How to tell when a directory backlink or other backlink is worthy of disavow tool? Especially when a keyword is not ranking passed where it should.
-
Hello,
I jumped aboard as SEO for a client, who seems to of had been hit by panda and penguin back in 2012 of April, the panda part I feel I've fixed by creating better content, combining pages that were same topic into one, basically creating a better content experience that relates better to search terms users are searching for.
Once the site was redesigned and relaunched all keywords improved minus one, the main keyword they want to rank for. Created a landing page for it, that is very nicely optimized for that keyword and it's brothers and sisters, however that page isn't used by google since it's brand new with a PA of 1.
Doing a backlink audit I found 102 links out of 400 using the same anchor text as the keyword they want ranked for, they also have synonyms anchor text for other links too but not quite as much.
Most of those 102 domains using the main keyword anchor text are directories, in my opinion I'd declare all of them spam, however there are a few with DAs higher than 50, making me little more nervous to disavow, since I want to make sure we get out of the penalty if we were hit by penguin but also don't want to ruin the ranking for other keywords we're doing better with, since they are longtails and short, but very relevant to users.
How is the best way to determine if a site / directory is spammy enough that it's penalizing you and how could I approach the anchor text issue with backlinks? 99% of these links I cannot have changed, since they're directories I doubt many have had a human mess with them in a while.
Sidenote* If you're going to post a link as a response, try to summarize what that link will be about, as many times links are giving as an answer but end up not really providing the meat we were seeking.
Thank you!
-
Hello Robert,
Hope you're doing well,
Seems I just didn't include all the info I needed, making posts as if you all have access to the data I have in my head is a mistake
What I meant is I have 500 urls, after doing a full link audit, 153 of those urls are trashy directory or comment spam backlinks with very spammy site templates, also they often times not had anchor text with main keywords of ours.
Now yes, 153 out of 500 urls isn't that bad, however the 153 urls are more than 3 years old, and our total backlinks has grown from 160 ( a year ago ) to 500 ( today ) meaning at one point in time, we did have a majority of backlinks that were from trashy directories and comment spam, in fact last year ( 160 - 153 left us with 7 possibly ok backlinks ) was the most recent, so it's a very high possibility these urls were the reason we got hit by penguin ( have data that suggest this as well ).
It's easy to get fixated on one SEO keypoint or another, but when you do, just remember to follow the data trail and make sure to see the other SEO footprints as well during that search, you can find a good bit.
Even answering questions from others here helps me find further keypoints to highlight and go through.
-
I don't believe you can just say we have x links from directories of which __% are no followed and __% from followed use KW as anchor text; therefore, the links are the problem. It is simply not that simplistic.
Secondarlily, in your original comments you said this: "...however that page isn't used by google since it's brand new with a PA of 1." I can show you tons of pages with PA of 1 that rank on page one of Google.
I caution always that you should not get fixated on one issue with SEO as it can lead you down a rabbit hole. I do not think in this instance based on what you have here, that you are suffering due to the links. Frankly, you are looking at a page with a PA of 1 and then pointing to a site with 400plus links and saying the other pages are increasing in rank. The anchor text being what it is, I don't see how it is affecting this one page.
Best
-
Thanks for the reply, I agree with your points but also felt I didn't explain the rest of the backlinks quality that well either.
they have around 450 backlinks, 102 use that keyword we want as main as anchor text, the rest of the links aren't all good either.
Most of the 411 backlinks are nofollow it seems, with around 150 of those links being follow. Many of the follow links are under 50 DA and majority of those are directory listings or comment links.
This is why I think they've been hit, since the the backlink anchor text for follow links are using our main keyword and aren't to very high quality sites.
Couple that info with the fact I've had google index that one landing page 3 separate times since our redesign launch a month ago and only that main keyword fails to gain rank, It did make a big jump when we launched the redesign from 72 to 58 then to 41 but 2 days after ranking up to 41 it dropped back to 62 where it has stayed for the week, moving up to 64 and holding.
This is while every other keyword has improved by 20+ ranks, just this one keyword isn't going anywhere, I have around 160 more links to define the DA, follow or nofollow and anchor text if follow, then I will be grouping those follow links into a best to worst list and disavow 10 of the worst urls at a time every week to see how things go.
What do you think?
-
Deacyde
First you said, "however that page isn't used by google since it's brand new with a PA of 1. " I suggest using Fetch as Google and then once it shows as complete, click submit to index.
As to when is a specific link or group of links worthy of disavowal tool, that is a bit broader answer. You have roughly 400 links and roughly 100 or 25% are spammy directory links. IMO you likely are not being bothered by penguin IF the other links are at least reasonable. Also, with rare exception, most directory links are not doing you much good so losing them is not going to do much, if any damage. Think of it this way: Your client is a plumber, doctor, lumber store, etc. On a directory most of them have low value pages and then link out 20 to 100's of times. I have seen very few even higher value directories that are not either sending out a ton of links per page OR blowing it by using sitewide links, etc.
