Finding and Removing bad backlinks
-
Ok here goes.
Over the past 2 years our traffic and rankings have slowly declined, most importantly, for keywords that we ranked #1 and #2 at for years. With the new Penguin updates this year, we never saw a huge drop but a constant slow loss. My boss has tasked me with cleaning up our bad links and reshaping our link profile so that it is cleaner and more natural. I currently have access to Google Analytics and Webmaster Tools, SEOMoz, and Link Builder.
1)What is the best program or process for identifying bad backlinks? What exactly am I looking for? Too many links from one domain? Links from Low PR or low “Trust URL” sites? I have gotten conflicting information reading about all this on the net, with some saying that too many good links(high PR) can be unnatural without some lower level PR links, so I just want to make sure that I am not asking for links to be removed that we need to create or maintain our link profile.
2)What is the best program or process for viewing our link profile and what exactly am I looking for? What constitutes a healthy link profile after the new google algorithm updates? What is the best way to change it?
3)Where do I start with this task? Remove spammy links first or figure out or profile first and then go after bad links?
4)We have some backlinks that are to our old .aspx that we moved to our new platform 2 years ago, there are quite a few (1000+). Some of these pages were redirected and some the redirects were broken at some point. Is there any residual juice in these backlinks still? Should we fix the broken redirects, or does it do nothing? My boss says the redirects wont do anything now that google no longer indexes the old pages but other people have said differently. Whats the deal should we still fix the redirects even though the pages are no longer indexed?
I really appreciate any advice as basically if we cant get our site and sales turned around, my job is at stake.
Our site is www.k9electronics.com if you want to take a look. We just moved hosts so there are some redirect issues and other things going on we know about.
-
Ah okay - that notice is definitely a factor then and an important consideration not initially mentioned. So as long as you have someone else working on the other issues described then we can focus on the patterns concept I initially mentioned.
Several things that stand out when I'm reviewing links on a mass scale.I prefer to look at links grouped by domain in the first pass to help see these patterns.
1. Page titles of pages sending links. Quite often, they're titles that blatantly scream junk/low-quality or irrelevant to any topic your site is about, or even link-partnerships... or even outright mention SEO.
2. Domain names/URLs of pages sending links. Same concept - they can quite often obviously communicate that they're junk, irrelevant, or blatantly specifically sites for SEO or links.
3. Anchor Text - if you group by anchor text as a next pass, look for links where the anchor text is exact match keywords and then look at the page title of that linking page and it's domain name. Patterns can be spotted of low quality. If needed, you can click over to a URL and just look at the page that link is coming from.
4. After all that process, as you have marked links as being bad, regroup them by domain. At that point you will likely still need to go through remaining links and go to at least one link from each domain to examine the page or just look at the overall domain for quality.
NOTE - the part where you examine a site sending links does require you to be able to know how to spot a bad site already. Like - "Can I trust this site?" "Is this site obviously a fake site?" and other such questions need to be asked and answered.
And if a link is on a good site, is it a forum or blog comment? Is it using an SEO relevant keyword as the person's signature name? Or is it even a legitimate and relevant comment, even if the link isn't using keyword anchors?
There are so many subtle indicators I could add but in reality the best way to go is to dive in and remember to look for patterns. As you spend the time doing this work, patterns become more and more obvious...
-
We did receive a message from google about inorganic links. Also, our page speed right now has to do with us changing hosts. We know about those issues, and about our on site SEO problems. Like I said in my post, MY task is to try to make sure that I remove any links that may be hurting us, fix any broken ones and make sure that our link profile is as natural as can be. There are other people tasked with the issues you are talking about, I am just trying to get a handle on what I need to do.
-
Evaluating links is a very time-consuming process. You need to be able to look for "patterns" as a primary task IF you need to worry about links.
HOWEVER
I will also say this - your on-site SEO is suffering and just as likely or even MORE likely to be your primary problem. Why? Because you have not stated that you received a notice from Google informing you that your site was flagged for bad links. If you did NOT get such a notice, while a poor overall link profile can certainly contribute to a generally declining ranking footprint, it's less likely to be the PRIMARY concern.
For example: Your "Accessories and batteries" category has a terrible topical focus. The page Title doesn't mention what they're accessories or batteries for. Which means from the very first point of reference on-site, that page fails to communicate the refined focus of the category. Accessories could be about ANYTHING. And so could batteries.
Then, on that page, the header text "Accessories and Batteries" neither includes that topical clarification, nor is it even a proper "h1" header tag. There's no descriptive paragraph based content on the page reinforcing and strengthening that topical focus. Your Canonical tag is NOT SEO best practices for pagination in 2012, and thus that results in massive amounts of content within a category not properly being identified to further reinforce topical authority. (You should instead be using rel-next/rel-prev and NOT using canonicalization on paginated content, every page title should be unique, and every page within a set should be properly reinforced with it's own h1 tag).
You're not even close to having enough depth of content on product pages (one sentence for the "detailed description), so with all the "related" . product content, sidebar navigation and other "off-topic" content, there's a lot of content on your site deemed "thin" content.
