Victim of Negative SEO - Can I Redirect the Attacked Page to an External Site?
-
My site has been a victim of Negative SEO. During the course of 3 weeks, I have received over 3000 new backlinks from 200 referring domains (based on Ahref report). All links are pointing to just 1 page (all other pages within the site are unaffected). I have already disavowed as many links as possible from Ahref report, but is that all I can do? What if I continue to receive bad backlinks?
I'm thinking of permanently redirecting the affected page to an external website (a dummy site), and hope that all the juice from the bad backlinks will be transferred to that site. Do you think this would be a good practice? I don't care much about keeping the affected page on my site, but I want to make sure the bad backlinks don't affect the entire site.
The bad backlinks started to come in around 3 weeks ago and the rankings haven't been affected yet. The backlinks are targeting one single keyword and are mostly comment backlinks and trackbacks.
Would appreciate any suggestions
Howard
-
First, don't freak out. What does the anchor text look like? Is it for a term you're trying to rank for on that page? Chances are actually pretty low that it's going to hurt you. Google has a few intent- and source-detection mechanisms built in that work relatively well.
If this is a high-value page that you're making a lot of money on or that is ranking well, don't move it and don't 410 or 404 it. It's Google's job to filter through spam and spam attacks, and they do an OK job. I don't think it's totally wrong to disavow the links, but my experience is that people generally over-react.
http://www.seroundtable.com/google-bad-links-disavow-17195.html
TL;DR this is all good advice, but don't drop or redirect a high-value page.
-
Thanks for all the responses!
-
410 / GONE
“Indicates that the resource requested is no longer available and will not be available again. This should be used when a resource has been intentionally removed and the resource should be purged. Upon receiving a 410 status code, the client should not request the resource again in the future. Clients such as search engines should remove the resource from their indices. Most use cases do not require clients and search engines to purge the resource, and a "404 Not Found" may be used instead.“ — wikipedia
“The requested resource is no longer available at the server and no forwarding address is known. This condition is expected to be considered permanent. Clients with link editing capabilities SHOULD delete references to the Request-URI after user approval. If the server does not know, or has no facility to determine, whether or not the condition is permanent, the status code 404 (Not Found) SHOULD be used instead. This response is cacheable unless indicated otherwise.
The 410 response is primarily intended to assist the task of web maintenance by notifying the recipient that the resource is intentionally unavailable and that the server owners desire that remote links to that resource be removed. Such an event is common for limited-time, promotional services and for resources belonging to individuals no longer working at the server's site. It is not necessary to mark all permanently unavailable resources as "gone" or to keep the mark for any length of time -- that is left to the discretion of the server owner.“ — ietf410 / CODE REFERENCE(S)Rails HTTP Status Symbol :gonehttp://httpstatus.es/410
-
A few options:
1. As david said make the page a 401 page.
2. Try to remove the links on scale, review why they are comming in i.e same IP address, same who is, request sites to remove them, if they don't remove add them to the disavow.
I wouldn't 301 pages this will just transfer the problem to a new websites, ive seen numerous cases where domains have been hit because of cross site 301's.
-
Return a 410 http status (page permanently gone, disregard links) on that URL, move the content to a new URL.
-
Are you positive that it wasn't anything you bought as a service, right?
Although Google's Matt Cutts claims that Negative SEO exists but it would take a lot of work to achieve and you could actually benefit the target instead, it has been proven over and over that it isn't that hard, see here: http://www.fulltraffic.net/blog/85062/is-negative-seo-becoming-a-mainstream-tactic-infographic/
As it is something you actually can't control, I would just go with trying to contact the owners of those pages where the links are and ask them politely to remove the link, as it will also help them too (usually the most affected side is the one selling the links, as there's no way to know who is buying them). Don't only go with an email, try social networks too, contact forms, etc.
But, considering that your rankings aren't affected, after contacting those Webmasters you shouldn't go as far as disavowing the links, you are not being penalized, you did the job on trying to remove the links (document your efforts!!), etc. IF, and only if you notice a ranking drop, an actual penalty, you should go ahead and disavow those links, and in case of a penalty, send a reconsideration request explaining them everything an showing the efforts you did to get rid of those links.
