Do you have to wait after disavowing before submitting a reconsideration request
-
Hi all
We have a link penalty at the moment it seems. I went through 40k links in various phases and have disavowed over a thousand domains that date back to old SEO work. I was barely able to have any links removed as the majority are on directories etc that no one looks after any more etc and / or which are spammy and scraped anyway.
According to link research tools link detox tool, we now have a very low risk profile (I loaded the disavowed links into the tool for it to take into consideration when assessing our profile). I then submitted a reconsideration request on the same day as loading the new disavowed file (on the 26th of April). However today (7th May) we got a message in webmaster central that says our link profile is still unnatural. Aaargh.
My question: is the disavow file taken into consideration when the reconsideration request is reviewed (ie is that information immediately available to the reviewer)? Or do we have to wait for the disavow file to flow through in the crawl stats? If so, how long do we have to wait?
I've checked a link that I disavowed last time and it's still showing up in the links that I pull down from Webmaster Central, and indeed links that I disavowed at the start of April are still showing up in the list of links that can be downloaded.
Any help gratefully received. I'm pulling my hair out here, trying to undo the dodgy work of a few random people many months ago!
Cheers,
Will
-
You seem to have a good handle on the issue but you might consider getting an experienced SEO in for at least a second opinion. We can only give very general help here on the Q&A, as we don't have access to your data
They do say to wait at least a few weeks for results
Cheers
S
-
Hi Stephen
I've been using the links downloaded from Webmaster (as directed to by Matt Cutts in one of his videos IIRC) plus also the data set from Link Research Tools. Is that insufficient? I've only got so many hours in the day as my day job is running this company...I figured taking the links that Google gave me would surely be enough...but these days who knows. G seems to want to make people jump through a lot of hoops...
-
Hey Marcus
Thanks for your input. Yeah, we have a lot of links but then we've been around for 7 years and weirdo scrapers and random replicants of DMOZ alone contribute a zillion links without us even having done anything. Not saying we didn't do link building back in the day (we did, just like everyone else, in what was at the time a white hat fashion but apparently no longer is) but we have had no permanent marketing team at all for the last two years as we've focused on some B2B parts of our business. So frustrating that bad links just kept growing and we're supposed to be responsible for them!
Anyway, as you say, will need to go in a bit harder I guess. eg just because a site is PR0, I didn't remove it before, as some random person with a no marks blog who used our birthday balloon picture on their blog didn't deserve to be disavowed as far as I thought. But, well, I can't take any chances now so will just have to bin anything under PR1 and take another look at links from themed websites (eg should I disavow other blogs that have added us to their blogroll unsolicited even if they're in our vertical? It's hard to tell. What about genuine flower directories? Who knows?).
What's really frustrating is that the whole message from Matt Cutts is "you really shouldn't use this tool" (ref disavow) as you could damage your site but 1. barely anyone takes links down when requested as far as I can tell and 2. given the amount of junk that's been pointed at our site that we're not responsible for (though we are are responsible for some), then I think the contention that very few people would need to use it is a bit optimistic and there's therefore a danger or people like me totally shooting themselves in the foot, given there are no clear rules on the grey areas I mention above.
PS understood that it's not some magic solution and we'll rank #1 for everything afterwards. I just want to get it cleared up and be able to get back to my day job. God knows how a smaller business than us would cope with something like this. Seems to me it pushes the advantage even further in the direction of bigger companies with the resources to manage a screw up like this.
Anyway, blah blah. Time to get the machete out.
-
In my experience, if you have this message again, you still have links they don't like. 35% of linking domains is not a great deal and as Stephen said, whilst Link Detox gives you a good starting place you really do have to audit these links in a brutal fashion.
You have 15000 external links from 2000 sites - that's a hell of a lot of links for a semi popular blog let alone a site that does not really publish any content that would attract links.
If you are holding onto links as you think they are 'ok' or because they 'don't look too bad' then you may need to get a whole lot more aggressive with what you remove.
Also, just because you remove the manual penalty, don't expect things to be amazing afterwards.
An alternative approach to finding the bad links and getting them removed is to identify the good ones and consider getting them repointed to a new URL and starting again with a rebrand / new URL. It can be easier to get a response from the good sites than it can be getting a response from the bad ones.
Failing that get a whole lot more aggressive with what you remove.
Hope that helps!
Marcus
-
How sure are you you have a full dataset of links? What did you use as you database for links to start cleaning from? (I would expect ahrefs, GWT, seomoz + majestic etc)
S
-
Well, I also went through all the links manually which was the world's most boring task, then followed up with a healthcheck. Gah.
We've disavowed about 35% of all linking domains now...
-
I doubt its a time thing, it's more likely that they still see dirty links that you have not disallowed
That's the problem with these jump one the bandwagon tools like Link detox et al - they give you a nice score but that doesn't mean anything
404ing burnt pages and starting again may be a much quicker process than messing around with link disavowal
How many domains were linking and how many domains did you disallow?
