to URLs With Hash (#) in Them
How does link juice flow when linking to URLs with the hash tag in them? If I link to this page, which generates a pop-over on my homepage that gives info about my special offer, where will the link juice go to? homepage.com/#specialoffer Will the link juice go to the homepage? Will it go nowhere? Will it go to the hash URL above? I'd like to publish an annual/evergreen sort of offer that will generate lots of links. And instead of driving those links to homepage.com/offer, I was hoping to get that link juice to flow to the homepage, or maybe even a product page, instead. And just updating the pop over information each year as the offer changes. I've seen competitors do it this way but wanted to see what the community here things in terms of linking to URLs with the hash tag in them. Can also be a use case for using hash tags in URLs for tracking purposes maybe?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MiguelSalcido0 -
Disavow Links & Paid Link Removal (discussion)
Hey everyone, We've been talking about this issue a bit over the last week in our office, I wanted to extend the idea out to the Moz community and see if anyone has some additional perspective on the issue. Let me break-down the scenario: We're in the process of cleaning-up the link profile for a new client, which contains many low quality SEO-directory links placed by a previous vendor. Recently, we made a connection to a webmaster who controls a huge directory network. This person found 100+ links to our client's site on their network and wants $5/link to have them removed. Client was not hit with a manual penalty, this clean-up could be considered proactive, but an algorithmic 'penalty' is suspected based on historical keyword rankings. **The Issue: **We can pay this ninja $800+ to have him/her remove the links from his directory network, and hope it does the trick. When talking about scaling this tactic, we run into some ridiculously high numbers when you talk about providing this service to multiple clients. **The Silver Lining: **Disavow Links file. I'm curious what the effectiveness of creating this around the 100+ directory links could be, especially since the client hasn't been slapped with a manual penalty. The Debate: Is putting a disavow file together a better alternative to paying for crappy links to be removed? Are we actually solving the bad link problem by disavowing or just patching it? Would choosing not to pay ridiculous fees and submitting a disavow file for these links be considered a "good faith effort" in Google's eyes (especially considering there has been no manual penalty assessed)?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Etna0 -
Unpaid Followed Links & Canonical Links from Syndicated Content
I have a user of our syndicated content linking to our detailed source content. The content is being used across a set of related sites and driving good quality traffic. The issue is how they link and what it looks like. We have tens of thousands of new links showing up from more than a dozen domains, hundreds of sub-domains, but all coming from the same IP. The growth rate is exponential. The implementation was supposed to have canonical tags so Google could properly interpret the owner and not have duplicate syndicated content potentially outranking the source. The canonical are links are missing and the links to us are followed. While the links are not paid for, it looks bad to me. I have asked the vendor to no-follow the links and implement the agreed upon canonical tag. We have no warnings from Google, but I want to head that off and do the right thing. Is this the right approach? What would do and what would you you do while waiting on the site owner to make the fixes to reduce the possibility of penguin/google concerns? Blair
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BlairKuhnen0 -
Dummy links in posts
Hi, Dummy links in posts. We use 100's of sample/example lnks as below http://<domain name></domain name> http://localhost http://192.168.1.1 http:/some site name as example which is not available/sample.html many more is there any tag we can use to show its a sample and not a link and while we scan pages to find broken links they are skipped and not reported as 404 etc? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mtthompsons0 -
Blog links - follow or nofollow?
I need my memory refreshed here! Say, I've got a blog and some of the posts have links to recommended external sites and content. Should these be nofollowed? They're not paid links or anything like that, simply things relevant to the post.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PeterAlexLeigh0 -
Advertising links hurt SEO?
I'm working with a publisher who said that having DFA links on his site will hurt his SEO. He is taking my link and pointing it back to his site and then to mine. Does that sound right to you?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GFTMarketer0