As Cutts told: it may actually benefit you...
Hope that helps!
-
Take the page the bad links are being sent to copy the content get rid of the old page make a new URL put your old pages content on a new URL. The 301 will hurt you.
If you want to try and find the person sending you the links use removeem.com
I hope I was of help,
thomas
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
-
Too many links pointing to our privacy policy page: Hurting our ranking efforts of main pages?
Hi community, As per the "Links" report from GSC, there are millions of pages pointing to our privacy policy page. We can expect high number of links to this page being ours an open source product. But these links are overtaking the count of links pointing to our homepage which are very artificial from few spammy or low quality sites. "Privacy policy" anchor text is also been the top anchor text. Our homepage ranking dropped and I suspect this is the culprit. Google might be considering this is the important page being linked on top with anchor text. Shall I Disavow these sites and will this makes Google stop counting links, and the anchor text coming from these sites as well? Suggestions please. Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | vtmoz0 -
PDF Sharing sites - scribd/dropbox/edocr/etc Cleaning Up SEO History
Howdy, Whilst in the process of cleaning up a new clients seo profile and have encountered a lot of techniques I am uncomfortable with and in my opinion should be removed. One technique I have not seen before is using a load of pdf sharing and video sites. The domains have high DA ratings, but to me the intention is highly questionable. The sites include: https://www.dropbox.com/s/tuxb8w1qowcm27i/Looking for boiler spares-geniune parts and consumables.pdf?dl=0 http://www.scribd.com/doc/241542076/Looking-for-Boiler-Spares-geniune-Parts-and-Consumables http://www.divshare.com/download/26207602-569 And so the list goes on for about 50 domains. Am I correct to be concerned here and what was the seo plan here? Thanks in advance. Andy Southall. (Marz Ventures)
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | MarzVentures0 -
Is it wrong to have the same page represented twice in the Nav?
Hi Mozzers, I have a client that have 3 pages represented twice in the Nav. There are not duplicates since they land with the same URL. It seems odd to have this situation but I guess it make sense for my client to have those represented twice since these pages could fall into multiple categories? Is it a bad practice for SEO or is it a waste to have those in the NAV? Should I require to eliminate the extras? Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Ideas-Money-Art0 -
Multiple Versions of Mobile Site
Hey Guys, We have recently finished the latest version of our mobile site which means currently we have 2 mobile sites. Depending on what device and Os will depend on which site you will be presented with.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | seekjobs
e.g.
iPhone 3 or 4 users on iOS4 will get version 1 of our mobile site
iPhone 5 users on iOS5 will get the new version (version 2) of our mobile site. Our old mobile site is currently indexed in Google and performing pretty well.
Since the launch of the second mobile site we have not see any major changes to our visibility in Google and so was curious My main concern here is duplicate content so I am curious can Google detect that we have 2 mobile site that we serve depending on device? And if Google can detect this, why has our sites not been penalized! Thanks, LW I know the first thing that comes to your mind is Duplicate content0 -
2 Questions about 301 Redirects
So I have a couple of questions about 301 redirects: Do Google penalties EVER pass through a 301? I've done 20+ domain 301s in the last year and have yet to see it happen, but the other day I read a an article (or maybe it was a QA post?) that suggested doing 302s to avoid transferring penalties. Has anyone seen any authoritative information regarding this? I 301'd a domain in February that another SEO firm had built a lot of spammy links and I began building contextual links for it at a very slow rate (like 10 or so a month). Within a month, my domain authority was a 26 on the new domain and my inbound links were non existent. By month 2, my links were 70k and domain authority was 34. By month 3, down to 25k inbound links and domain authority of 29, where it has settled for the last 3 months despite some really high quality links. My question (don't worry it's coming), is does anyone have any clue why my links shot up so quickly and then dropped? I'm assuming the 301 links kicked in and then only about 45% ended up 'sticking'?? Thanks in advance
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BrianJGomez0 -
Opinions sought on outbound Links page.
