Is link disavow becoming a necessary defensive strategy?
-
We have a large site which attracts a massive amount of link spam on a continual basis. I'm talking thousands of links every day. The reason we get so much spam linking to us is that we are an authority site in a highly spammed vertical.
So, to avoid falling foul of Penguin are we fast coming to a point where sites have to constantly monitor their link profiles and disavow anything that looks remotely dodgy?
-
Thanks David, some interesting comments on those posts. Normal, I would not bother with disavowing but in this particular instance the volume is at a level to cause serious concern.
-
Loss of rankings/traffic = Yes for penguin 1.0
GWT Warning = No -
Hi Jan,
I posted a similar question just the other day (http://moz.com/community/q/thoughts-on-proactive-link-disavow)
Sheldon commented on that question with a link to an interesting G+ Hangout where they touched on it slightly. You might want to check that out.
I also posted the question on G+ and got a number of replies which may be interesting to checkout:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/112470203895742795102/posts/gAXXxDWMLNS
Like most things SEO, there are people on both sides of the fence. One side suggessts that you don't want touch the disavow tool unless you get a warning email (or penalty) from Googs. The other side are all for regularly, proactively disavowing junk. You may need to take all the available info into consideration and make your own judgement call.
Hope this helps.
-
Did you notice a loss of ranks/traffic? Did you get a warning message in Google Webmaster Tools for "unnatural links"? As an "authority site", the answer is probably "no". No need to use the disavow tool in my opinion.
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
-
Does adding more outgoing links on a high PA page decrease the juice passed to previous links?
Hi, I'm not sure how PA DA exactly works when the goal is to create backlinks to your site in order to have the most impact on passing PA DA juice (if there is such a thing) to ones money site. For example let's say you have a blog and the PA is 40 DA is 30. Let's say I create a backlink pointing to my site on the homepage of this blog, in which I desire better rankings for, and the links I created are only 1-3 outgoing links on this post which is again on the homepage. Then say in a months time, I want to add another post on the homepage (so the 40 PA and 30 DA stays the same) creating a backlink to one of my other money sites. Does adding this second round of backlinks result in sending less juice to the first? This is what I want to know. Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | z8YX9F800 -
Disavowing a .edu
I have a backlink that I found from http://onucdm.onu.edu/mt/hmlref/2010/10/see_below.html . . . it is a nofollow, so it doesn't seem to be doing much harm. But this is obviously spam. It is from a .edu, so I'm not sure what I should do. Think it's harming my site at all? In general, how do you determine what to disavow?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KevinViner0 -
Unpaid Followed Links & Canonical Links from Syndicated Content
I have a user of our syndicated content linking to our detailed source content. The content is being used across a set of related sites and driving good quality traffic. The issue is how they link and what it looks like. We have tens of thousands of new links showing up from more than a dozen domains, hundreds of sub-domains, but all coming from the same IP. The growth rate is exponential. The implementation was supposed to have canonical tags so Google could properly interpret the owner and not have duplicate syndicated content potentially outranking the source. The canonical are links are missing and the links to us are followed. While the links are not paid for, it looks bad to me. I have asked the vendor to no-follow the links and implement the agreed upon canonical tag. We have no warnings from Google, but I want to head that off and do the right thing. Is this the right approach? What would do and what would you you do while waiting on the site owner to make the fixes to reduce the possibility of penguin/google concerns? Blair
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BlairKuhnen0 -
Internal Links not being Identified on OSE
Greetings Mozzers, When ever I check my home page on OSE it says I have a total of 5 internal links. Obviously this is WAY off. I've used all relative links, if I were to removed all relative and make them absolute, would there be a better chance of OSE identifying them instead of losing that juice? I think this is huge to resolve as when I compare my site to competitors, almost all factors are in our favor except this huge gap of only 5 internal links. I'm using Drupal CMS. For example, Drupal normally outputs internal links as "/about" and "/about/team" in the menus. If we changed it to "https://monsterweb.net/about", and "https://monsterweb.net/about/team", would that make a difference? Thanks for all the advice and clarification on this matter.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MonsterWeb280 -
Can links indexed by google "link:" be bad? or this is like a good example by google
Can links indexed by google "link:" be bad? Or this is like a good example shown by google. We are cleaning our links from Penguin and dont know what to do with these ones. Some of them does not look quality.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bele0 -
Competing with Spammy Links
One of my client's leading competitors is well stacked in terms of rank/authority. PA: 61, DA: 53. However, in OSE I estimate that +/- of all links on the first page are from sites such as "http://www.shopp011.freedownloadhub.com/Link-Exchange/browse.php?id=17", "http://www.shopp002.freedownloadhub.com/Link-Exchange/browse.php?id=17", "http://www.shopp029.freedownloadhub.com/Link-Exchange/browse.php?id=17". Personally, I would consider this to be a little spammy. However, I admit that I could be wrong. What's the best approach when trying to take on a competitor like this? Wait it out and tell my client to keep blogging/selling as per the schedule until Google pics up on these links?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ShippingContainer0 -
Should I link my similar sites together?
Hi I currently have two sites within exactly the same market. I've just purchased a third website from someone. Should I link these sites together? (i.e. in the page header should I cross link them or point two of them to the third?) If I do this will it harm them if they are on the same C-Class IP blocks? Is using private domains and different hosting companies considered dodgey in any way? Basically I'm a big wimp and don't want to do anything potentially that might potentially hurt my rankings;)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Blendfish0 -
Big Site Wide Link
Hi Guys, I've noticed that Google is starting to de-value site-wide links... Our previous SEO agency sourced us a site wide link on a big website and at the moment within Google Webmaster Tools its showing 749,726 links from this 1 source. Do you think this is too many? Could this be being flagged by Google? Here is the site: http://tinyurl.com/7bttw3b Cheers, Scott
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ScottBaxterWW0
