What can I do if my reconsideration request is rejected?
-
Last week I received an unnatural link warning from Google. Sad times.
I followed the guidelines and reviewed all my inbound links for the last 3 months. All 5000 of them! Along with several genuine ones from trusted sites like BBC, Guardian and Telegraph there was a load of spam. About 2800 of them were junk. As we don't employ any SEO agency and don't buy links (we don't even buy adwords!) I know that all of this spam is generated by spam bots and site scrapers copying our content.
As the bad links have not been created by us and there are 2800 of them I cannot hope to get them removed. There are no 'contact us' pages on these Russian spam directories and Indian scraper sites. And as for the 'adult book marking website' who have linked to us over 1000 times, well I couldn't even contact that site in company time if I wanted to! As a result i did my manual review all day, made a list of 2800 bad links and disavowed them.
I followed this up with a reconsideration request to tell Google what I'd done but a week later this has been rejected "We've reviewed your site and we still see links to your site that violate our quality guidelines." As these links are beyond my control and I've tried to disavow them is there anything more to be done?
Cheers
Steve
-
Tom has given you good advice. I'll put in my 2 cents' worth as well.
There are 3 main reasons for a site to fail at reconsideration:
1. Not enough links were assessed by the site owner to be unnatural.
2. Not enough effort was put into removing links and documenting that to Google.
3. Improper use of the disavow tool.
In most cases #1 is the main cause. Almost every time I do a reconsideration request my client is surprised at what kind of links are considered unnatural. From what I have seen, Google is usually pretty good at figuring out whether you have been manually trying to manipulate the SERPS or whether links are just spam bot type of links.
Here are a few things to consider:
Are you being COMPLETELY honest with yourself about the spammy links you are seeing? How did Russian and porn sites end up linking to you? Most sites don't just get those by accident. Sometimes this can happen when sites use linkbuilding companies that use automated methods to build links. Even still, do all you can to address those links, and then for the ones that you can't get removed, document your efforts, show Google and then disavow them.
Even if these are foreign language sites, many of them will have whois emails that you can contact.
Are you ABSOLUTELY sure that your good links are truly natural? Just because they are from news sources is not a good enough reason. Have you read all the interflora stuff recently? They had a pile of links from advertorials (amongst other things) that now need to be cleaned up.
-
Hi Steve
If Google is saying there are still a few more links, then it might be an idea to manually review a few others that you haven't disavowed. I find the LinkDetox tool very useful for this. It's free with a tweet and will tell you if a link from a site is toxic (the site is deindexed) or if it's suspicious (and why it's suspicious). You still need to use your own judgement on these, but it might help you to find the extra links you're talking about.
However, there is a chance you have gone and disavowed every bad link, but still got the rejection. In this case, I'd keep trying but make your reconsideration request more detailed. Create an excel sheet and list the bad URLs and/or domains and give a reason explaining why you think they're bad links. Then provide information on how you found their contact details. If there are no contact us pages, check the whois registrar's email. After that, say when you contacted them (give a sample of your letter to them too), and if they replied, along with a follow up date if you got silence. If there are no details in the whois, explicitly mention that there are no contact details and so you have proceeded straight to disavowing.
Then list the URLs you've disavowed (upload the .txt file with your reconsideration email). You've now told Google that you've found bad links, why you think their bad (also include how you discovered them), that you've contacted the webmaster on numerous occasions and, if no removal was made, you've disavowed as a last resort. This is a very thorough process and uses the disavow tool in the way that Google wants us to - as a last resort to an unresponsive or anonymous webmaster.
Please forgive me if you've already done all this and it seems like repetition. I only mention it because I've found it's best to be as thorough as possible with Google in these situations. Remember, a reconsideration request is manual and if they see that you've gone through all this effort to be reinstated, you've got a better chance of being approved.
Keep trying, mate. It can be disheartening, but if you think it's worth the time and effort, then keep going for it. I would bear in mind the alternatives, however, such as starting fresh on a new domain. If you find yourself going round the bend with endless reconsiderations, sometimes your time, effort and expertise can be better put elsewhere.
All the best!
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 -
Why can no tool crawl this site?
I am trying to perform a crawl analysis on a client's website at https://www.bravosolution.com I have tried to crawl it with IIS for SEO, Sreaming Frog and Xenu and not one of them makes it further than the home page of the site. There is nothing I can see in the robots.txt that is blocking these agents. As far as I can see, Google is able to crawl the site although they have noticed a significant drop in organic traffic. Any advise would be very welcome Regards Danny
Technical SEO | | richdan0 -
We can't figure out why competitors have better position(s) in Google
We are using MOZ analytics for some days now, and it really helps us with important information about our rankings.
Technical SEO | | wilcoXXL
I hope you guys can help us out with the following particular case; In google.nl (dutch) we rank position #18 with the following searchterm 'sphinx 345' one of our competitors rank position #3.
