Should I Disavow More Links
-
My SEO website got hit with a very severe penalty about a year ago and it was totally banished from the rankings for all of the money terms like SEO, SEO company and search engine optimisation (before the penalty I ranked in the top 10-15 for all of those phrases, top 3 for SEO company). I was probably hit for being listed in shed loads of paid directories, low quality free directories, footer links in client sites, keyword forum signature links and articles with keyword rich text links.
A month or so after I got hit I started trying to clean up my link profile, I got rid of all of the client website links, I changed the link text on the majority of forum signature links and article links, I managed to get rid of about 50 directory links and the ones that I could not get taken down I disavowed - about 150.
During that time I sent 2-3 separate reconsideration requests and I got this message each time:
"Links to your site violate Google's quality guidelines"
After doing all of that work and being rejected I pretty much gave up - things just seemed to get worst, not only was I no longer ranking for the money terms, but all of my blog posts tanked as well.
I got my site redesigned and switched to Wordpress - I used 301 redirects and everything but they totally didn't work. My organic traffic went down to less than 50 hits a day - before the penalty I was getting over 300 a day.
Then on Saturday just gone, almost exactly a year after I got hit with the penalty I noticed my site ranking in position 23 on Google.co.uk in the UK for the competitive phrase SEO company from being absolutely nowhere and I do mean nowhere.
This sign has given me hope and the motivation to get rid of the penalty altogether, update all of my articles, get rid of bad advice in old blog posts and get rid of the rest of the bad links.
Thing is that I am nervous to go getting rid of more links and disavowing, what if I do more harm then good? Do you think the penalty has been removed and I should just leave the rest of the bad links or should I continue trying to clean things up?
By the way, my website is http://www.seoco.co.uk
-
Hi David,
It sounds like you have had a partial recovery and looking at your other replies below, that the manual action you have applies to the links themselves which means Google have reduced their value and your rankings accordingly. So whilst they may not be actively hurting you, it is always good to have a clean slate and remove manual penalties if you can so that you know there is nothing holding you back from ranking.
In terms of your actual question, if you have links that are clearly outside of Google guidelines, you may as well get rid of them if you can. They're probably not helping and if you are able to get rid of them, then it may help prevent any future problems if Google tweak how they treat those links.
It sounds like you have recovered a little though with your ranking returning, so removing other links may not be a high priority for you, but like I said, it's good to get a clean slate and be sure that you can move forward building good links with nothing else holding you back.
I hope that helps a bit!
Paddy
-
That's a tough one. At one time, John Mueller (Google employee) said that WMT links were all that you needed in order to get rid of a link related problem. But, when Google started giving example links for failed reconsideration requests they commonly would give links that are not in WMT. Sometimes they can be found in ahrefs or majestic but sometimes they can't be found in any of the backlink checkers!
I use WMT (both sample and most recent), OSE, Majestic and Ahrefs. You can also get links by registering for Bing WMT and Yandex as well. Plus, you can look at your GA referral data over the last few years which may find you more.
If you kept any records of where you had made links then that can help as well.
-
I have another question, because I have over 1000 domains linking to my site in webmaster tools I cannot see all of the domains linking to my site, how do you recommend I get around this? I have already gone through all of the links in Open Site Explorer.
-
Thanks Marie, I think I am going to take your advice and keep going with cleaning up bad links.
Most of the organic links use my company name "The SEO Company", my domain name "Seoco", my name "David Eaves", or the name of the article/blog post, but there are a few that simply say "SEO company".
-
OK, so now that you know you have a manual action, you know that you've got work to do. Some people would argue that if you have a partial action that you don't need to do anything because Google has already discounted those links. So, in other words, if you take action to remove the warning message it's not like Google is going to start counting them already. But, I would disagree. If you have a manual action, in most cases it's almost a blessing because if you do the work to get the warning lifted then you will have also done the work needed to escape the Penguin algorithm.
If what you are saying about self made links is true then aren't you breaking the guidelines by having a link to your real estate website in your moz profile?
I think in Google's eyes it's mostly about scale and intent to manipulate the search results. The link that I have from my Moz profile could potentially be seen as unnatural on a manual review, but the odd link like that is not likely to do me harm. It's not anchored with a keyword and it's obvious that I have not used links in profiles as an attempt to manipulate Google. I'm not saying that your profile links are necessarily bad as I haven't analyzed your site, but if you've got lots of them, and if a good number of them are keyword anchored, then they could be causing you problems. Also, if there are profile links made on sites where you don't actively participate then Google may pick up on this as a manipulating scheme. (I'm not saying that you have links like this...just throwing it out as an idea.)
