Linking Domains in Open Site Explorer Report No Longer Exist. Help.
-
Hello to all,
I have a number of Linking Domains on our Open Site Explorer Report that no longer exist.
I've run URL checks on just a sample of the list, and found that approx. 35% of that sample are from now dead Linking Domains.
Can someone help? If these Linking Domains are defunct, how can I remove these? Does Google reflect negatively on these dead Linking Domains in our SERPs?
Has anyone experienced this before? What action did you take?
-
This is the case as far as I'm aware, and Keri seems to have confirmed it below.
Chances are that Google has already taken note of some of the links so I would imagine you will be seeing changes over the next few weeks / months as it finds out these links no longer exist.
If the domains have expired, removing them isn't something you can do as they already don't exist.
-
Hi! These domains that no longer have links to a site should drop off the report in a couple of crawl cycles. Our data isn't live, but can take a few weeks to crawl, process, and display. I suggest re-running your report, since we just pushed out a new index yesterday, and seeing if anything looks better. You can also look to see what Google and Bing report in their webmaster tools for your website.
-
Ben - The 35% was taken from a small sample, I'm guessing that the actual figure will be much lower. However, it's still worrying.
I'm not too sure when the domains expired, or whether there is a common cause, I'll have to do some more digging on that front. I suppose the more pressing issue is that we do remove them if they are having a negative impact on our rankings.
Are you saying the linking domains will simply fall off once opensite discover they no longer exist?
-
I think it may be the case that open site explorer will update when it discovers the links no longer exist. How long ago did they expire?
35% of your backlinks dropping seems like quite a big chunk. Is there a common cause for these domains expiring? If they all dropped off quite recently I would image there would be some fluctuation in terms of rankings
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
-
Should I keep a website which is outdated or close it down? It has a few links. If I keep it can I redirect people to our newer site?
We are in the process of buying some intellectual property, and it's websites are very dated and only have around 5 external links each. What's the best course of action? Do we close down the sites; then redirect the urls to our current website, or do we leave the sites up, but redirect people to our new site. Reference: current website: www.psychometrics.com Old sites that come with the intellectual property: http://www.eri.com/ plus http://www.hrpq.com/ Thanks, Dan Costigan
Technical SEO | | dcostigan0 -
Treatment of domain names in content that are not actually a link
From PR activity we've found that lots of newspaper sites will include reference to a domain name in an article but not actually make this a link through to the domain. For example we will see text like: For further information read the full report at www.bluewidget.com Of course we make attempts to contact the newspaper to request they make it a link but this doesn't always achieve a result. So the question is, does Google place any value for the identified domain in a case like this?
Technical SEO | | bjalc20110 -
Maintaining link value during site downtime
We are nearly finished rebuilding a client website, but they want to have a "dark launch" period for 4 days prior to the public site launch. During that 4-day period, we will be converting their server, so they want to take down the old site and instead send users a "coming soon" message. Although we have the old site pages set up to 301 for the public launch, I'm concerned that this dark period is going to hurt the link value on the old site pages. During this 4-day period, should we be setting a 503 status code on the old site that automatically serves the "coming soon" message? Or, should all old site pages be temporarily redirected to the "coming soon" landing page? Any other recommendations are appreciated as well.
Technical SEO | | AHartman2 -
Mobile site SEO: faulty redirects.. 204! help pls!
Hello, I have recently read that a m.site.com should provide the same number of pages as the non-mobile site. Is this so? Is this why my mobile site won't rank? Our competitors have their standard websites showing up before our m.website.com version... Also, do I have to get a whole new set of mobile links for my mobile site? In WT, I am seeing absolutely no inbound links, which seems odd? Any help would be greatly appreciated. 🙂 Thanks in advance
Technical SEO | | lfrazer0 -
Quality links are beneficial, but are neutral links detrimental?
So obviously a link profile featuring quality / authoritative / relavant in-bound links is preferable, but here's my question: If I'm starting work on a brand new domain, should I build links that one would consider neutral (i.e. from a non-spammy, but unrelated site) or should I not bother and only focus on quality links? Thanks
Technical SEO | | underscorelive0 -
My site has a "Reported Web Forgery!" warning
When I check my bing cached page it comes up with a "Reported Web Forgery!" warning. I've looked at google web tools and no malware has been detected. I do have another site that has a very similar web address jaaronwoodcountertops.com and jaaron-wood-countertops.com. Could that be why? How do I go about letting bing and or firefox know this is not a forgery site?
Technical SEO | | JAARON0 -
External Links from own domain
Hi all, I have a very weird question about external links to our site from our own domain. According to GWMT we have 603,404,378 links from our own domain to our domain (see screen 1) We noticed when we drilled down that this is from disabled sub-domains like m.jump.co.za. In the past we used to redirect all traffic from sub-domains to our primary www domain. But it seems that for some time in the past that google had access to crawl some of our sub-domains, but in december 2010 we fixed this so that all sub-domain traffic redirects (301) to our primary domain. Example http://m.jump.co.za/search/ipod/ redirected to http://www.jump.co.za/search/ipod/ The weird part is that the number of external links kept on growing and is now sitting on a massive number. On 8 April 2011 we took a different approach and we created a landing page for m.jump.co.za and all other requests generated 404 errors. We added all the directories to the robots.txt and we also manually removed all the directories from GWMT. Now 3 weeks later, and the number of external links just keeps on growing: Here is some stats: 11-Apr-11 - 543 747 534 12-Apr-11 - 554 066 716 13-Apr-11 - 554 066 716 14-Apr-11 - 554 066 716 15-Apr-11 - 521 528 014 16-Apr-11 - 515 098 895 17-Apr-11 - 515 098 895 18-Apr-11 - 515 098 895 19-Apr-11 - 520 404 181 20-Apr-11 - 520 404 181 21-Apr-11 - 520 404 181 26-Apr-11 - 520 404 181 27-Apr-11 - 520 404 181 28-Apr-11 - 603 404 378 I am now thinking of cleaning the robots.txt and re-including all the excluded directories from GWMT and to see if google will be able to get rid of all these links. What do you think is the best solution to get rid of all these invalid pages. moz1.PNG moz2.PNG moz3.PNG
Technical SEO | | JacoRoux0 -
Internal Linking: Site-wide VS Content Links
I just watched this video in which Matt Cutts talks about the ancient 100 links per page limit. I often encounter websites which have massive navigation (elaborate main menu, side bar, footer, superfooter...etc) in addition to content area based links. My question is do you think Google passes votes (PageRank and anchor text) differently from template links such as navigation to the ones in the content area, if so have you done any testing to confirm?
Technical SEO | | Dan-Petrovic0