Best practice to disavow spammy links
-
Hi Forum,
I'm trying to quantify the logic for removing spammy links.
I've read the article: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-to-check-which-links-can-harm-your-sites-rankings.Based on my pivot chart results, I see around 55% of my backlinks at zero pagerank.
Q: Should I simply remove all zero page rank links or carry out an assessment based on the links (zero pagerank) DA / PA. If so what are sensible DA and/or PA metrics?
Q: What other factors should be taken into consideration, such as anchor text etc.
-
I would never get rid of links simply based on pagerank (or DA/PA). I would evaluate my links based on whether or not they were natural or self-made.
The first thing you need to decide though before slashing links is whether or not your links are actually hurting you. If your rankings dropped it doesn't necessarily have to be because of spammy links as there are many algorithm factors that could be in play.
Now, if your rankings dropped significantly on a Penguin refresh day, then yes, you could consider removing or disavowing the links. Most SEOs agree that the key to recovering from Penguin is to do that. You may not even have to remove them. Just disavowing is likely enough for Penguin. But no one can say for sure because Penguin hasn't refreshed since the disavow tool was released.
But be careful messing around with the disavow tool. I've seen sites that had other issues such as Panda or site structure issues that went and cut a bunch of potentially spammy links out and damaged their rankings even further.
-
-
It appears that their are. Duke Tanson wrote a really good article regarding using the disavow tool. He shares that the tool he used for this task was http://tools.seogadget.co.uk/ - stating, "I got all the contact details of the domains I wanted to remove using this tool."
-
If you know for certain the links are negatively impacting your site, I would probably send a couple of emails to the webmaster over the course of a week or two. This would show that you have tried multiple times to resolve the issue and give the webmaster time to resolve the issue for you. If multiple weeks have passed with no reply, you may have to take matters into your own hands with the disavow tool.
Hope this helps.
Mike
-
-
Thanks for your reply.
I have a couple of further questions.
Q: Are there any free tools or free online services that I can use to gather a live email address for a given site.
Q: Additionally, how long from sending "Removal Link" email before using Disavow?
-
Yup. Those look pretty spammy.
You should first try to contact the webmaster of these sites and request that your links be removed.
Google wants you to try as hard as you can to personally get your links removed from spammy sites prior to using the Disavow tool. It is also recommended that you save email correspondence between yourself and these webmasters to prove to Google you are actively trying to clean up your backlinks.
Does that help?
Mike
-
If they have a PR of 0, it would probably be worth your time to contact the webmaster and request you link be removed.
I do not believe that getting those types of backlinks removed would do any harm on your site. It would probably be more beneficial than anything.
Good luck.
Mike
-
Mike, this is very helpful information for me as well.
I'm curious - I also discovered I have links with 0 PR and have been wondering if I should put some time in to get them removed. Not with the disavow tool, but by writing to the webmaster or seeing if there is sanything on those sites that allows me to request that my link be removed. I also have not received any messages or warnings in GWT about penalties.. I did have a major drop in The SERPs for a couple of my keywords -still healthy for others and my business name URL. Do you feel it could do harm if I were to try to get the links removed?
-
Matt Cutts says that you should use the disavow link tool very carefully and only in certain circumstances.
I found this article very helpful: 6 Things To Think About Before Disavowing Links from Search Engine Land. It states, "If you haven’t actually been penalized and you start disavowing your links, you’re essentially outing yourself to Google that you manipulated the system. Make sure that you equivocally know you were penalized and it’s not just some random fluctuation in rankings, a sitemap or indexing problem, or an accidentally no-indexed page."
And according to Google Webmaster Tools , "This is an advanced feature and should only be used with caution. If used incorrectly, this feature can potentially harm your site’s performance in Google’s search results. We recommend that you disavow backlinks only if you believe you have a considerable number of spammy, artificial, or low-quality links pointing to your site, and if you are confident that the links are causing issues for you. In most cases, Google can assess which links to trust without additional guidance, so most normal or typical sites will not need to use this tool."
Hope this information answers your questions.
Mike
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
-
Best practice recommendations for enabling multiple languages on your site?