My website has hundreds of totally organic links from websites like Techcrunch, Mashable, this site, search engine land and loads more thanks to blog posts and a popular infographic I did
What kind of anchor text are they linking back with? If it's a money term then this can definitely be a factor in your penalty even if the links are on high quality sites.
Manual penalties and Penguin are created to catch sites that are cheating their way to the top. They're not created to demote sites that have the odd unnatural link here and there. I have yet to analyze a Penguin hit site or a manually penalized site that I thought was hit unfairly.
I have far more organic links then almost any other UK SEO company.
If you've got good links beneath the unnatural ones then this means that if you do a good cleanup of the unnatural links then you have a good chance for an excellent recovery. You may need to wait for the next Penguin refresh to fully see the effects though.
-
I have just checked in WMT and in the partial matches section it says:
"Some manual actions may apply to specific pages, sections or links
Reason
Unnatural links to your site - impact links"
If what you are saying about self made links is true then aren't you breaking the guidelines by having a link to your real estate website in your moz profile? The links I have in forums are signature links and have been earned through participation just like your links on your moz profile - I have not spammed or anything to get them.
My website has hundreds of totally organic links from websites like Techcrunch, Mashable, this site, search engine land and loads more thanks to blog posts and a popular infographic I did, I have far more organic links then almost any other UK SEO company.
Thanks for your response.
-
When you get an unnatural links penalty, Google wants to see that you have made attempts to remove almost every single link that was self made. It's not enough to get most of them...you need to address close to 100%
Just changing anchor text in self made links is probably not going to work. If you control the link then it's probably unnatural and needs to go.
Do you have naturally earned links to your site? If not, then you may not be able to rank again unfortunately.
The main question that you are asking though is why you have popped back up to position #23. It's possible that you had a manual penalty that has expired. Take a look in WMT under Search Traffic --> Manual Actions and see if you still have manual action there. Even if the penalty has expired though it's important to do the work to clean things up completely because you can get re-penalized again.
I am suspicious that Google has been testing Penguin refresh data as I have seen a couple of my Penguin hit clients make slight recoveries and then drop back down again. It's possible that when Penguin refreshes you will bump up higher which would be good!
-
Thanks, will bare that in mind
-
While I agree with your advice, I am not sure that getting rid of more links right away is the right thing to do.
@David
Without knowing the entire story of this site, it seems to me that your appearance on page three indicates that the penalties are no longer affecting your site as it has positively improved. I think in this case spending your time trying to get some very authoritative and trusted links would do you the most good. Remember, most sites have spam links pointing to them for one reason or the other but if those links make up only a small portion of the total link profile, they often do not harm the site. If this wasn't the case negative SEO would be the only way people boosted their own sites.
Good luck and keep at it!
-
Hi Bill, with the 150 directory links that I disavowed I sent each of them two separate link removal requests before I disavowed and I marked all of it down in a google doc and sent it to google in the reconsideration requests. The only thing I didn't do was actually send Google a copy of the emails I sent. Are you saying that I need to send Google a copy of the emails I send to each directory owner/website owner?
Thanks for your response by the way.
-
David, whenever you get that message from Google, they're looking for you to make a considerable effort to remove the links, not just disavow the links. So, before you submit another reconsideration request, you'll need to do a few things:
-
identify all of the links. Don't just get the links that OSE gives you, get the webmaster tools links, the ahrefs links, and the majestic SEO links, as well
-
review all of the links and identify the toxic/bad/unhealthy/paid links (the ones that Google is having a problem with).
-
contact site owners to get those links removed. You'll need to document everything, even show the emails you sent as well as when you sent them, etc. etc.
Google is looking for you to spend time getting the links removed, and a disavow will not be enough in order to get a manual penalty revoked.
-
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
-
Inbound Linking
Hello, I manage a company that owns a bunch of schools (20) websites. They would like to create on each website a page which shows their schools in all the locations. Will this be ok as far as white hat practices and inbound linking?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | brightvessel0 -
Do dead/inactive links matter?
In cleaning up the backlink profile for my parent's website, I've come across quite a few dead links. For instance, the links in the comments here: http://www.islanddefjam.com/artist/news_single.aspx?nid=4726&artistID=7290 Do I need to worry about these links? I assume if the links are no longer active, and hence not showing up in webmaster or moz reports, I can probably ignore them, but I'm wondering if I should try and get them removed regardless? I've read that google is increasingly taking into account references (i.e. website mentions that are not links) and I don't know if inactive spam links might leave a bad impression of a website. Am I being overly paranoid? I imagine disavowing them would be pointless as you can't attach a nofollow tag to an inactive link.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | mgane0 -
Why should I reach out to webmasters before disavowing links?
