A client/Spam penalty issue
-
Wondering if I could pick the brains of those with more wisdom than me...
Firstly, sorry but unable to give the client's url on this topic. I know that will not help with people giving answers but the client would prefer it if this thread etc didn't appear when people type their name in google.
Right, to cut a long story short..gained a new client a few months back, did the usual things when starting the project of reviewing the backlinks using OSE and Majestic. There were a few iffy links but got most of those removed. In the last couple of months have been building backlinks via guest blogging and using bloggerlinkup and myblogguest (and some industry specific directories found using linkprospector tool). All way going well, the client were getting about 2.5k hits a day, on about 13k impressions. Then came the last Google update. The client were hit, but not massively. Seemed to drop from top 3 for a lot of keywords to average position of 5-8, so still first page. The traffic went down after this. All the sites which replaced the client were the big name brands in the niche (home improvement, sites such as BandQ, Homebase, for the fellow UK'ers). This was annoying but understandable.
However, on 27th June. We got the following message in WMT - Google has detected a pattern of artificial or unnatural links pointing to your site. Buying links or participating in link schemes in order to manipulate PageRank are violations of Google's Webmaster Guidelines.
As a result, Google has applied a manual spam action to xxxx.co.uk/. There may be other actions on your site or parts of your site.This was a shock to say the least. A few days later the traffic on the site went down more and the impressions dropped to about 10k a day (oddly the rankings seem to be where they were after the Google update so perhaps a delayed message).
To get back up to date....after digging around more it appears there are a lot of SENUKE type links to the site - links on poor wiki sites,a lot of blog commenting links, mostly from irrelevant sites, i enclose a couple of examples below. I have broken the links so they don't get any link benefit from this site. They are all safe for work
http:// jonnyhetherington. com/2012/02/i-need-a-new-bbq/?replytocom=984
http:// www.acgworld. cn/archives/529/comment-page-3
In addition to this there is a lot of forum spam, links from porn sites and links from sites with Malware warnings. To be honest, it is almost perfect negative seo!!
I contacted several of the sites in question (about 450) and requested they remove the links, the vast majority of the sites have no contact on them so I cannot get the links removed. I did a disavow on these links and then a reconsideration request but was told that this is unsuccessful as the site still was being naughty.
Given that I can neither remove the links myself or get Google to ignore them, my options for lifting this penalty are limited.
What would be the course of action others would take, please.
Thanks and sorry for overally long post
-
Thanks for the replies everyone, now comes the fun part when I have to crack on and work way through 48,000 backlinks!
-
Yeh, tbh, you don't need to worry too much about nofollow links. The only thing that I would do is check through some of the nofollow links to see if they are all blog comments that have been done with an automated system. If this is the case then there could be duplicate content issues that are leaving a footprint back to your site (i.e. within the spun comment). This isn't a major concern but worth a little look - but as a general rule, you don't need to worry.
Matt
-
I agree with that Carl. It's one thing if your worried that Google might penalize you, maybe you don't worry about the nofollows. However, once Google has already placed a manual penalty on the site, it's all about showing Google that your not trying to game their system and you're working hard to correct the situation. A bunch of links on spammy sites will still look bad to a reviewer even if they are nofollow. I'd try to get them removed as well...though I may not put as high a priority on them.
-Kurt
-
Thanks for the replies everyone, they are most welcome.
If I could trouble you to one sub question before I mark this as solved. When cleaning up a dodgy backlinks profile, what is the general view on no follow links? Going through the client links and they seem to have a fair few no follow links from generic directories. Even though they shouldn't be counting toward a site ranking, I have been asking people to remove these too. My view is that if I remove all the bad links, regardless of follow situation, that will show Google that I know what is right and what is wrong re the site.
Thanks, Carl
-
Yeah, Google definitely wants to see that you've put some effort into removing the links and that you aren't doing it anymore. It's also not uncommon for it to take several requests and several months.
-
No, sorry I may have worded myself poorly...the client used an seo agency until a couple of months back, it seems although a lot of the spam links were posted between Dec and Feb they are only now impacting on the site. When I referred to negative seo, I more meant it as a joke that the links look like the perfect example of a negative seo campaign. Found some forum spam earlier on Arsenal FC forum and a forum about psychological issues faced by transgender people. Both of these sites seemed fine sites in their own right but one would have to question their value when linking to a door handle website!!
The initial (and thus far, only) request was a very basic one to say we have received this penalty, we hired a poor seo company to look at our site and it seems they spammed our domain. I told them I had disavowed several hundred domains but I think it failed owning to the lack of proof of manual work, so, as suggested by Matthew (above) I will include a document this time to show who we contacted, when, the reply and the current link status
-
Yeh, I would recommend using Buzzstream for the data gathering, it saves a heap load of time - I also outsource it to freelancers on oDesk - you can do this for a very l;ow budget and just speeds the whole process up.