We used the MOZ On Page Grade tool to find out some details about the two pages:
Our page #18: http://goo.gl/cTsbmI
Competitor page #3: http://goo.gl/qk21sM Our page hits an A and Keyword usage for "sphinx 345" = 52
The competitors page hits an A too and Keyword usage for "sphinx 345" = 45 About the link structure; for our page there is no link data found in Open Site Explorer. The url exists about a year and a half now.
I'm also very sure we have many internal links to this url.
Does Google and other crawlers have a hard time to crawl our site?(it's a Magento site, our competitors do have custom-made e-commerce systems, maybe that has something to do with it?) As i were saying;we can't figure this out. I hope you guys can help to get us any further. Regards, Wilco0 -
Can hreflang replace canonicalisation ?
Hi Im working with a site that has ALOT of duplicate content and have recommended developer fix via correct use of Canonicalisation i.e the canonical tag. However a US version (of this UK site) is about to be developed on a subfolder (domain.com/uk/ & domain.com/US/ etc so also looking into adopting the hreflang attribute on these. Upon reading up about the hreflang attribute i see that it performs a degree of canonicalisation too. Does that mean that developing the international versions with hreflang means there's no need to apply canonicalistion tags to deal with the dupe content, since will deal with the original dupe content problems as well as the new country related dupe content, via the hreflang ? I also understand that hreflang and canonicalisation can conflict/clash on different language versions of international subfolders etc as per: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Igbrm1z_7Hk In this instance we are only looking at US/UK versions but very likely will want to expand into non english countries too in the future like France for example. So given both the above points if you are using hreflang is it advisable (or even best) to totally avoid the canonical tag ? I would be surprised if the answers yes, since whilst makes logical sense given the above (if the above statements are correct), that seems strange given how important and standard best practice canonical usage seems to be these days. What best ? Use the Hreflang alone, or the Canonical tag alone or both ? What does everyone else do in similar situation ? All Best Dan
Technical SEO | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
Time to deindexing: WMT Request vs. Server not found
Google indexed some subdomains (13!) that were never supposed to exist, but apparently returned a 200 code when Google somehow crawled them. I can get these subdomains to return a "server not found" error by turning off wildcard subdomains at my DNS. I've been told that these subdomains will be deindexed just from this server not found error. I was going to use Webmaster Tools and verify each domain, but I'm on an economy goDaddy server and apparently subdomains just get forwarded to a directory, so subdomain.domain.com gets redirected to domain.com/subdomain. I'm not even sure with this being the case, if I can get WMT to recognize and remove these subdomains like that. Should I fret about this, or will the "server not found" message get Google to remove these soon enough?
Technical SEO | | erin_soc0 -
Can anyone explain why and how these odd URLs could be working?
In our GWT and Google Analytics traffic reports, I often see some very oddly formed URLs. Here's an example http://www.ccisolutions.com/storefront/www.ccisolutions.com and here's another
Technical SEO | | danatanseo
http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category//www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/CEW.cat What strikes me about this particular URL is two things: It renders this page http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category/on-disc-printing, but not with that URL, the URL stays http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category//www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/CEW.cat When I break this URL into pieces http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category/CEW.cat
and www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/CEW.cat,
both redirect to: http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category/on-disc-printing This makes me wonder, is there something (a rule?) in the
backend (maybe the .htaccess file?)that was set up that says http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category/CEW.cat
= www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/CEW.cat
(or maybe vice versa?), and as a result an odd URL for the page is being
written automatically? This scenario worked on every category page I checked. All had the same results. For example, I tried: http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category//www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/AAA.cat
and it rendered the Live Sound category page, but without redirecting to the
user friendly URL. This URL stayed unchanged in the address bar When I broke it into pieces, like http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category/AAA.cat
and www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/AAA.cat, both of these redirected to http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category/sound-video-lighting-equipment-experts Have any of you ever encountered a problem like this? Any sugeestions as to what might be causing it and how to remedy the problem? It is definitely causing us a duplicate content headache. Thanks! Dana0 -
Can you mark up a page using Schema.org and Facebook Open Graph?
Is it possible to use both Schema.org and Facebook Open Graph for structured data markup? On the Google Webmaster Central blog, they say, "you should avoid mixing the formats together on the same web page, as this can confuse our parsers." Source - http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/06/introducing-schemaorg-search-engines.html
Technical SEO | | SAMarketing1 -
My client has lost his URL - is there anything he can do to salvage SEO?
My new client has had his URL for 8 years and built up good SEO, visitors and links. He has now lost it and the cost of getting it back is prohibitive. Apart from contacting all the places he is currently getting links from, is there anything he can do to salvage SEO and site visitors? Is there anyway he can get 301s done if he no longer owns the URL? If he starts again with a new URL, and loads all the new content on it, will submitting a site map help Google understand its not duplicate and all the content is just at a new URL? He is hoping that contacting Google and explaining will help them "look kindly", but I have never heard anything like this happening! Any ideas? Many thanks
Technical SEO | | Chammy0