How to idesntify "inorganic" links
-
I am intending to remove spammy link of my website http://cellspyexpert.com/ which has been ranking well but I noticed a sudden drop in its ranking. I took a lot of care while building links, I tried to get links from relevant high authority websites with high page rank. I used profiling and guest blogging method only and never participated in any link scheme but received following message in google webmaster tools "
Google Webmaster Tools notice of detected unnatural links to http://www.cellspyexpert.com/"
I got this message on 19<sup>th</sup> Sep and ranking dropped on 6<sup>th</sup> Oct
1- Is this EMD issue?? I am pretty sure it is not because of EMD (Exact match domain) as I have been using phrase match, brand name+phrase and other anchor texts. I used exact match also but only 2%.
2- If it is bad quality, inorganic link issue?? Then I am intending to remove inorganic links so that I could send reconsideration request but facing problem in detecting inorganic links.
Please advise!!
-
Uhhh, how much alcohol? I have a reasonably stocked wine cellar.... Good point re JCPenny.
Best to you,
-
**Is there a way to tell whether or not a penalty was caused by a webspam report to Google? **
Of course! Where there is a will, there is a way.
The question is, are you determined enough to find the answer by bribing Matt or another member of his team with enough alcohol / money / goodies to get them to violate their NDA? I have seen them share in a general manner they have taken action on sites based on spam reports, but I can't recall any example where they have said "we have taken action on your site based on a spam report".
If pressed for an example, I would use JC Penney's. According to the public story, a NY Times reporter called Google to inquire about JC Penney's amazing performance in Google. You could view this as a spam report.
Thanks for the kind words Robert.
-
Ryan,
I do not believe I have seen this laid out more clearly or succinctly. The most important part that most seem to gloss over in this quest of reconsideration is your statement, ..."** forums are full of angry site owners sharing stories of how they submitted 10 Reconsideration Requests and all 10 have been denied**."
If you rush to get site reconsidered, you are slowing yourself down. You might as well do it all first and not be unhappy because you did no research on links, got two or three you saw as bad (or knew were bad) removed and ask for reconsideration. Without documentation (proof you did all in your power to have the links removed) of what you have done, what reasonable person would believe you did it?
"It does beg a question for me:
Is there a way to tell whether or not a penalty was caused by a webspam report to Google?
Thanks for great response.
-
**Is this EMD issue?? **
No. You do not have a EMD.
Clearly you have an issue with unnatural links. Those links should be located and removed. The process involves three main steps:
1. Compile a comprehensive list of ALL known links to your site. That does not mean simply downloading the links Google shows as that often represents about 50% of the links to your site. It also does not mean using Google + OSE as that still is not enough. I generate a report using Google + Bing + OSE + Majestic + AHREFs. This report consistently finds enough links to remove a manual penalty or relieve a Penguin issue.
2. Visit every linking site and properly identify each link as organic or manipulative. This task sounds much easier then it is. It requires training and experience. A large percentage of SEOs are simply not calibrated to look at a link the same way Google does. In other words, they cannot properly identify a manipulative vs organic link.
If you identify manipulative links as organic, then Google is unlikely to honor your Reconsideration Request. If you identify organic links as manipulative, you are damaging your site.
3. A comprehensive Webmaster Outreach program needs to be implemented to contact every site providing a manipulative link and requesting the removal of the link(s). This involves sending emails to the site's WHOIS email address, the email address found on the site, and using the Contact Form on the site. At times you need to call sites, use regular mail or chase site owners down via social networks. You need to take any and all reasonable actions to remove the link.
For each of the above steps, you need to thoroughly document your actions if you are dealing with a manual penalty. You need to prove the above steps were taken. For example, when you send an email to the WHOIS email address, a copy of that email needs to be saved as a pdf or text file, uploaded to a file server and then a link to that message should be placed in a spreadsheet. This example is simply one of many.
The process takes a massive amount of time by properly trained personnel. I have examined numerous software tools designed to automate the link identification process, and they all fail quite badly in my experience. That is why the forums are full of angry site owners sharing stories of how they submitted 10 Reconsideration Requests and all 10 have been denied.
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
-
Tiered back links
Playing catch up with latest SEO techniques and wanted to ask the community what opinion is with generated tiered back links. For example, in one month having - 50 tier one links, 250 tier two links and 1000 tier three links generated within articles forums, social networks, guestbooks etc. In my view this is blackhat, my question is - is this still acceptable? or will it be damaging my domain? Thank you.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | w4rdy0 -
How do you change the 6 links under your website in Google?