With the Link Detox tool, importing all of your other link data is vtial towards getting a good reflection of the links. Good luck
If you get really stuck, email me (my email is on my Moz profile) and I'll help you out more where I can.
Matt
-
In your request to Google, did you explain that you were not building these links and that it appears to be someone performing negative SEO on your client?
-Kurt Steinbrueck
OurChurch.Com -
Matthew,
Many thanks for the detailed reply. Shortly ago I used the linkdetox tool, I didn't realise you can upload files to it so used their built in bad link identifier. It has given me about 1800 bad links which am working though. Helpfully a few of them are blogger sites and have no contact!! Am managing to contact about 30% so far so that's better than nothing.
I have read about using buzzstream.com to try and pull the contact information on the other domains, I will employ this once I have finished going through the list. So far I have documented the urls and contact times in a spreadsheet. I must admit I didn't know you could link to a Google doc in the reconsideration so the spreadsheet I am working through will provide a good start, especially if the removed column starts to fill up!!
Thanks again
-
Hi Carl,
First step is to identify all of the links. Pull off the full backlink data from OSE, Majestic SEO, Ahrefs and WMT. Compile all of them into one master spreadsheet and then upload these to the Link Detox Tool (http://www.linkdetox.com/). This will give you a starting point for finding all of the toxic links - bare in mind that this is just a guide and you will still need to go over the link manually.
Start gathering webmaster details and record EVERYTHING in a Google Docs spreadsheet. Record the webmasters' contact details, URL, date you contacted them, the date of the response, any action taken, etc. Spend a good month on link removal to get as many removed manually as possible.
Once this stage is complete you will need to Disavow the rest of the links. Be careful here not to Disavow genuine good links. When it comes to the likes of SENuke links, you will want to Disavow them on domain level, i.e:
domain:jonnyhetherington. com
After you have submitted a Disavow, submit a reconsideration request and let Google know all of the bad links that were pointing to the site, why they were there and what you have done to rectify it - be explicit. Also, link to the Google Docs spreadsheet with all the details in.
If you get a negative response back then dig a little deeper with the links to Disavow - most reconsideration requests get knocked back the first time but ignore those that say 'you can't recover', because you can. Just make sure that your client understands the implications of everything. They will have further dips in rankings and traffic before it gets better.
Hope this gives you a good starting point.
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
-
Inbound links to internal search with pharma spam anchor text. Negative seo attack
Suddenly in October I had a spike on inbound links from forums and spams sites. Each one had setup hundreds of links. The links goes to WordPress internal search. Example: mysite.com/es/?s=⚄
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Arlinaite470 -
How good/bad the exit intent pop-ups? What is Google's perspective?
Hi all, We have launched the exit intent pop-ups on our website where a pop-up will appear when the visitor is about to leave the website. This will trigger when the mouse is moved to the top window section; as an attempt by the visitor to close the window. We see a slight ranking drop post this pop-up launch. As the pop-up is appearing just before someone leaves the website; does this making Google to see as if the user left because of the pop-up and penalizing us? What is your thoughts and suggestions on this? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | vtmoz1 -
Scraping Website and Using Our Clients Info
One of our clients on Moz has noticed that another website has been scraping their website and pulling lots of their content without permission. We would like to notify Google about this company but are not sure if that is the right remedy to correct the problem. They appear in search results on Google using the client's name so they seem to be use page titles etc with the client's name in them. Several of the SERP links link to their own website but it pulls in our client's web page. Was hoping anyone could perhaps provide some additional options on how to attack this problem?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | InTouchMK0 -
Site Footer Links Used for Keyword Spam
I was on the phone with a proposed web relaunch firm for one of my clients listening to them talk about their deep SEO knowledge. I cannot believe that this wouldn’t be considered black-hat or at least very Spammy in which case a client could be in trouble. On this vendor’s site I notice that they stack the footer site map with about 50 links that are basically keywords they are trying to rank for. But here’s the kicker shown by way of example from one of the themes in the footer: 9 footer links:
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | RosemaryB
Top PR Firms
Best PR Firms
Leading PR Firms
CyberSecurity PR Firms
Cyber Security PR Firms
Technology PR Firms
PR Firm
Government PR Firms
Public Sector PR Firms Each link goes to a unique URL that is basically a knock-off of the homepage with a few words or at the most one sentences swapped out to include this footer link keyword phrase, sometimes there is a different title attribute but generally they are a close match to each other. The canonical for each page links back to itself. I simply can’t believe Google doesn’t consider this Spammy. Interested in your view.
