Bing beats google to disavow links
-
You can now disavow bad links in Bing WMT, google has stated they will be doing the same, this should shake up the rankings when many sites get penalties lifted
-
Yes, this would be a good way for webmasters to confess that they have purchased links and turn off their value. If that is what Bing wanted this tool to be used for they should say that explicitly.
Instead they say.....
Use the Disavow Links tool to submit page, directory, or domain URLs that may contain links to your site that seem "unnatural" or appear to be from spam or low quality sites.
.... which has a very different meaning to me.
Bing is full of BS.
They can't do their job on links and they can't communicate.
-
I think the idea is paid links, if you have a clint that has been naughty, then this is good idea, i am waiting for googles version the said they were going to bring out soon, as i have a clint with a un-natrual link penalty
-
I am not going to spend a single minute of time on this. Not one minute.
Links happen, right? So how can you protect yourself from malicious link building? How do you tell the engine you just don't want to associate your content with "that" site?
Busy sites will have thousands to millions of links that were created by spammers and garbage site builders such as updowner.
Bing is making this because they can't do their job.
-
I just look at them, its not hard to tell. If in doubt and the site has not much PageRank then you have not much to lose.
-
What tools do you use to determine which links you will be disavowing?
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
-
Paid links from directory listing and business listing sites are good or bad according to Penguin 2.1 update?
Hi Friends, Recently on October 4<sup>th</sup>, 2013, a new spam filtering algorithm got live named Penguin 21. / Penguin 5. The update goes after sites that may have purchased paid links. I would like to know is it safe, if we submit website details with links in paid directories, eg: https://ecom.yahoo.com/dir/submit/intro/ (yahoo directory) and quality business listing sites provided the categories are related to our website. Our competitor sites having the backlinks from those kind of directories and they are performing (ranking) well in major search engines. May I know how Google treat these kinds of links according to this recent algorithm update?
Industry News | | zco_seo0 -
Google still showing sitelinks from old website
Hi guys, we relaunched our website www.segafredo.com.au a few weeks ago, however google is still showing site links from our old page that no longer exist... Is there anything we can do about this? Sit back and wait or try demoting the old urls in webmaster tools? Looking forward to see your tips! Ciao, Manny.
Industry News | | Immanuel0 -
So, Google is the best site on the internet.. Right? Or is that just what most people tend to think off-face?
LOL woah, put the guns away. I'm not about to rant, I just have a question and wanted to present it well. Then again, I might have actually found some easy fixes to some of Google's tools that they could make. So here's the thing. I noticed how annoyed I always getting when I have to sign in every time I go to the adwords keyword tool, or analytics. Why do you have to sign in a million times? I think it is a problem that can be fixed because if you go to check your webmaster tools, you go straight into your account, where you can then select which site you want to explore. It knows that I am already signed in to Google Accounts when I go to webmaster tools, but it doesn't recognize that fact when I go to my Analytics account, or to use the Adwords Keyword Tool. Now, every site has things that they need to work on, but not necessarily that need to be 'fixed'. Google being so commonly accepted as the best site on the net, I thought it was funny/interesting at the least to point out the problem. Even funnier is the fact that I could submit it as a problem to see if they could fix it or not, but they do such a good job of making it hard for people to contact them, that A) I don't feel like wasting my time trying B) I don't even really know if it is possible to do that. Also, why is there no official Google Analytics App / Mobile site?? Google has been pushing how important mobile is to us webmasters, but then it doesn't seem to be very high on their priority list for the tools that we use. I mean you can't view graphs on phones / tablets (mine at least), in webmaster tools, OR google analytics. Also, its a pain in the but to click the sign in button on Google Analytics when using my phone / tablet, it disapears really fast for me (needs more research from others to see if everyone has the same problem) Thanks for the interest / answers everybody. Look forward to hearing from you guys. Also, tips and help would be nice if anybody knows a solution to my sign in issue
Industry News | | TylerAbernethy0 -
Will Google ever begin penalising bad English/grammar in regards to rankings and SEO?
Considering Google seem to be on a great crusade with all their algorithm updates to raise the overall "quality" of content on the Internet, i'm a bit concerned with their seeming lack of action towards penalising sites that contain terrible English. I'm sure you've all noticed this when you attempt to do some proper research via Google and come across an article that "looks" to be what you're after, then you click through and realise it's obviously been either put together in a rush by someone not paying attention or putting much effort in, or been outsourced for cheap labour to another country whose workers aren't (close to being) native speakers. It's getting really old trying to make sense of articles that have completely incorrect grammar, entirely missing words, verb tenses that don't make any sense, randomly over-extravagant adjectives thrown in just as padding, etc. etc. No offense to all those from non-native speaking countries who are attempting to make a few bucks online, but this for me is becoming by far more of an issue in terms of "quality" of information online as opposed to some of the other search issues that are being given higher priority, and it just seems strange that Google have been so blasé about it up to this point - especially given so many of these articles and pages are nothing more than outsourced filler for cheap traffic. I understand it's probably hard to code in something so advanced, but it would go a long way towards making the web a better place in my opinion. Anyone else feeling the same way? Thoughts?
