700,000+ Google Webmaster Messages Sent - unnatural linking Profile. What to do?
-
Google has confirmed they have sent out of over 700,000 messages through its google webmaster interface in February. Thats more than what they sent in all of 2011.
Where does this leave us?
What have we done wrong?
What works going forward?
Im sure many business's will be left in a very bad position over this update, people will lose their jobs.
I always considered myself to be very careful with my link building as I am totally reliant on search for my business.
I think something so big requires a better explanation from google. Has SEOmoz any more info on such a big update? This really needs input from the big SEO heads.
-
Oh I see, did you get your site reconsidered ? So far you've probably made an effort of sending tens of thousands of emails probably.
-
It differs. We have had multiple emails going backward and forward. In some cases within a day or two. The last one took well over a week and a half.
Hope this helps
-
Sorry, was away for the weekend.
"There are still many inorganic links pointing to your site. Here are some examples:
http://bayside-wire-designs.com/Links.php (anchor text: Unique Collection of Celtic Wedding Rings) http://bestrings.blogspot.com/2011/08/celtic-peridot-rings.html (anchor text: Celtic Peridot Ring - Celtic Rings)"
direct from the horse's mouth.
First one is what I would consider a reciprocal link. And google seems to agree. We have requested removal/.
2nd one. Scraped content, and cant really see how they can "blame" us for that one. We will still ask for removal, but do not count of having much luck with it.
Another thing I noticed while going through the link profile.
The amount of scraped content is insane. We are talking thousands of sites/links.I really really hope we are not told to contact those sites as well as it would prove imposible in most cases.
-
How long did it take for Google to reply?
-
Oh we did indeed..
Exported the link profile, put all contact details for the spammy sites. Contacted them once, then waited a week. Checked again, then contacted where the links had not been removed. Waited another week. Then checked again.
After which we updated spreedsheet, uploaded to google docs and contacted google again.
You have to be seen to be making an effort.
-
Over SEO means the following:
-
Building a huge amount of links with a similar anchor text.
-
Over optimizing titles so they are like "Money Loans | Buy loans | Loans Texas" ect, titles need to be more natural
-
Using non ethical link strategies
-
Using a high percentage of the same keyword on page, key word spamming.
Overall you just need to be wise with your SEO efforts and be more natural with the SEO process.
-
-
I have heard similar stories, I would note the links you can not remove in the re consideration request, I would provide as much information as possible in the reconsideration request to be honest. I would name every link that you can not have remove and say you have tried your best to have it taken down.
-
Where does this leave us?
- If you have received the warning you need to go over your link profile in Google Webmaster tools, you need to remove any paid links, you need to request to remove any very low quality links or blog network links.
What have we done wrong?
- You have use paid links, over use of anchor text on links, blog networks for links, low quality links in huge numbers.
What works going forward?
- Remove all bad links then put forward a re consideration request with Google, it can take up to 4 weeks for a reply to be had.
-
I find it interesting that 700K+ messages were sent out. That is a lot of sites registered with GWT who may (or certainly may not) be engaging in questionable link strategies
-
We had the same issue for one of our sites. We manually went through 5000+ links categorising them as
Spammy (mostly articles, link farms etc)
Low quality (reprocial links etc we built from 2004-2007 etc)
Scrapped content (content taken from our site and used on other site not related to us)
Okay/Organic (what it says on the tin)We contacted every single on the Spammy list and ask for our links/articles to be removed. Waited a few weeks then checked again and update our list.
We then contacted google again with the list hoping for the penalty to be lifted.
Their reply was.. "There are still many inorganic links pointing to your site. Here are some examples:"
followed by a list of some of the reprocial links.So back to going through the 1000+ Low quality links and see if we can get them removed.
Bit of a nightmare when those were links we did 5-7 years ago.Only good thing is we still have some keywords performing well, and that our competitors are in the same boat.
-
Yes, the Majority of them is coming from Link Networks, this is what i have noticed in search for answers.
What do you recommend on then? Like Matt Cutts also announced that they were going to level the playing field and penalize websites that are over SEO'd. Whats does over SEO mean.
I ask these questions because I am now completely reviewing my SEO strategy. I want to build a long term business. But, If im going out trying to get links all day everyday, am I SEOing too much then, where do you draw the line?
-
I think it's high time for every one to realize this. Unfortunately, there's no shortcut to success. The quick/manipulative link building works. Yes, you can buy links and essentially trickle through the SERPS and get into top positions. But then you are risking your website/domain/trust for long term. Think about times to come and weigh in the reward vs risk. From what I have seen, heard, a majority of this is coming from people using BuildMyRank.com Link Network. There might be others, because Google said these 700,000 messages include the manual and automatic warnings/penalties.
-
To be honest, I dont think you should. You should be proactive and review all your link building you have done to date.
I have done this on my other websites and deleted links that might cause suspicion.
This is a rolling update they are doing, they have contact 700,000 website in Jan and Feb, SO FAR. I think not being proactive and trying to clean up your linking profile before it gets crawled could save you a lot of rankings
-
Dear site owner or webmaster of xxxxxxxxx,
We've detected that some of your site's pages may be using techniques that are outside Google's Webmaster Guidelines.
Specifically, look for possibly artificial or unnatural links pointing to your site that could be intended to manipulate PageRank. Examples of unnatural linking could include buying links to pass PageRank or participating in link schemes.
