DIsavow links even without a penalty?
-
This is a sort of follow-on question from a previous one I asked, where I was being advised to do this.
I've inherited a poor client link profile from a previous provider, with tons of partial match links for "IT support" on a lot of low quality directories. It has been at least a year now since they were built, and I'm concerned that the abundance of them will make it harder to rank for any "IT support" keywords due to over-optimization. This is frustrating since "IT support London" is the main keyword for the home page.
On the previous thread, I was advised to disavow these old links and move on, though I have heard from many in the SEO community (and read) that using the disavow tool unless absolutely necessary (i.e. In the case of a penalty) is a mistake, since it is effectively notifying Google that you have been "misbehaving" and you should stay away from sending these types of signals altogether.
Can anyone with experience in this matter please advise on this?
Thank you in advance.
-
I would try and be as on the ball as possible with disavowing links that need it, even if there has been no penalty. One of the first things I look to do when onboarding a new client is review the current disavow file (if there is one) or looking at their backlink portfolio to find potential spam. The spam tool on Moz is quite good at finding these links but make sure you cast your eye over them first as it's likely some good links will have got caught up in there.
Just be careful - it's hard to come back from making a mistake with the disavow process!
-
There have been some great responses so far--overall, you should be proactive with your clients (and even your own sites) when it comes to links. If you do see spam links or the types of links that Patrick has suggested, be proactive and disavow them.
If you do feel there are links that need to get removed, though, then i would go ahead and try to get those removed.
-
OK... take your chances. Thousands of people are still being flogged by Penguin after two years.
-
I agree with EGOL, why wait to be penalised? Just disavow them and move on. Any drop in rankings should be able to be recovered by securing a few solid authoritative links
-
Hi there
For me, it comes down to the links in question. No, you will not get penalized for disavowing links - the tool is there to help you and there to help you stay in the clear.
That being said, you need to assess links with the following things in mind:
-
Does this link help my website?
-
Is this link relevant to my website?
-
Would I trust this site (that's linking to me) if I landed on it?
-
Is the website or content in which I am being linked from topically relevant to my website?
-
If you check metrics - does anything about the metrics (domain authority, page authority,Majestic, SEMRush traffic/ranking data, etc) make me feel uneasy?
-
Are the links from directory templates? (example)
-
Inspect URLs with blatant spam words
-
Free
-
Porn
-
XXX
-
Submit
-
Directory
-
Paid
-
Links
-
URL
-
Sex
-
etc.
-
Check for multiple domains and URLs on the same IPs
-
This can usually show link farms or spam
-
Am I getting traffic / conversions from this link?
From there, that should give you a better idea of what links need to stay, need to be removed, or what need to be disavowed. Use it wisely, but don't be afraid to use it if you find multiple links that could negatively impact your SEO, especially if you have asked to have those links removed before. It's really up to you and your expertise!
Let me know if this helps! Good luck!
Patrick -
-
Thank you, but that isn't true - I had another client who was hit by Penguin and we recovered after a disavowal.
Also, it has been over a year sinc those link were built, so I think if we were going to get a penalty, it would have happened by now.
Many of these links, even though spammy, may be propping the site up. We have page 1 rankings for a couple of keywords and disavowing a lot of them I am concerned will send our rankings down.
-
If you wait until you get a penalty for bad links you have a huge problem.
Current people suffering from Penguin have been under a penalty for TWO YEARS.
-
Thanks, Gaston. I haven't heard or read that you get a penalty for disavowing (and wouldn't believe it) - just that it potentially affects your spam score or sends an overall negative signal to Google about whether your domain is to be trusted or not... There are a lot of experienced SEOs who believe this.
-
Hi there,
On one hand, disavowing links doesnt necessarly mean that you've been misbehaving. It is possible that you've been target of black hat SEO or someone that wants to hurt you has created many links.
In my opinion, you must disavow links when spotted and and analized to be potentially harmfull.On the other hand, I've never heard or read anyone that was penalized for disavowing links. That should be a huge piece of news, that Google penalized you for doing something they want you to do.
Hope i've helped.
GR.
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
-
HTTPs to HTTP Links
Hi Mozers, I have a question about the news that Google Chrome will start blocking mixed content starting in December 2019. That starting in December 2019, users that are presented insecure content will be presented a toggle allowing those Chrome users to unblock the insure resources that Chrome is blocking. And in January 2020, Google will remove that toggle option an will just start blocking mixed content or insecure web pages. Not sure what this means. What are the implications of this for a HTTPS page that has an HTTP link? Thanks, Yael
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | yaelslater0 -
Link Juice
Do you guys think having a guest post close to the root domain has more link juice that being in subfolders? example.com/123 vs example.com/nov/123 Both pages have the same amount of internal links and both pages don't have external links
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | arango201 -
Internal Linking
Hi I've been looking over my pages and it says for this page for example http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/1-6kw-halogen-heater I have too many links, I think it was about 178. These links are from the menu and bottom of the page - how much of an issue is this for internal linking structure? I wouldn't want to remove the menus or change them too much. Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
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 -
Toxic Links; Their Existence and Their Impact..
We are constantly being asked about the existence of “toxic Links” and that they are damaging the sites of our clients. Apparently, this definition is being pushed down the throats of clients by other “Seo experts” trying to hijack our business. At this point in time, clients can easily be swayed as a reflex reaction to a drop in rankings. These so called “Seo experts” are clearly scaremongering for their own gain but I would be grateful for your opinion about whether automated, spun content from Seolinkvine and the like, where the English may not be perfect (I assume this is what is meant by “toxic Links”) can actually damage a client’s site. Is it not more constructive to concentrate resources on dilution of keywords from the anchor text rather than waste time on links that may no longer be as powerful, or do they actually have a negative effect?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Dexter-2455780 -
Bing Penalty
I am working with a client who apparently has been penalized by Bing. The site has been around for many years and they are an industry leader in their field. The site was previously indexed and received a substantial amount of traffic from Bing. Last week the site disappeared from Bing's index. A site: and url: search both show no results. Does anyone have a significant amount of knowledge or experience related to Bing penalties? Here is what I have done so far: http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/webmaster/archive/2009/03/19/getting-out-of-the-penalty-box.aspx This 2009 article states Bing's Summary Tool offers a "Site Status" section with a "Blocked" indicator which informs webmasters if a site is penalized. I have seen it before a long time ago, but apparently the field no longer exists. Is there a definitive means of determining if Bing has manually penalized a site besides a response from their Content Inclusion Request? Danny Sullivan wrote a great article about how Bing removed some sites for thin content last month. It seems two of the sites which were a focus of the article have been re-included in Bing's index. Bing claims an algorithm change where Danny seems skeptical. Either way this could be the same issue. http://searchengineland.com/bing-bans-holiday-deals-sites-102856 there are two recent complaints on Bing's forums about a similar issue where various webmasters shared their sites have been removed. There are no responses to these posts from Bing: http://www.bing.com/community/webmaster/f/12252/p/670360/9665163.aspx#9665163 and http://www.bing.com/community/webmaster/f/12252/t/670550.aspx?PageIndex=1 (the comments are relevant but not the initial post). Any ideas or suggestions would be helpful.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RyanKent0 -
Link Building Tactics for 2012?
Hi all! Happy New Year! Just wanted to pop in here and start a discussion to see what are some of the most effective link building techniques you'll be using for 2012? -Andy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | alhallinan1