I think you can always experiment. Do the disavowal and leave in the few you think are higher value. For each of the questionable directory domains disavow the whole domain to save time assuming they have multiple links. Also, a strong caution here is no matter what link tool you used, also go look in GWMT (search console) to be sure there aren't any really dastardly ones you have missed as many directories now block ahrefs, majestic, moz, etc.
Once you do that if you don't gain traction, resubmit adding additional "good" directories to the disavowal. With what you have as a fairly low number the disavowal should be fairly straightforward and easy to get done. Nothing like dealing with a few hundred thousand bad links!
Let us know if this helps,
Robert
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
-
Disavow links old links
We have built a lot of sites and there a few sites we no longer manage or want any association with. When I have looked at webmasters I can see 20 to 200+ odd links back to our site. The page however at source has no reference to our website. I have searched the code but there isn't anything. Is it safe to disavow these or just leave them?
Technical SEO | | Cocoonfxmedia0 -
Drop in Rankings
Hello Webmasters, My site has incurred a sudden dip in rankings across sections. We conducted an analysis and have observed the following two major issues: Unnatural Links Penalty: Our site was issued an Unnatural Links Penalty on May 23. Basically, we have both 'http' and 'https' versions of our website registered on Webmaster tools. Initially, the warning showed up on the 'http' version and thus we started a cleanup by extracting the linking domains and have also filed a reconsideration request once all the spammy domains were removed and rightly disavowed. Recently, we got another manual action warning on the 'https' version regarding the unnatural links. So we have started with the cleanup activity right away. While analyzing this issue, we came across another major problem regarding the two versions which is our next concern and is mentioned below. https Canonical Issue: For more insights, we went through our site’s content and found that our website is following the below pattern Our 'http' version of the webpages get 301 redirected to the 'https' version. This 'https' version again has a canonical pointing to the 'http' version thus creating a loop. To conclude, I request your valuable learnings and thoughts on the following: Which of these issues are likely to have affected our website’s ranking Which version is likely to be preferred by Google (https or http) in our case
Technical SEO | | Starcom_Search0 -
# in url affecting rank
Hi I am building links to a page www.companyname.com/category.index.php There is also another similar url www.companyname.com/category.index.php#. This page is linked to from the non # page. This is a new client and I'm not entirely sure why that link is there. Am I correct in thinking that these two urls are different in the eyes of the search engines? If so, would some of the link juice to www.companyname.com/category.index.php be transferred to www.companyname.com/category.index.php# and affect the ranking of the non # page? I hope this makes sense! Thanks
Technical SEO | | sicseo0 -
Why is this site ranking better than me
Hi just used the compare tool to try and find out why a site is ranking better than me http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/comparisons?site=www.lifestylemonthly.co.uk%2F my site is www.in2town.co.uk and the site i am comparing with is http://www.lifestylemonthly.co.uk/ Can anyone explain what is going on and how i can achieve better ranking results
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-1848860 -
Received Google Webmaster Tools notice of detected unnatural links , but no negative impact on ranking and traffic, What should i do next?
Hello, On May 19 , 2012 Google webmaster sent notification "Google Webmaster Tools notice of detected unnatural links to " both sites haven't lost any ranking or traffic as yet. I am worried, Should i panic,what should i be doing , will it be going down anytime soon? how to naturally build links?
Technical SEO | | conversiontactics0 -
Incredible rank variations!
Hello, I recently received a project that has incredible SERP variation - one month in the top - next month not even in 100. I tried fixing some problems, I also found out the website owners were changing their content - taking their offers down, and so on, and I thought that was the main reason the SERP variate so often. Now I discovered a page that wasn't changed - meaning it's place in the menu and dropped down from the 4'th page to ..i have no idea where it is. The page is: www.filadelfiaturism.ro/oferte-Cazare-Romania/116/oferte-1.html - I looked for the exact title and it didn't ranked at all. Could someone give me some advice?
Technical SEO | | A.Popoviciu0 -
How do 301 redirects affect rankings?
Scenario: example.com/red-shoes gets 301 redirected to example.com/brown-boots because we have stopped selling red shoes and now only sell brown boots (which is a fairly new page with no authority). the red-shoes page ranked well for "red shoes" and "footwear". Will Google still index and show the red-shoes url in the SERPs? Will the "red shoes" and "footwear" keywords still rank well? Or does the redirected/new boots page need to properly support these keywords? The boots page has inherited the juice from the shoes page, but how does it help the boots page rank well? Only for keywords that both pages targeted, like a general "footwear" type keyword? Thanks in advance!
Technical SEO | | akim260 -
Keyword rich domains
Hi, Our site is beingthere.com.au We are in the business of video conferencing in Australia. I was wondering if there would be any benefit of purchasing keyword rich domains such as www.videoconferencing.net.au www.video streaming.net.au What would be the benefit(s)? And How would I go about using these domains to maximise SEO benefit? Thanks Dan
Technical SEO | | dantmurphy0