You have SEVERE page speed problems, a very serious SEO factor in 2012. (tools.pingdom.com reported a 9.3 second load time for the home page and URIValet.com reported 15 seconds).
I haven't even begun to scratch the surface here, because you have a SERIOUS on-site SEO problem that you've apparently either failed to understand or chosen to ignore in this question, which indicates there could be MANY more problems on the site.
Heck - several "minor" template fixes alone could boost your SEO, though if you really want to win, you'd be wise to really address all the high priority factors on-site.
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
-
Advise / Help on Bad Link Removals
Hey everyone.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | TheITOteam
Im new to the community and new to backlinks - hence the question to the community today.
I would like help understanding options and work load around back links and removing them.
I have a client with over 8000 back links as a few years ago he paid someone about £10 to boost his rankings by adding thousands of backlinks.
We fear this is having a bad effect on their site and rankings organically as 90% of these back links have a spam score of over 50% and also no follows. My questions to the community (if you could be so kind to share) are:
1. Whats the best way to decide if a Backlink is worth keeping or removing
2. Is there a tool to decide this or assist with this somewhere on the internet? Ive had advise stating if its not hurting the page we should keep it. However, again...
How do I know what damage each Backlink is causing to the domain? I appriciate anyones time to offer some advice to a novice looking to clear these1 -
Do we lose Backlinks and Domain Authority of URL when we change domain Name?
Have 1 performing domain (Monthly - 4M visitor ) now we want to change domain name ( Brand name like SEOMOZ to Moz ). I have general knowledge about domain changing prevention tips like 301 redirection and other thing. My concern is about backlinks and DA. How can I prevent any lose from SEO Point of view. (backlink lose) Do I need to change all backlink form source or redirection is enough to get all reference traffic from that backlinks?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | HuptechWebseo0 -
Client Wants To Use A .io Domain Name - How Bad For Organic?
Hi, I have a U.S. client who is stuck on a name that he wants to get as a .io (British Indian Ocean) domain name for a new site. Aside from the user confusion/weirdness, how much harder do you think this makes this sites organic in the U.S. in the future with a .io domain name? FYI, the other part of the domain name he wants to use is short, meaningless and implies nothing in and of itself. Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | 945012 -
Asynchronous loading of product prices bad for SEO?
We are currently looking into improving our TTFB on our ecommerce site. A huge improvement would be to asynchronously load the product prices on the product list pages. The product detail page – on which the product is ordered- will be left untouched. The idea is that all content like product data, images and other static content is sent to the browser first(first byte). The product prices depend on a set of user variables like delivery location, vat inclusive/exclusive,… etc. So they would requested via an ajax call to reduce the TTFB. My question is whether google considers this as black hat SEO or not?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | jef22200 -
Our site has too many backlinks! How can we do a bad backlink audit?
Webmaster Tools is saying we have close to 24 million links to our site. The site has been around since the mid 90s and has accumulated all these links since. We also have our own network of sites that have links in their templates to our main site. I'm fighting to get these links "nofollow"'d but upper management seems scared to alter this practice. This past year we've found our rankings have dropped significantly and suspect it's due to some spammy backlinks or being penalized for doing an accidental link scheme network. 24 million links is too many to check manually for using the disavow tool and it seems that bulk services out there to check backlinks can't even come close. What's an SEO to do?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | seoninjaz0 -
Finding out why Bing gave page-level penalty?
In the last couple of weeks Bing has gradually removed 5 webpages of my website from their SERP's. The URL's are totally gone. They all had top 5 rankings and just got removed out of nothing. Have can I investigate what went wrong with these pages? Are here perhaps experts who are willing to investigate this for a fee? How can I restore a page-level penalty? I have no messages in my Bing Webmastertools account.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | wellnesswooz0 -
How do I know what links are bad enough for the Google disavow tool?
I am currently working for a client who's back link profile is questionable. The issue I am having is, does Google feel the same way about them as I do? We have no current warnings but have had one in the past for "unnatural inbound links". We removed the links that we felt were being referred to and have not received any further warnings, nor have we noticed any significant drop in traffic or rankings at any point. My concern is that if I work towards getting the more ominous looking links removed (directories, reciprocal links from irrelevant sites etc.), either manually or with the disavow tool, how can I be sure that I am not removing links that are in fact helping our campaign? Are we likely to suffer from the next Penguin update if we chose to proceed without moving the aforementioned links? or is Google only likely to target the serious black hat links (link farms etc.)? Any thoughts or experiences would be greatly appreciated.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BallyhooLtd0 -
Fix Bad Links in Google
I have a client who had some grey hat SEO done in the past. Some of their back links aren't from the best neighborhoods. Google didn't seem to mind until 9/28, when they literally disappeared for all searches except for their domain name. Google still has their site indexed, but it's just not showing up. There are no messages in Webmaster Tools. I know Bing has the tool where you can disavow bad links and ask them to discount them. Google doesn't have such a tool, but what is the strategy when you don't have control over the link sources, such as in blog comments? Could this update have been a delayed Penguin ranking change from the latest Penguin Update on the 18th? http://www.seomoz.org/google-algorithm-change Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Tom
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | TomBristol0