Almost all the blogs, and Google themselves, tell us to reach out to webmasters and request the offending links be removed before using Google's Disavow tool. None of the blogs, nor Google, suggest why you "must" do this, it's time consuming and many webmasters don't care and don't act. Why is this a "required" thing to do?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | RealSelf0 -
Should we remove our "index" pages (alphabetical link list to all of the products on the site)?
We run an e-commerce site with a large number of product families, with each family having a number of products within it. We have a set of pages (26 - one for each letter A-Z) that are lists of links to the product family pages. We originally created these pages thinking it would aid in discoverability of these pages to search engines, of course as time has gone on, techniques like this have fallen out of favor with Google as it provides negligible value to the user. Should we consider removing these pages from the site overall? Is it possible that it could be viewed by Panda as resembling a link farm? Thanks in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | ChrisRoberts-MTI1 -
Unnatural inbound links message from Google Webmaster Tools!
Hi Everyone, I just got this message from GWT(image below) This is probably a penguin Penalty. What is clear is I have to find the best and most efficient way to tackle this issue. We will probably lose tons of traffic in the next couple of weeks so I would like to get the best suggestions and maybe a guideline on how to do this in the most effective way! Thank you! 1a0X2M2a1h0A
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Ideas-Money-Art0 -
Have just submitted Disavow file to Google: Shall I wait until after they have removed bad links to start new content lead SEO campaign?
Hi guys, I am currently conducting some SEO work for a client. Their previous SEO company had built a lot of low quality/spam links to their site and as a result their rankings and traffic have dropped dramatically. I have analysed their current link profile, and have submitted the spammiest domains to Google via the Disavow tool. The question I had was.. Do I wait until Google removes the spam links that I have submitted, and then start the new content based SEO campaign. Or would it be okay to start the content based SEO campaign now, even though the current spam links havent been removed yet.. Look forward to your replies on this...
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | sanj50500 -
Link package review and recommendations
Hello there, I recently spoke to a contractor that offered me the following package, and i have to ask, in this post-penguin world, does it make sense to pursue this kind of linking? Or will it be considered spam. They said it's a manual submission process and they will 'do their best' to ensure that it's under a related category, but can't promise anything in regards to that. What should i be requesting in this post-penguin world? How do i get quality backlinks that won't harm me given the current environment? Any help is greatly appreciated, here is the package info: 1. 900 links submissions = 450 Guaranteed One Way Theme Links - The links are built by manually publishing 5 Original Articles (500 words each) on 125 different article sites (each published article will have 2 back-links to your site). We can use up to 10 keywords and 10 different URLs of your site to build the links.70% of our Article Sites have PR 2 to 6, all with different C classes IPs. 2. 300 links submissions = 150 Guaranteed One Way Theme Links – The links are built by manually publishing 4 Reviews for your site from 4 different accounts (we can use up to 4 URLs of your site to link back) on 150 Social Bookmarking sites, 90% of the sites have PR 2 to 8, all with different C classes IPs. 3. 480 links submissions = 240 Guaranteed One Way Theme Links – The links are built by manually publishing 3 Original Press Releases on 35 Press Release sites(each published press release will have 2 back-links to your site). We can use up to 6 keywords and 6 different URLs of your site to build the links. All our Press Release Sites have PR 2 to 7 all with different C classes IPs. 4. 220 links submissions = 110 Guaranteed One Way blog links – These links are built by publishing 3 Original Blog Article (300 words each) with 2 back links to your site on 20 different free blog sites. These free blog sites are our sites (new sites with PR 0) which we are promoting to get the highest PR for them and your blog back links too.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | symbolphoto0 -
Why Does Massive Reciprocal Linking Still Work?
It seems pretty well-settled that massive reciprocal linking is not a very effective strategy, and in fact, may even lead to a penatly. However, I still see massive reciprocal linking (blog roll linking even massive resource page linking) still working all the time. I'm not looking to cast aspersion on any individual or company, but I work with legal websites and I see these strategies working almost universally. My question is why is this still working? Is it because most of the reciprocally linking sites are all legally relevant? Has Google just not "gotten around" to the legal sector (doubtful considering the money and volume of online legal segment)? I have posed this question at SEOmoz in the past and it was opined that massively linking blogs through blog rolls probably wouldn't send any flags to Google. So why is that it seems that everywhere I look, this strategy is basically dismissed as a complete waste of time if not harmful? How can there be such a discrepency between what leading SEOs agree to be "bad" and the simple fact that these strategies are working en masse over the period of at least 3 years?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Gyi0