We encourage you to make changes to your site so that it meets our quality guidelines. Once you've made these changes, please submit your site for reconsideration in Google's search results.
If you find unnatural links to your site that you are unable to control or remove, please provide the details in your reconsideration request.
If you have any questions about how to resolve this issue, please see our Webmaster Help Forum for support.
Sincerely,
Google Search Quality Team
I know getting the above was from participating in a service called buildmyrank. A high PR blog network. This was the only sort of thing I did that was somewhat grey hat (or so I thought) the content was always 100% and good. I have hundreds of other links that I worked really hard to get and now its practically all lost.
-
I guess those who didn't receive one can relax a little!
-
Did you receive one of those GW messages?
If yes, what did it say?
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
-
When we use 'link:' for who get the link, how come google show us the same domain as a link.
the search result show the domain of its own. what is is? and is it meaningful as a link?
Link Building | | onedaykorea0 -
What is the importance of root domains linking to your website in Google's rankings? I notice our competition has a much higher number on keywords I'm analyzing. Thank you!
I've noticed our competition has a much higher number of "root domains" linking to their page than we do. Is this simply a result of more websites linking to them? How long does it normally take to build up these numbers/rankings? (I'm assuming it's a concerted effort, which I'll be researching.) Thank you!
Link Building | | mjfinet0 -
Around 10% of our backlink profile is made up of branded links from one Japanese site, do we disavow?
We have recently changed domain names and all the links are going to the old domain. We are wondering whether we should disavow them all as they are the majority of our backlink profile at the moment.
Link Building | | cttgroup0 -
Which Links to Disavow!
We just took over SEO for a new client who is being penalized for a bad link profile. They've asked Google to reconsider multiple times, and Google still claims that the links are bad. Because of this, and because I don't have direct access (logins, etc.) to what the former SEO did, I am considering using the disavow links tool. The most obvious links to disavow are a group of almost 1000 links that come from the same forum. However, when viewing the links on this forum they actually seem natural. People are reviewing the product (ipod cases), both negatively and positively. While this could have been an SEO tactic for link building, I don't want to disavow these links if they're not the problem, even though this domain is the source of almost all the low-quality links. Another site that has more than 200 links is Askives. Do any of you have experience with links from Askives, or removing these links? Thanks again!
Link Building | | newwhy0 -
Link Detox and Link Removal
I have a question about which links to remove after running a link detox from Link Research Tools. First a little back story. I had had an SEO company link building for one of the websites I own. But I have recently stopped working with them. In the last month my rankings have near dropped off the charts. I have just recently gotten access to Google webmaster tools and noticed an unnatural link warning from back in March. So yesterday I ran link detox and it reported 19 toxic links, 120 suspicious links, and 24 healthy links. It's rather obvious that I should remove all of the toxic links. They all from sites that have been deindexed by google. But my question is a about the suspicious links. What should my criteria be for removing them? Am I better off removing them all and leaving my site with only 24 healthy links or should I personally comb through them and remove only the worst of the worst so that I leave my site with a few more links? I'd really like to get the site ready to resubmit to google as soon as I can. Thoughts? yyCOf.png
Link Building | | CobraJones950 -
Does a hashtag link pass the same amount of link juice as a link without a hashtag?
Example 1: link to: http://www.domain.com/#something-inside-the-page Example 2: link to: http://www.domain.com/
Link Building | | adriandg0 -
Link building / baiting in the Google zoo
I work for a consultancy, and in the past most of our links have been acquired by giving away privacy statements etc for websites, including a link back in the body of the document, and making it a licensing requirement that the link be kept. We're launchinga new site. We want this one to be whiter-than-white, and would appreciate some advice on the following options. Option 1: no links Remove the links from the documents, and don't require links for the use of the documents. Leave a non-linking credit in the documents. Perhaps ask nicely for links from other pages. Option 2: links on other pages Remove the links from the documents, but make it a licensing requirement that users will link to our site from another page on their site. I appreciate that most won't, but some will. Option 3: retain the links Keep the links in the document, using domain name (with and without http and www) and business name anchor text. Option 4: script the links Use scripts to generate randomized links in the documents, so that no two are the same, but with relevant linking text for the most part. We're risk-adverse with the new site, and it will pick up some links "naturally". We're therefore tending toward option 1, on the basis that it may well generate as many links as option 2. Which of these options would you choose? Are there any other options we should be considering?
Link Building | | seqal0 -
Free link on a Paid Link Blog
Hi there, I have been doing some outreaching, and managed to have a blog post accepted on a authority blog. They included links to my website, and I was very pleased with the placement. However, having browsed through the site, I was worried to see that they openly admit they allow 'reviews' of websites, with backlinks included, for $50 per review. I am worried I might be penalised without actually doing anything wrong. I did not pay for my link, but the link has been placed on a site which openly admits they accept payment for links. Should I be worried? Should I ask them to take it down? To date I have been told countless times by bloggers I am outreaching that if I pay $10, $50, $100 etc I can write a blog post. I have never accepted because of the risk of penalization. Now, unwittingly, I am linked to from a paid link site with a blog post that would look like I have paid for it because of the placement and style of back link. What do you think? Thanks,
Link Building | | giveacar0