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
-
What should I do after a failed request for validation (error with noindex, nofollow) in new Google Search Console?
Hi guys, We have the following situation: After an error message in new google search console for a large amount of pages with noindex, nofollow tag, a validation is requested before the problem is fixed. (it's incredibly stupid decision taken before asking the SEO team for advice) Google starts the validation, crawls 9 URLs and changes the status to "Failed". All other URLs are still in "pending" status. The problem has been fixed for more than 10 days, but apparently Google doesn't crawl the pages and none of the URLs is back in the index. We tried pinging several pages and html sitemaps, but there is no result. Do you think we should request for re-validation or wait more time? It there something more we could do to speed up the process?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ParisChildress0 -
What should I include in disavow file and/or reconsideration request?
My client got a manual penalty notice. Need to submit a disavow file and reconsideration request which is new territory for me. The task of contacting/disavowing 100's of sites to remove 1000's of links is a bit overwhelming. Answers to any of these questions would be greatly appreciated. Search console is showing 100's of hacked websites pointing to the site. Many of the incoming links showing in search console are already gone. Should I include in the disavow file or is the disavow file only for links that persist? I have read that Google does not actually read the #remarks in the disavow file. Since its manual penalty should I include them anyway since it's possible that a human could look it over? If anyone who has submitted a reconsideration request for unnatural links can comment on their use or non use of #remarks and the result that would be very helpful. You can tell that Google wants an effort to be made that the site owners are contacted. What is the best way to document that? In the reconsideration request?: The disavow file? or both.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KentH0 -
Best sitemap generator that can automatically create and submit
I like screamingfrog but they don't automatically generate and submit to google. We use xml-sitemaps.org but they don't have all the functions and they crawl slow too. Can you recommend some good sitemap generator that is fast, with features and can automatically create and submit? Is inspyder good?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rbai0 -
I've submitted a disavow file in my www version account, should I submit one in my non-www version account as well?
My non-www version account is my preferred domain. Should I submit in both account? Or one account will take care of the disavow?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ChelseaP0 -
Uncontrollable Spammy Backlinks - Disavow or Not?
Hey Mozzers, I have ran a few different backlink reports, and I noticed that one of my sites has an incredible amount of spammy backlinks. These were not done by a prior SEO, they are simmply spammy links that were scraped and inserted on terrible sites, forums, directories, etc. 100% uncontrollable. The anchor text includes anything from the domain to "live sex" and "victoria's secret coupons". There are probably close to 700 or so of these backlinks from around 150-200 domains. I have read that one should contact the webmaster, and use disavow as a last resort, but I am not sure if that advice is for spammy link building techniques, which we have no history of doing. Is this normal? What is the best way to handle this? Is it likely that these are affecting this site's ranking at the moment? The number of spammy links drastically affects the ratio of quality backlinks to spammy backlinks. This is so frustrating...
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | evan890 -
Google Disavow Tool - Waste of Time
My humble opinion is that Google's disavow tool.... is a utter waste of your time! My site, http://goo.gl/pdsHs was penalized over a year ago after the SEO we hired used black hat techniques to increase ranking. Ironically, while having visibility, Google itself had become a customer. (I guess the site was pretty high quality, trust worthy and user friendly enough for Google employees to purchase from.) Soon enough the message about detecting unnatural links had shown up on the webmaster tools and as expected, our rankings sank and out of view. For a year we had contacted webmasters, asking them remove links pointing back to us. 90% didn't respond, the other 10% complied). Work on our site continued, adding high quality, highly relevant unique content.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Prime85
Rankings never recovered and neither did our traffic or business….. Earlier this month, we learned about Google’s "link disavow tool" and were excited! We had hoped that following the cleanup instruction, using the “link disavow tool”, we would get a chance at recovery!
We watched Matt Cutts’ video, read the various forums/blogs/topics online that were written about it, and then we felt comfortable enough to use it... We went through our backlink profile, determining which links were either spammy or seemed a result of black hat practices or the links added by a 3rd party possibly interested in our demise and added them to a .txt file. We submitted the file via the disavow tool and followed with another reconsideration request. The result came a couple of weeks later… the same cookie cutter email in the WMT suggesting that there are “unnatural links” to the site. Hope turned to disappointment and frustration. Looks like the big box companies will continue to populate the top 100 results of ANY search, the rest will help Google’s shareholders… If your site has gotten in the algorithm crosshairs, you have a better chance of recovering by changing your URL than messing around with this useless tool.0 -
Is it worth submitting a blog's RSS feed...
to as many RSS feed directories as possible? Or would this have a similar negative impact that you'd get from submitting a site to loads to "potentially spammy" site directories?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PeterAlexLeigh0 -
What is the average response time for Reconsideration request
I know that Google states 'several' weeks but just wondering if anybody has any experience with a Reconsideration request and if they got any type of reply and what their general experience was. thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BelfastSEO0