Manual Spam Action Revoked... Finally!
-
Just got this:
Dear site owner or webmaster of http://www.
We received a request from a site owner to reconsider http://www. for compliance with Google's Webmaster Guidelines.
Previously the webspam team had taken manual action on your site because we believed it violated ourquality guidelines. After reviewing your reconsideration request, we have revoked this manual action. It may take some time before our indexing and ranking systems are updated to reflect the new status of your site.
Of course, there may be other issues with your site that could affect its ranking without a manual action by the webspam team. Google's computers determine the order of our search results using a series of formulas known as algorithms. We make hundreds of changes to our search algorithms each year, and we employ more than 200 different signals when ranking pages. As our algorithms change and as the web (including your site) changes, some fluctuation in ranking can happen as we make updates to present the best results to our users. If your site continues to have trouble in our search results, please see this article for help with diagnosing the issue.
Thank you for helping us to maintain the quality of our search results.
Sincerely,
Google Search Quality Team
-
Hi Stephane, I'm wondering if you've seen any rebound at all since the penalty was revoked back in May?
-
Well think of it: If you keep your old site, you'll have to clean it up first and then start building links again almost like it's a new site. And nothing guarantees that it will be ever successfull as it once was. Chances are, it will never be.
If you start a new website, you'll also have to build links again but you won't have to clean it up first. You'll also get to monitor your link building campaign so that you can keep your link profile clean.
So no matter if you keep your old website or build a new one, you'll have to build links and that will take the same amount of time.
My advice to you is to start building a new website and keep cleaning up the old one for a while but try to minimize the lost as much as possible. If the old site ever gets back on track 100% before the new one gains traction, just redirect the new site to the old one. If the new one gains traction and starts getting profitable, kill the old site or whatever but don't redirect it to the new one to avoid passing bad link juice.
I think it's best to play it safe.
-
Wow. These are very unfortunate news...!
Can you please PM me the old site.
I'm on the same dilemma... I got the approval but nothing happened.We already spent so much time on it that if in fact we had done what you suggest we could have been way better off. But it is an old site so we hope for the best.
I do know that I need to fix many other things but still...Thanks
-
To sum up things, the site has pretty much gone to hell since so I'm abandoning it.
Don't waste time an energy recovering from a penalty, it's faster (and more profitable) to build a new website from scratch.
-
Hi Stephane,
You are now 2.5 months over. Are you back up? Is it truly over?
On that note, how long did it take you from the penalization to the RR approved?
During the penalization, did you have pages de-indexed?
Thanks
-
Great work, I don't think you're so lucky, perhaps a bit but it appears you did what was necessary to clear your link profile many would shy from as it's laborious and difficult. But not impossible.
Excellent feedback from you, so many thanks. I've gotta go through the process for a client very shortly.
-
I should also add that when submitting the reconsideration requests, I explained everything that's been done, from the SEO services / softwares used to build the links to everything you did to clean it up.
I included the full list of back links in a Google Docs spreadsheet as well as the list of disavowed links. I also printed all the emails I sent in PDF format and uploaded that as well to Google Drive. I shared both documents and included them in the reconsideration request.
Don't forget: the Google team will not open documents from anywhere else than Google Drive.
-
It took me about 50 to 60 hours to go through approximately 6,800 links. What a f*cking pain.
Here's how I did it if ever it helps someone:
1. I gathered all the back links from the following sources:
- Google Webmaster Tools (Sample Links + Latest Links)
- Link Detox (http://www.linkresearchtools.com/)
- ahrefs.com: Make sure to include sitewide links and nofollow links too (you can't be too careful)
- opensiteexplorer.org
2. I merged all the backlinks into one single Excel spreadsheet and removed the duplicates.
3. I uploaded the backlink list in CSV format into Link Detox (http://www.linkresearchtools.com/). It verifies if the links are still there and gives you back lots of details about each link like text anchors and the destination url.
4. You will be able to export 3 reports from Link Detox: Healthy Links, Suspicious Links and Toxic Links. Merge all 3 in one single spreadsheet.
5. I identified the obvious links first by sorting the Link Detox spreadsheet by anchor text. You can easily spot the exact match anchors.
6. Next, sort the spreadsheet by destination URL. You know the URLs to the pages you've spammed
7. Finally go manually through all what's left. Have fun!
8. When you're done putting all the bad links in another spreadsheet, rerun the Link Detox report by uploading the full link list as well as the list of links to disavow. This will allow you to see what's left and if you forgot anything.
I identified about 1,500 bad links from nearly 1,000 unique domains and emailed each of them when possible (about 300 - 400 emails sent).
It took two reconsideration requests before the penalty was finally taken off. The first time, I only used the links found in GWT and Link Detox. The second time around, I used ahrefs.com and opensiteexplorer.org also. I found about 100 more links the second time.
-
How long did it take you to do this?
How many RR's did you submit as well?
-
Congrats Man. You are one the few lucky guys who has done this.
-
Feels good, doesn't it!
I have two reconsideration requests in the queue right now waiting for a response. I keep refreshing WMT all day long to see if "Message(1)" is going to appear.
Congrats!
-
Congratulations!
I am sure getting the manual penalty revoked involved some hard work. Keep us updated on how long it takes for your search performance to improve.