Hello everyone, I have no idea how to ask this question, so I'm going to give it a shot and hopefully someone can help me!! My company is called Eteach, so when you type in Eteach into Google, we come in the top position (phew!) but there are 6 links that appear underneath it (I've added a picture to show what I mean). How do you change these links?? I don't even know what to call them, so if there is a particular name for these then please let me know! They seem to be an organic rank rather than PPC...but if I'm wrong then do correct me! Thanks! zorIsxH.jpg
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Eteach_Marketing0 -
Is it ok to ask for a non reciprocal link
hey guys, got mini discussion question. With rapgenius.com getting penalized today, it raises some questions about linking. What they did is definitely not ok. A link scheme involving their own affiliate network is against Google guidelines for sure. So is it ok to ask for a non reciprocal link if there is no incentive involved and no money changes hands? ie. Someone writes an article related to your article topic, or they reference you without a link. Then uou email the webmaster requesting a link... They add it. Is this against the guidelines?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Anti-Alex0 -
Which links should I remove?
What is your general approach when removing links for a new client? Just taken on some new work and found links that I wouldn't dream of building now (unrelated domain name, blogroll, single word, exact match anchor, dead sites). However some of these are brand anchor links, and some of the pages have decent Page Rank (2/3/4). Obviously I don't want to remove links that might actually be helping the site in a weird way. It would be good to get an idea of other peoples approach to link removal - what goes, what stays etc?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Coolpink0 -
Links via scraped / cloned content
Just been looking at some backlinks on a site - a good proportion of them are via Scraped wikipedia links or sites with similar directories to those found on DMOZ (just they have different names). To be honest, many of these sites look pretty dodgy to me, but if they're doing illegal stuff there's absolutely no way I'll be able to get links removed. Should I just sit and watch the backlinks increase from these questionable sources, or report the sites to Google, or do something else? Advice please.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | McTaggart0 -
"take care about the content" is it always true?
Hi everyone, I keep reading answer ,in reference to ranking advice, in wich the verdict is always the same: "TAKE CARE ABOUT THE CONTENT INSTEAD OF PR", and phrases like " you don't have to waste your time buying links, you have first of all to engage your visitors. ideally it works but not when you have to deal with small sites and especially when you are going to be ranked for those keywords where there's not too much to write. i'll give you an example still unsolved: i've got a client who just want to be ranked first for his flagship store, now his site is on the fourth position and the first ranked is a site with no content and low authority but it has the excact keyword match domain. tell me!!! what kind of content should i produce in order to be ranked for the name of the shop and the city?? the only way is to get links.... or to stay forth..... if you would like to help me, see more details below: page: http://poltronafraubrescia.zenucchi.it keyword: poltrona frau brescia competitor ranked first: http://turra.poltronafraubrescia.it/ competiror ranked second: http:// poltronafraubrescia.com/
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | guidoboem0 -
Are unusual chinese links likely to be black hat?
Hello, I noticed that this onepage website: http://www.clearpixel.net/ ranks at #11 for web design London so I did some research using SEO Moz Pro. Turns out that alll their links are from Chinese directory style sites. Does this demonstrate black hat SEO? If not, how do I go about getting links on Chinese sites with .gov urls. Many thanks, Martin Hofschroer
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | MartinHof0 -
Why Does Massive Reciprocal Linking Still Work?
It seems pretty well-settled that massive reciprocal linking is not a very effective strategy, and in fact, may even lead to a penatly. However, I still see massive reciprocal linking (blog roll linking even massive resource page linking) still working all the time. I'm not looking to cast aspersion on any individual or company, but I work with legal websites and I see these strategies working almost universally. My question is why is this still working? Is it because most of the reciprocally linking sites are all legally relevant? Has Google just not "gotten around" to the legal sector (doubtful considering the money and volume of online legal segment)? I have posed this question at SEOmoz in the past and it was opined that massively linking blogs through blog rolls probably wouldn't send any flags to Google. So why is that it seems that everywhere I look, this strategy is basically dismissed as a complete waste of time if not harmful? How can there be such a discrepency between what leading SEOs agree to be "bad" and the simple fact that these strategies are working en masse over the period of at least 3 years?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Gyi0