When to re-submit for reconsideration?
-
Hi! We received a manual penalty notice. We had an SEO company a couple of years ago build some links for us on blogs. Currently we have only about 95 of these links which are pretty easily identifiable by the anchor text used and the blogs or directories they originate from.
So far, we have seen about 35 of those removed and have made 2 contacts to each one via removeem.com.
So, how many contacts do you think need to be made before submitting a reconsideration request? Is 2 enough?
Also, should we use the disavow tool on these remaining 65 links? Every one of the remaining links is from either a filipino blog page or a random article directory.
Finally, do you think we are still getting juice from these links? i.e. if we do remove or disavow these anchor text links are we actually going to see a negative impact?
Thanks for your help and answers!!
Craig
-
sure or e-mail me davec@evolvecreativegroup.com
-
Hi Dave,
Would you mind if I PM you a few of these examples?
Thanks!
Craig
-
I can't answer that accurately without knowing A) What page on the sites you linked link back to your site site. B) What your website is about (theme, category etc.).
-
Thanks Dave. Would you agree that the links above are the types of sites we need to be removing and shouldn't hurt us if we remove them or disavow them?
Here are a few more examples:
http://linkssolutions.org
http://alcoosite.org
http://dbindex.info
http://xyzdirectory.info
http://topdirlisting.com
http://freearticlesinc.com
http://seenation.com
http://articlerich.com
http://ipunjab.comThe blog posts I know need to go. It is the article and directory sites that I am a little unsure of.
Thanks for taking the time to answer.
Craig
-
You're lucky you got a manual penalty and not an algorithmic one. When you get a manual penalty you get to use the disavow tool, say your sorry, and come back. Don't hesitate to use the disavow tool since you got the manual letter.
-
Yikes on the 5000 bad links! Yes, we are lucky. However, I am a little concerned that Google thinks we have more bad links than we do and is considering our organic links as paid or something. See (http://www.seomoz.org/q/to-remove-or-not-to-remove)
Here I will give you a few examples of the sites that are linking to us and can say that pretty much all of the sites that we have set apart as bad links are similar to these. These are the only links that were paid via this SEO company. These seem like obvious sites for the disavow tool, but just want to be sure. I am heard so many cautionary comments on the disavow tool, that I wonder if we should use it at all.
http://www.sackthetickettax.com/
http://www.cowboysandangels.info/
http://www.businessdesmoines.com/
http://www.vespertinecrawl.com/
If any of these seem like sites we would want to keep links from, please let me know. Or, if they all seem like links we would definitely want to disavow, let me know as well.
Thanks for your help and quick answer!
Craig
-
First, I think you're lucky that you only have 60 links outstanding, we recently took a client that had over 5000 bad links!!
If you have emailed or tried to contact the remaining websites then I'd say its time to turn to the disavow tool. Be really careful though when using it because you have to be 100% sure that these are bad links before disavowing them. Once you have submitted the disavow file (which can take a week or 2 to filter through to Google) you will get a message in Webmaster Tools to tell you they have received it.
I'd say at this point, resubmit for reconsideration. If you have evidence that you tried to contact these websites then include that in your request because Google wants to see that you have made an effort to get them removed first.
If the links are as bad as you say then they are probably doing more bad than good so don't worry about the link juice they are passing.
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
-
Google selecting incorrect URL as canonical: 'Duplicate, submitted URL not selected as canonical'
Hi there, A number of our URLs are being de-indexed by Google. When looking into this using Google Search Console the same message is appearing on multiple pages across our sites: 'Duplicate, submitted URL not selected as canonical' 'IndexingIndexing allowed? YesUser-declared canonical - https://www.mrisoftware.com/ie/products/real-estate-financial-software/Google-selected canonical - https://www.mrisoftware.com/uk/products/real-estate-financial-software/'Has anyone else experienced this problem?How can I get Google to select the correct, user-declared canoncial? Thanks.
