How do you block incoming links to your site?
-
With the new update to google focusing on link spam and multiple anchor text ? If you have incoming links that you would like to block or make no follow?
-
I guess the only real way is to use site explorer and then contact the site directly... We have been spammed bad by competitors and google is penalizing us.. I have contacted the sites and am waiting for response...
-
Yes, as Ryan said, this is the nature of the internet. Just like you can write about anything, anybody, you can create a link to anybody and just to clarify, the block that Ryan is talking about is essentially that if someone linked to you, you could "technically" setup a block so anybody visiting your website from that link, would not be able to access your website..but it would still get counted as a link from that website to yours.
-
It can't be done with respect to Google's visibility. Anyone can link to you at any time and there is nothing you can do about it.
The main positive action you can take is to earn as many good links as possible so if you get some bad links pointed to your site they will only represent a small percentage of your total links.
I know people hate this answer but we have to trust Google has systems in place to deal with black hat SEO tactics of link spamming a competitor's site.
If you wanted to go to extreme measures, you can block a link from reaching your site in your web server settings. On Apache servers (the most common servers) you can do it in the htaccess file. Once again, this is not recommended but those who are extremely determined to block the links from working can do it this way.
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
-
Our site dropped by April 2018 Google update about content relevance: How to recover?
Hi all, After Google's confirmed core update in April 2018, we dropped globally and couldn't able to recover later. We found the update is about the content relevance as officially stated by Google later. We wonder how we are not related in-terms of content being ranking for same keywords over years. And we are expecting to find a solution to this. Are there any standard ways to measure the content relevancy? Please suggest! Thank you
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Canonical when using others sites
Hi all, I was wondering if this is a good way to safely have content on our website. We have a job search website, and we pull content from other sites. We literally copy the full content text from it's original source, and paste it on our own site on an individual job page. On every individual job page we put a canonical link to the original source (which is not my own website). On each job page, when someone wants to apply, they are redirected to the original job source. As far as I know this should be safe. But since it's not our website we are canonical linking to, will this be a problem? To compare it was indeed.com does, they take 1 or 2 senteces from the original source and put it as an excerpt on their job category page (ie "accountant in new york" category page). When you click the excerpt/title you are redirected to the original source. As you might know, indeed.com has very good rankings, with almost no original content whatsoever. The only thing that is unique is the URL of the indeed.com category where it's on (indeed.com/accountant-new-york), and sometimes the job title. Excerpt is always duplicate from other sites. Why does this work so well? Will this be a better strategy for us to rank well?
Algorithm Updates | | mrdjdevil0 -
Site titles / descriptions change - Google Algo Change ?
Hello, During the weekend 4 of our sites automatically changed their search titles and descriptions at the same time.
Algorithm Updates | | lordish
They are not picking up the real pages: Title, Description. Our ranks are dropping because of this. can you please tell if it happened to you as well or if you recognize a problem here? sites:
http://www.robinhoodbingo.com
http://www.gossipbingo.com
http://www.moonbingo.com in the attached examples:
for the kws searched - the results show different titles and descriptions. results for these pages:
moon bingo - http://www.moonbingo.com
mobile bingo - http://www.robinhoodbingo.com/skin/mobile.php rhMzURw.png 2tRL5dZ.png0 -
How does this site rank no 1 for big terms with no optimisation?
Hi, A client recently asked me abut a site that appears to have popped up out of nowhere and is ranking for big terms within their industry: http://bit.ly/11jcpky I have looked at the site for a particular term: Cheap Beds I was using unpersonalised search on google.co.uk with location set to London. The site currently ranks no 1 for that term and other similar terms. The question is how? SEO Moz reports no backlinks (they must have blocked?) Ahrefs and Majestic report report some backlinks but not many and no anchor text with the term in. The Page title and meta do not contain the term nor does the page seem to contain the term anywhere. The domain does have some age though has no keyword match in the URL. I'm a little stumped to how they are achieving these results. Any Ideas Anyone?
Algorithm Updates | | JeusuDigital0 -
Content Caching Memory & Removal of 301 Redirect for Relieving Links Penalty
Hi, A client site has had very poor link legacy, stretching for over 5 years. I started the campaign a year ago, providing valuable good quality links. Link removals and creating a disavow to Google have been done, however after months and months of waiting nothing has happened. If anything, after the recent penguin update, results have been further affected. A 301 redirect was undertaken last year, consequently associating those bad links with the new site structure. I have since removed the 301 redirect in an attempt to detach this legacy, however with little success. I have read up on this and not many people appear to agree whether this will work. Therefore, my new decision is to start a fresh using a new domain, switching from the .com to .co.uk version, helping remove all legacy and all association with the spam ridden .com. However, my main concern with this is whether Google will forever cach content from the spammy .com and remember it, because the content on the new .co.uk site will be exactly the same (content of great quality, receiving hundreds of visitors each month from the blog section along) The problem is definitely link related and NOT content as I imagine people may first query. This could then cause duplicate content, knowing that this content pre-existed on another domain - I will implement a robots.txt file removing all of the .com site , as well as a no index no follow - and I understand you can present a site removal to Google within webmaster tools to help fast track the deindexation of the spammy .com - then once it has been deindexed, the new .co.uk site will go live with the exact same content. So my question is whether Google will then completely forget that this content has ever existed, allowing me to use exactly the same content on the new .co.uk domain without the threat of a duplicate content issue? Also, any insights or experience in the removal of a 301 redirect, detaching legacy and its success would also be very helpful! Thank you, Denver
Algorithm Updates | | ProdoDigital0 -
How effective are nofollow links today (2013) ?
Hi, We had a question about the effectiveness of nofollow today. Nofollowing some links on pages was to make sure pagerank flows to content which is most relevant and useful to visitors on the site. Looking at the 2009 article, http://www.seomoz.org/blog/google-says-yes-you-can-still-sculpt-pagerank-no-you-cant-do-it-with-nofollow, it seems that adding the meta tag nofollow would no longer help us in ensuring this goal. We had a couple of questions: 1. Do you think Google today only passes pagerank to dofollow links
Algorithm Updates | | SEMEnthusiast
2. Are sites today using iframes/javascript to make sure googlebot passes pagerank to only relevant pages
3. Any other best practice you would suggest Thanks0 -
How to get Yahoo visitors to my site
I get great traffic from Google but Yahoo is at about a 20 to 1 ratio on visitors. Is there anything I should do to increase Yahoo traffic? I bought a Yahoo Directory listing about 3 months ago but it did no good. Thanks, Boo
Algorithm Updates | | Boodreaux0 -
High bounce rates from content articles influencing our rankings for rest of site
We have a large content article section on our e-commerce site that receives a lot of visits but also have very high bounce rates. We are wondering if this is hurting the rest of our site's rankings. **When I say bounce rates I mean what ever metrics Google is using to determine quality content (specifically after the Panda update). ** We are trying to determine if having the content articles on our domain hurts us. We only have the content articles for link building.
Algorithm Updates | | seozachz0