Industry News | | ExperienceOz1 -
What is triggering Google account suspensions?
Over the past 24 hours many of our clients have had their Google accounts suspended. The explanation has been: "After reviewing your profile, we determined that it has been used to impersonate another individual or mislead other users. This violates the Google+ User Content and Conduct Policy." We are NOT impersonating our clients, we have their permission. We are not misleading anyone, simply setting up profiles for our clients on Google+. This has not affected all of our clients, but a significant number of them. We cannot find a common variable between the clients that have been suspended, and those who have not. Some have had other Google+ profiles in the past, in another account, some have not. Some have been previously verified via SMS, others by phone. Some have posts in their profile, others have only the profile info filled out. Again, we are not trying to game Google, we are simply setting up authorship for them, with their permission. I have not seen much in the SEO community about this today, and this is NOT related to fake reviews. We do not partake in that kind of activity. We have written a post on the topic, and no matter how this shakes out, I think our take is solid. Authorship is changing the game, content is changing the game, trust is changing the game… and Google is getting serious about it. We have also seen this happen to our clients, to our competitors' clients, and to other marketing firms' clients, outside of our vertical. Does anyone know more about the topic, especially in regards to the suspensions over the past 24 hours?
Industry News | | Einstein-Industries0 -
Chrome blocked sites used by Googles Panda update
Google's Panda update said it used Chrome users blocked sites lists as a benchmark for what they now term poor quality content. They said the Panda update effectively took about 85% of them out of the search results. This got me thinking, it would be very nice to discover what are the exact sites they don't like. Does anyone know if there is an archive of what these sites might be? Or if none exists, maybe if people could share their Chrome blocked sites on here we might get an idea?
Industry News | | SpecialCase0 -
Google+ profiles and Rel Author. Extensive question
A bit of a mammoth question for discussion here: With the launch of Google+ and profiles, coupled with the ability to link/verify authorship using rel=me to google+ profile - A few questions with respect to the long term use and impact. As an individual - I can have a Google+ Profile, and add links to author pages where I am featured. If rel=me is used back to my G+ profile - google can recognise me as the writer - no problem with that. However - if I write for a variety of different sites, and produce a variety of different content - site owners could arguably become reluctant to link back or accredit me with the rel=me tag on the account I might be writing for a competitor for example, or other content in a totally different vertical that is irrelevant. Additionally - if i write for a company as an employee, and the rel=me tag is linked to my G+ profile - my profile (I would assume) is gaining strength from the fact that my work is cited through the link (even if no link juice is passed - my profile link is going to appear in the search results on a query that matches something I have written, and hence possibly drain some "company traffic" to my profile). If I were to then leave the employment of that company - and begin writing for a direct competitor - is my profile still benefiting from the old company content I have written? Given that google is not allowing pseudonyms or ghost writer profiles - where do we stand with respect to outsourced content? For example: The company has news written for them by a news supplier - (each writer has a name obviously) - but they don't have or don't want to create a G+ profile for me to link to. Is it a case of wait for google to come up with the company profiles? or, use a ghost name and run the gauntlet on G+? Lastly, and I suppose the bottom line - as a website owner/company director/SEO; Is adding rel=me links to all your writers profiles (given that some might only write 1 or 2 articles, and staff will inevitably come and go) an overall positive for SEO? or, a SERP nightmare if a writer moves on to another company? In essence are site owners just improving the writers profile rather than gaining very much?
Industry News | | IPINGlobal541 -
Do "big" SEO companies remove links after termination of service?
Or worded differently: Has anyone heard of "big" SEO companies removing links after termination of service? I have a client who isn't particularly happy with the SEO he's getting from a big Aussie SEO firm, and he wants to terminate, however they've built thousands of links for him and he's a little concerned they might all get pulled. Has anyone heard of this happening, or; Do you think this is a legitimate concern? I think its physically possible to remove backlinks like this because it seems the SEO firm in question is building links by using other client's websites. I also wonder if they might have large content farm style sites where they place links for clients which might be quite easy to take down. Please discuss!
Industry News | | CheapGames990