Technical SEO | | nfrank0 -
301 Re-directing 'empty' domains
Hello, My client had purchased a few domains and 301 re-directed them, pointing to our main website. As far as I am aware the 'empty domains' are brand related but no content has ever been displayed on them, and I doubt they have much authority. The issue here is that we took a dive in ranking for our main keyword, I had a look on ahrefs and found the below: | www.empty-domain/our-keyword | 30 | 19 | 1 | fb 0
Technical SEO | | SO_UK
G+ 0
in 4 | REDIRECT 301 TO www.main-domain/our-keyword | 8 Feb '175 d | The ranking dip happened at the same time as the re-direct was re-discovered / re-crawled. Could the 'empty' URL in question been causing us any issues? I understand that this is terrible practice for 301 redirects, I was hoping someone in the community could shed light on any possible solution for this.0 -
When choosing GWT preferred domain its asking for re-verification?
Trying to set a preferred domain in GWT, and the site is verified via Google Analytics and meta tag in the code, but still asks: Part of the process of setting a preferred domain is to verify that you own http://site.org/. Please verify http://site.org/. Tried looking for answer to no avail, am I missing anything?
Technical SEO | | vmialik0 -
Are my canonical re directs working?
Buonjourno from Wetherby UK 🙂 Ive been battlling sometime to get this site http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk to rank for term Right To Manage. Amongst other tactics ive set up a canonical http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk/about/right-to-manage.aspx * - Canonical version http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk/how-we-care-for-you/right-to-manage.aspx http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk/what-our-customers-say/right-to-manage.aspx http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk/ - But has this canonical redirect feature worked? The reason i doubt it is i notice when i enter a page http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk/what-our-customers-say/right-to-manage.aspx which has the below code in place: rell="canonical" href="http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk/About/right-to-manage.aspx/" /> It does not jump to http://www.goldsboroughestates.co.uk/about/right-to-manage.aspx So my question is... "is the canonical redirect working or not & waht is the best way / tool for diagnosing a canonical error" Grazie tanto,
Technical SEO | | Nightwing
David0 -
Webmaster woes - should I re-direct or re-structure?
Hey guys, I'll get straight to the point - a small (growing) website I'm working on has a number links pointing to it from totally irrelevant sites (66, to be precise). These were built by an SEO company prior to me working on the site, and lead to an over-optimisation penalty for one keyword. This number doesn't sound large, but proportionally (to all other links), it is. It didn't used to be, but a lot of the links coming in have now 'died', and the domains they came from are now just parked. Anyway, I have managed to contact pretty much all the webmasters, and 27 of these links have been removed. Unfortunately - as I'm sure many people know all too well - a good handful of the contacted webmasters haven't replied, and the bad links still remain on their websites (either in-content or on links pages). I have decided to 'refresh' the website with some new (and better) content - providing much more information and a valuable resource. My question is - what should I do? Should I just replace the content on the existing pages (slightly altering the URL structure to match the topic more) and 301 the old URLs to the new ones? Or should I delete the pages and create new ones - thus making sure this particular section of the site isn't affected by any bad in-bound links? I'm more inclined to opt for the latter option, and 'start fresh' with the pages - so I know I've got total control over them, but wanted to get the opinion of the community before I made a decision. Thanks in advance for your responses! Nick
Technical SEO | | Danapollo0 -
We're working on a site that is a beer company. Because it is required to have an age verification page, how should we best redirect the bots (useragents) to the actual homepage (thus skipping ahead of the age verification without allowing all browsers)?
This question is about useragents and alcohol sites that have an age verification screen upon landing on the site.
Technical SEO | | OveritMedia0 -
Is it possibly to use anything besides a 302 re-direct when your doing a re-direct for someone to login?
Hopefully this makes sense. So I am working on a site that uses a 302 re-direct for logins. As in it goes from a profile page to the login via a re-direct, most of the time I see sites use this as a meta refresh, but in this case I wasn't sure. Obviously when I run a crawl diagnostic I'm getting a lot of errors as in over 100. Now I know there is no link juice with this, but I was just wondering what other people thought on using 302's for logins? Thanks
Technical SEO | | kateG12980 -
Re-direct issues
Forgive me for the novice question. But I was recently looking at open site explorer and was checking out my site www.visualawards.com , I know we have a re-direct to www.visualawards.com/home.php . After checking both URL's, I found that I have links pointing to both. Is this bad, am I diluting the links? If yes, which one should I point the future ones to, and is there anyway to recover the current links already? Thanks again for your help!!!
Technical SEO | | RENDEV0