Hello Forum, I'm about the remove my outbound Links page at: http://www.pictureframe.com.au/---obs--picture-frames-links.html I think that Google could be assessing this page as a link scheme, ie: I-link-you-if-you-link me. I haven't received any messages from Google about this but I think the page may be devaluing my site. What do you guys~gals think? Thank you for any and all feedback Paul the Picture Framer
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Picframer0 -
Why is this site not being punished!?
I guess this is the usual reaction to a seeing a domain rank above your own website is "They must be cheating"! However... in this case I feel more than justified. The website is aircon247.com they rank top 3 in the UK for "air conditioning" and other quite generic terms in the industry. I'm interested to know your thoughts and what (if any) action should be taken. Here are many of the links that I think contravene the Google Guidelines : Spammy Article Submissions with Inorganic Anchor Text: http://www.furniturearcade.com/decorative-furniture/decorative-accessories-lamps/ http://www.sys-con.com/node/2308271 http://www.bucksherald.co.uk/imagine-a-world-without-air-conditioning-units-7-112555 http://www.retail-digital.com/press_releases/appliances/diy-air-conditioning-installation-options http://www.livingwithwhite.com/three-fun-uses-for-antique-grates-and-floor-registers/ http://www.mcrjk2008.com/2009/04/best-air-conditioning-ever.html http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/comfort-your-business-needs-1682737.htm http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/diy-air-conditioning-installation-options-1677015.htm http://www.housetohome.co.uk/topical-advice/531054/regulating-your-home-environment http://homeklondike.com/2011/01/10/country-style-bedroom-design-ideas/ http://professorshouse.com/Building-a-house/Plumbing-Heating/Articles/Energy-Efficient-Air-Conditioners/ http://www.greenscenedebate.com/2009/04/take-good-luck-at-air-conditioning.html#.URzEmh17L5w http://www.harlynn.com/2009/04/wanna-chill-out.html http://www.loveshaven.com/2009/04/we-are-all-so-excited-for-my-sisters.html http://asiwaspassing.com/2009/05/ Spammy Links in External Website Footers / Side Bars with Inorganic Anchor Text: http://www.w-int.com/ http://www.g-dir.com/home/gardening/ http://www.s-dir.com/ http://www.sefdir.org/popular-listings.html http://www.ribcast.com/ http://rapidcoolsite.com/Home.html http://www.index-guide.org/ http://e-dir.org/ http://www.singaporerealestate.info/blog/?s=%27the+solitaire+call%27 http://www.onlinepureherbs.com/acidity.htm http://erostours.com/cheap-flights-Chicago.html http://www.search-way.com/ http://koolergazi.persianblog.ir/ Blog Spam Inorganic Anchor Text: http://edcel.net/2009/05/ http://www.bluehatseo.com/quick-answers-1-link-building/ Spammy (Link exchange etc.) Directories: http://ireland.accommodationforstudents.com/info/reciprocal_links_ad.asp http://baliscript.net/barter-links.php http://www.abacushosting.ca/linx.php http://www.whelphelper.com/links.php http://www.spectramedi.com/links_shopping.htm https://www.midwayautosupply.com/linkexchange.aspx? http://artsellart.com/links.html http://www.linkalizer.com/directory/39-1/ http://dogdir.com/region/NA.php http://www.easyezinearticles.com/ezineresources/Outsourcing.htm http://www.patchhomeinspections.com/Links.html http://autoharpusa.com/index.html?p=10 http://www.baliscript.net/webdesign-links.php
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | trickshotric0 -
Use of 301 redirects
Scenario Dynamic page produces great results for the user but produces a long very un-user and un-search friendly URL http://www.OURSITE.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=loving&x=0&y=0#/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=lovingthebead&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Alovingthebead Solution 301 redirect in .htaccess Fantastic - works a treat BUT after redirect the original long ugly old URL appears in the location field Would really like this showing the new short user friendly short URL What am I doing wrong? Thank you all. CB
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | GeezerG0