I find that the advice for multi-language sites is always tied with multi-region, but what about US only sites that want to be multi-lingual? What are the best practice recommendations there? HREFLANG tags necessary? TLDs? Do you need to purchase yoursite.us , yoursite.sp , etc.. or would yoursite.com/en yoursite.com/sp suffice? Should the extensions be region based even if the language is the only difference?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | emilydavidson0 -
Base href + relative link href for canonical link
I have a site that in the head section we specify a base href being the domain with a trailing slash and a canonical link href being the relative link to the domain. <base <="" span="">href="http://www.domain.com/" /> href="link-to-page.html" rel="canonical" /> I know that Google recommends using an absolute path as a canonical link but is specifying a base href with a relative canonical link the same thing or is it still seen as duplicate content?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Nobody16116990439410 -
Internal Linking
Hi I've been looking over my pages and it says for this page for example http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/1-6kw-halogen-heater I have too many links, I think it was about 178. These links are from the menu and bottom of the page - how much of an issue is this for internal linking structure? I wouldn't want to remove the menus or change them too much. Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
Links on page
Hi I have a web page which lists about 50-60 products which links out to either a pdf on the product or the main manufacturers website page containing product detail. The site in non e-commerce is this the site/page likely to get hit by Penguin? Would it be best to create a separate page for the product/manufacturer group i.e 5 or 6 pages but linking out to the PDFs etc...?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Cocoonfxmedia0 -
Same page Anchor Links vs Internal Link (Cannibalisation)
Hey Mozzers, I have a very long article page that supports several of my sub-category pages. It has sub-headings that link out to the relevant pages. However the article is very long and to make it easier to find the relevant section I was debating adding inpage anchor links in a bullet list at the top of the page for quick navigation. PAGE TITLE Keyword 1 Keyword 2 etc <a name="'Keyword1"></a> Keyword 1 Content
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ATP
<a name="'Keyword2"></a> Keyword 2 Content Because of the way my predecessor wrote this article, its section headings are the same as the sub-categories they link out to and boost (not ideal but an issue I will address later). What I wondered is if having the inpage achor would confuse the SERPS because they would be linking with the same keyword. My worry is that by increasing userbility of the article by doing this I also confuse them SERPS First I tell them that this section on my page talk about keyword 1. Then from in that article i tell them that a different page entirely is about the same keyword. Would linking like this confuse SERPS or are inpage anchor links looked upon and dealt with differently?0 -
SEO best practices for embedding content in a map
My company is working on creating destination guides for families exploring where to go on their next vacation. We've been creating and promoting content on our blog for quite some time in preparation for the map-based discovery. The UX people in my company are pushing for design/functionality similar to:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Vacatia_SEO
http://sf.eater.com/maps/the-38-essential-san-francisco-restaurants-january-2015 From a user perspective, we all love this, but I'm the SEO guy and I'm having a hard time figuring out the best way to guide my team regarding getting readers to the actual blog article from the left content area. The way they want to do it is to have the content displayed overtop the map when someone clicks on a pin. Great, but there's no way for me to optimize the map for every article. After all, if we have an article about best places to snorkel on Maui, I want Google to direct people to the blog article specific to that search term because that page is the authority on that subject. Additionally, the map page itself will have no original content because it will be pulling all the blog content from other URLS, which will get no visitors if people read on the map. We also want people, when they find an article they like, to be able to copy a URL to share. If the article is housed on the map page, the URL will be ugly and long (not SEO friendly) based on parameters from the filters the visitor used to drill down to that article. So I don't think I can simply optimize the map filtered-URL. Can I? The others on my team do not want visitors to ping pong back and forth between map and article and would prefer people stay on the discovery map. We did have a thought that we'd give people an option to click a link to read the article off the map but I doubt people will do it which means that page will never been visited, thus crushing it's page rank. so questions: How can i pass link juice/SEO love from the map page to the actual blog article while keeping the user on the map? Does google pass that juice if you use Iframes? What about doing ajax calls? Anyone have experience doing this? Am I making a mountain out of a molehill? Should I trust that if I create good content, good UX and allow people to explore how they prefer, Google will give me the love? Help me Rand Fishkin, you're my only hope!1 -
Duplicate Content www vs. non-www and best practices
I have a customer who had prior help on his website and I noticed a 301 redirect in his .htaccess Rule for duplicate content removal : www.domain.com vs domain.com RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com [NC]
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EnvoyWeb
RewriteRule (.*) http://www.MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com/$1 [R=301,L,NC] The result of this rule is that i type MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com in the browser and it redirects to www.MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com I wonder if this is causing issues in SERPS. If I have some inbound links pointing to www.MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com and some pointing to MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com, I would think that this rewrite isn't necessary as it would seem that Googlebot is smart enough to know that these aren't two sites. -----Can you comment on whether this is a best practice for all domains?
-----I've run a report for backlinks. If my thought is true that there are some pointing to www.www.MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com and some to the www.MY-CUSTOMER-SITE.com, is there any value in addressing this?0 -
There's a website I'm working with that has a .php extension. All the pages do. What's the best practice to remove the .php extension across all pages?
Client wishes to drop the .php extension on all their pages (they've got around 2k pages). I assured them that wasn't necessary. However, in the event that I do end up doing this what's the best practices way (and easiest way) to do this? This is also a WordPress site. Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | digisavvy0