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
-
Having problems with spam score
Hi I am having problems with the spam score of my links. Although I have removed the "bad ones" and disavow them in many cases, it is still showing a bad score. My site is https://www.way2net.com/ Is there any way to improve this faster? Thanks!
Link Building | | way2netseo0 -
Does removing pages, so that they return 404, also remove any impact of spam links pointing to that page?
A site with numerous spam links pointing to an old forum. The forum is now removed so do I need any further action? thanks,
Link Building | | ElaineDesignLobby0 -
Spam links - what would you do?
Hello, A few months back our website was hacked which we noticed quickly and got fixed. However, there still is a lot of dodgy backlinks, linking to the spam pages. They come up in Webmaster Tools, Moz and SEM rush. According to the Moz Spam tool, a few of them have been given 7 flags which Moz suggests gives a 30% chance of being penalised by Google. The website has great rankings (position 1-3 in most targeted keywords) so I am scared of doing something that will harm the rankings, however I also aware that Google may do an update which could take these spam links into account. I have no experience of using the disavow tool but from reading up about it, it should only be used as a last resort. So my question is - what would you do?
Link Building | | N2Digital0 -
A website with a spam score of 5 is back linking to me. How important is to get that link removed?
There is a website that OSE has identified with a spam score of 5, it back links to me with a very specific key word. How important is it to have them remove those links?
Link Building | | absoauto0 -
Old Spammy Backlinks but No Manual Penalty...No Results
We have taken over a site in which the client had unfortunately hired an SEO consultant who bought bad comment spam links. Webmaster Tools does not show a manual penalty of any kind but clearly this was bad practice from the former "SEO" consultant. I believe we have a good structure of the completely new website we have built for the client but I am not sure of the best way to reduce any negative fallout from the previous actions. I've read conflicting information about submitting disavow report to Google for the comment spam links. In some cases, I have read that it would be irrelevant since there is not a manual penalty. I am fairly certain rankings are being negatively effected from this action and looking for the best way to neutralize the algorithmic penalty. Not sure if this helps or not but I use GWMT "Download Latest Links" and see that the soonest Google discovered one of these links is 4/4/2013. Most of the links were generated some time during 2012. How do you even begin to try to reach out and have comment spam manually removed...when most of the sites that allowed the comment spam to begin with are spam sites themselves?
Link Building | | bluelynxmarketing0 -
Manual penalty & long tail
Hi guys, one of our websites has received a partial manual penalty from Google, visible in our webmaster tools panel. That website was SEO-ed poorly via external agency, using very old-fashioned, spammy solutions. We have X keywords that are filtered (drops in rankings such as 2 -> 48), and X keywords that our website still ranks well for (stays top 3, etc). Question: after we remove all the traces of SEO implemented by previous SEO manager (so we remove some bad stuff from the web, and disavow the rest of bad stuff through webmaster tools), we expect drops in positions for keywords that were previously filtered (because not many links, if any, remains). How will that process affect our previously not-filtered main and long tail phrases? We wonder if there's a point in removing that manual penalty. Our website still receives solid portion of organic traffic, because Google didn't penalized all of our phrases supported by bad SEO. Any tips or suggestions as to what path should we take from here? Mind you, this is an e-commerce website. We fear that removing the penalty will result in removing most of the existing organic traffic, and our sales will suffer tremendously.
Link Building | | superseopl0 -
Concerned about quality of backlinks - should I take action?
I regularly work on websites to which previous SEOs have built questionable backlinks. This morning I've just been analysing some backlinks - found 40 odd were coming from 20 odd websites which all had the same gentleman as personal registrant, who happens to be the boss of an SEO company. The SEO company name is mentioned in registrant details too, and often on the websites in question (including weblinks from some of these 20 odd websites to the SEO company). I did note the IP addresses / hosting for these websites did vary though, as did the postal address of the individual in question, perhaps throwing Google off the scent a bit. I should add that these websites are virtually all tourism related/themed, with up to a few dozen backlinks per page - usually articles. It's very clear they are backlinking to keyphrases. Now, this kinda thing<a></a> sets the alarm bells ringing. Firstly, this looks like an infringement of Google Webmaster Guidelines. Secondly, it doesn't sound like a White Hat technique for building links! Am I correct? I guess it might be denied they are partner pages due to the quality of content, perhaps, which isn't as spammy as it might've been. However, I suggest these are at least paid links because there is no other clear way of getting content on these pages, as far as I can see.<a></a><a></a> Should I demand these backlinks are taken down? What level of risk is posed do you think? I don't want this website to suffer a Google penalty at some point, particularly not after I've started work on it. Thanks and I look forward to hearing from you.
Link Building | | McTaggart0 -
How to have an internal call to action with an anchor that employs the correct internal linking practices?
I wanted to put a call to action in my internal profiles, but I'm not able to get out of the classic "check out" and "learn more" links. Right now the best copy I've been able to come up with is: <nickname>is using StyleJam for his web design portfolio - check out the benefits </nickname> Where "check out the benefits" is a link to my home page. I wanted to understand first of all how important this is, and second what techniques you use for internal calls to action. TIA.
Link Building | | ngw0