Unnatural Link Warning Removed - WMT's
-
Hi, just a quick one.
We had an unnatural link warning for one of our test sites, the message appeared on the WMT's dashboard.
The message is no longer there, has it simply expired or could this mean that Google no longer sees an unatural backlink profile? Hoping it's the latter but doubtful as we haven't tried to remove any links.. as I say it's just a test site.
Thanks in advance!
-
Sounds good Tom.
-
I would as it is a test site (if it matters you don't do this) Ask Google Apps for some good way to talk to Google (can't hurt) http://google/a
All The best man,
Tom
PS John I meet with you guys very soon
-
Still waiting John.. as expected!
-
Hi Lee, any update on the status of this? Did you ever hear back from Google?
-
Hi Lee,
You got a stay optimistic man sometimes it's essential. Look at your good luck now no penalties and we don't know why but I bet many people would've said that would never happen.
all the best man,
Tom
-
A response from Google Thomas, like your optimism!!
-
Hi Lee,
I would bet if the links are the same it you could have a single link coming from a site that had been connected to a link farm then that link farm was taken down thus eliminating your problem. I can only really guess because unfortunately so many third-party people have some control over whether or not our sites get that links pointed towards them. I wish I could tell you for sure I wonder if because it's only a test site it would be worth actually asking Google? I'd love to hear what they have to say if you do.
All the best,
Thomas
-
Many thanks Thomas, interesting to hear that it may mean that the penalty has been lifted!
No 301's were done, am not sure if any third party site cleaned up their act and by the looks of it no backlinks have been removed, unless of course they simply weren't picked up by Majestic and OSE and we weren't aware of them.
Am still swaying towards the idea of the message simply expiring, but your theory has a lot of legs.. still confused!!!
Lee
Webresence.
-
I would ask myself a few questions as this is test site
1st did I possibly undo a 301 redirect?
2nd did whoever was linking to you that was spamming possibly clean up their act and report that Google?
3rd I would imagine and less the message was deleted or was for another test site that you receive mail for on that webmaster account that Google would not just it in less either somebody else resubmitted the site or somebody else cleaned up your links.
If I had to bet I would say you had some one linking to you that took down their link on their own fixing your problem.
I wish you the best and I hope this is not a real problem.
Sincerely,
Thomas von Zickell
Blueprint Marketing
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
-
Google how deal with licensed content when this placed on vendor & client's website too. Will Google penalize the client's site for this ?
One of my client bought licensed content from top vendor of Health Industry. This same content is on the vendor's website & my client's site also but on my site there is a link back to vendor is placed which clearly tells to anyone that this is a licensed content & we bought from this vendor. My client bought paid top quality content for best source of industry but at this same this is placed on vendor's website also. Will Google penalize my client's website for this ? Niche is HEALTH
Technical SEO | | sourabhrana1 -
Webmaster Tools vs Screaming from for 404's
Hey guys, I was just wondering which is better to use to find the 404's effecting your site. I have been using webmaster tools and just purchased screaming frog which has given me a totally different list of 404's compared to WMT. Which do I use, or do I use both? Cheers
Technical SEO | | Adamshowbiz0 -
Unfindable 404's
So I have noticed that my site has some really strange 404's that are only being linked to from internal links from the site.
Technical SEO | | Adamshowbiz
When I go to the pages that Web master tools suggests I can't actaully find the link which is pointing to the 404. In that instance what do you do? Any help would be much appreciated 🙂0 -
Has Google stopped rendering author snippets on SERP pages if the author's G+ page is not actively updated?
Working with a site that has multiple authors and author microformat enabled. The image is rendering for some authors on SERP page and not for others. Difference seems to be having an updated G+ page and not having a constantly updating G+ page. any thoughts?
Technical SEO | | irvingw0 -
Just read Travis Loncar's YouMoz post and I have a question about Pagination
This was a brilliant post. I have a question about Pagination on sites that are opting to use Google Custom Search. Here is an example of a search results page from one of the sites I work on: http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category/search-return?q=countryman I notice in the source code of sequential pages that the rel="next" and rel="prev" tags are not used. I also noticed that the URL does not change when clicking on the numbers for the subsequent pages of the search results. Also, the canonical tag of every subsequent page looks like this: Are you thinking what I'm thinking? All of our Google Custom Search pages have the same canonical tag....Something's telling me this just can't be good. Questions: 1. Is this creating a duplicate content issue? 2. If we need to include rel="prev" and rel="next" on Google Custom Search pages as well as make the canonical tag accurate, what is the best way to implement this? Given that searchers type in such a huge range of search terms, it seems that the canonical tags would have to be somehow dynamically generated. Or, (best case scenario!) am I completely over-thinking this and it just doesn't matter on dynamically driven search results pages? Thanks in advance for any comments, help, etc.
Technical SEO | | danatanseo1 -
Can JavaScrip affect Google's index/ranking?
We have changed our website template about a month ago and since then we experienced a huge drop in rankings, especially with our home page. We kept the same url structure on entire website, pretty much the same content and the same on-page seo. We kind of knew we will have a rank drop but not that huge. We used to rank with the homepage on the top of the second page, and now we lost about 20-25 positions. What we changed is that we made a new homepage structure, more user-friendly and with much more organized information, we also have a slider presenting our main services. 80% of our content on the homepage is included inside the slideshow and 3 tabs, but all these elements are JavaScript. The content is unique and is seo optimized but when I am disabling the JavaScript, it becomes completely unavailable. Could this be the reason for the huge rank drop? I used the Webmaster Tolls' Fetch as Googlebot tool and it looks like Google reads perfectly what's inside the JavaScrip slideshow so I did not worried until now when I found this on SEOMoz: "Try to avoid ... using javascript ... since the search engines will ... not indexed them ... " One more weird thing is that although we have no duplicate content and the entire website has been cached, for a few pages (including the homepage), the picture snipet is from the old website. All main urls are the same, we removed some old ones that we don't need anymore, so we kept all the inbound links. The 301 redirects are properly set. But still, we have a huge rank drop. Also, (not sure if this important or not), the robots.txt file is disallowing some folders like: images, modules, templates... (Joomla components). We still have some html errors and warnings but way less than we had with the old website. Any advice would be much appreciated, thank you!
Technical SEO | | echo10 -
Issue with 'Crawl Errors' in Webmaster Tools
Have an issue with a large number of 'Not Found' webpages being listed in Webmaster Tools. In the 'Detected' column, the dates are recent (May 1st - 15th). However, looking clicking into the 'Linked From' column, all of the link sources are old, many from 2009-10. Furthermore, I have checked a large number of the source pages to double check that the links don't still exist, and they don't as I expected. Firstly, I am concerned that Google thinks there is a vast number of broken links on this site when in fact there is not. Secondly, why if the errors do not actually exist (and never actually have) do they remain listed in Webmaster Tools, which claims they were found again this month?! Thirdly, what's the best and quickest way of getting rid of these errors? Google advises that using the 'URL Removal Tool' will only remove the pages from the Google index, NOT from the crawl errors. The info is that if they keep getting 404 returns, it will automatically get removed. Well I don't know how many times they need to get that 404 in order to get rid of a URL and link that haven't existed for 18-24 months?!! Thanks.
Technical SEO | | RiceMedia0