Rosemary0 -
How Do You Know or Find Out if You've been hit by a Google Penalty?
Hi Moz Community, How do you find out if you have been hit with a Google Penalty? Thanks, Gary
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | gdavey0 -
Please Correct This on-site SEO strategy w/ respect to all the updates
Hello, I believe my on-site SEO process that I used to use a couple of years ago is not working well anymore for a couple of my sites, including this one. I'll tell you the old strategy as well as my new strategy and I'm wondering if you can give me pointers that will help us rank where we should rank with our PA and DA instead of getting moved down because of what could be our old on-site SEO. OLD ON-SITE SEO STRATEGY: Title tags usually match the page, but title tags occasionally on this site don't match the pages exactly. There's not many of them, but they do still exist in a couple of places. Title tags are either 1. A phrase describing the page 2. Keywords 1, Keyword 2 3. Keyword 1 | Keyword 2 4. Keywords 1, Keyword 2, branding The keywords are in the h1 and h2 of each main page, at the very top of the page. The h1 and h2 do not exactly copy the title tag, but are a longer phrase with the keywords appearing in their exact word order or in word variations. See this page for an example. Keywords occur 3-4 times in the body of the main pages (the pages with a menu link). Right now some of the pages have the exact phrases 3 or 4 times and no variation. meta description tags have exact keyword phrases once per keyword. Meta description tag are a short paragraph describing the page. No meta keyword tags, but a couple haven't been deleted yet. FUTURE ON-SITE SEO STRATEGY: I'm going to change all of the page titles to make sure they match the content they're on exactly. If the title is a phrase describing a page, I'm going to make sure a variation of that phrase occurs at least three times in the content, and once in the meta description tag. Title tags will be either a. Short phrase exactly matching page b. Keyword 1, Keyword 2 | branding c. Keyword 1 | branding 2. I'm thinking about taking out the H1 and H2 and replacing them with one tag that is a phrase describing the page that I'll sometimes put the keyword phrase in, only a variation in it and not the exact keyword phrase - unless it just makes total sense to use the keyword phrase exactly. **I'm thinking of only using the keyword phrase in it's exact words once on the page unless it occurs more naturally, and to include the keyword phrase in word variations two more times. So once (in non-exact word order) in the at the top, once (exact word order) in the text, and two more times (varied word orders) somewhere in the text. All this will be different if the keywords show up naturally in the text. **3. I'll delete all meta keyword tags, and still use exact keyword phrases in meta description tag, though I'll change the meta description tags to always very closely match what the page is about. Do you think my new strategy will make a difference? Your thoughts on any of this?****
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobGW0 -
Being penalized for unnatural links, determining the issue, and fixing the problem. What to do?
Hi all, A client has been penalised, having received the message in Google Webmasters last week, along with two more yesterday. It seems the penalty is for something specific: “As a result, for this specific incident we are taking very targeted action on the unnatural links instead of your site as a whole“. This is the first time I've had to deal with this so I'll be a bit layman about it The penalty, firstly, seems to be for the old domain, from which there is a re-direct to the current one. This redirect has been in place since Feb 2012 (no link building has been done for the old domain since then). In Webmasters, I have the old and new domains set up separately and the messages are only coming for the old (but affecting the new, obviously). I need to determine if it’s the old or new URL I’m being hit for, or would that even matter? Some questionable links I can see in WM: There is an affiliate for whom WM is showing 154,000 links (all followed) from their individual products listings to the client’s site (as a related product) but they’re linking to the new domain if that matters. Could this affiliate be an issue? There is also Updowner, which has added 2000+ links unbeknownst to me but apparently they are discounted by Google. I see a ton of recent directory submissions - right up until last week - that I am not responsible for. Could that be intentional spam targeting? I did also use a 3<sup>rd</sup> party link building company for Feb, March and April who ‘manually’ submitted the new domain to directories and social bookmarking sites. Could this be issue? For what kind of time-scale are penalties usually imposed - how far back (or how recently) are they penalising for? Ranking were going really well until this happened last Thursday. Will directories with non-followed links effect us negatively - one such one has over 2000 links. What is the most conclusive way to determine which are the poor, penalty-incurring links pointing to us? I know I now have to contact all the dodgy directories the site is now listed on to get links removed, but any and all advice on how to rectify this, along with determining what had gone wrong, will be most appreciated. Cheers, David
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Martin_S0 -
Mobile SEO best practices : Should my mobile website be located at m.domain.com or domain.com/mobile?
I'd like to know if there's any difference between using m.domain.com/pages or domain.com/mobile/pages for a mobile website? Which one is better? Why? Does Google treat the two differently? As you can see, I'm new to this! This is my first time working on a mobile website, so any links/resources would be highly appreciated. Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | GroupeDSI0