11 000 links from 2 blogs + Many bad links = Penguin 2.0\. What is the real cause?
-
Hello,
A website has :
1/ 8000 inbound links from 1 blog and 3000 from another one. They are clean and good blogs, all links are NOT marked as no-follow.
2/ Many bad links from directories that have been unindexed or penalized by Google
On the 22nd of May, the website got hurt by Penguin 2.0. The link profile contains many directories and articles.
The priority we had so far was unindexing the bad links, however shall we no-follow the blog links as well?
Thanks!
-
Sitewide links are not the ideal, even if their are good.
I suppose the links in the good blogs are from a blogroll in sidebar, and that location for a link may sound suspect.
Said that, I would maintain them at first, concentrate in cleaning the toxic links you have detected, do a reconsideration request (and eventually uploading a disavow).
Just in the case the penalization is not quit, then I will consider the idea of asking the blogs to move the link from a sitewide situation to an editorial one (maybe creating a page: "The site we like", which should not be just a list of links but also give an explication why the blogs like those sites.
That would be helpful also for the sites themselves, because they will get rid of any suspect of manipulative link building from their side.
-
Hello!
I'm assuming those blog links are sitewide links like in the header/footer/sidebar?
In which case the question is really, is it a natural link? It's not the fact that it's a sitewide link that's really the problem. You'd expect sitewide links in some situations, for example with group company websites that link back to the main group website and this is natural behaviour. It's more where you get links that just have no reason to be there, Like, 'Blogroll:' and then 5 random unrelated sites linked by their anchor text. If on the other hand you've earned a couple of links in a list of good related resources in the sidebar, these are unlikely to cause you any problems.
If they don't 'feel natural', I would definitely ask if they can be made no-follow or better still, ask if they could each just give you one nice in-content link
ED: apologies for repeating some of the above answers, I think we all posted at the same time!
-
I think you just need to ask the question - how "natural" is it to have 8000 or 3000 links from just 1 domain? And how natural is it that it takes up a large proportion of your link profile?
The answer is likely to be not very natural at all. And for that reason, you should remove/nofollow/disavow if you can. Incidentally, if the amount of links has been inflated by tagging/category issues on that blog, then your website is potentially being linked to by masses of duplicate content, which is even more of a problem.
All 8000 links might be contextual and earned, but I'm almost certain Google would not see it that way and that's contributing to your algorithmic penalty. I'd nofollow if you can or better yet have the links removed.
Hope this helps.
-
Why are there so many links from just 2 domains?
If they are sitewide, Google is not a fan of that unless they are nofollow, however why are some nofolow and others follow? Is that not a signal to Google in some way? Why would a site naturally have some nofollow and some dofollow links to your site?
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 Linking
Hello, I manage a company that owns a bunch of schools (20) websites. They would like to create on each website a page which shows their schools in all the locations. Will this be ok as far as white hat practices and inbound linking?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | brightvessel0 -
Link Building vs. Straight Earning Links Discussion
Hello, I'd like to start a discussion on link building outreach techniques vs. just building a good website with good 10X content. I don't like to receive unsolicited emails in my inbox, so why should the people in my industry? Also, I've seen plenty of evidence of 10X content soaring without link building outreach. But link building isn't dead of course, so can you tell me your personal experiences either way and the ethics of what you do? I especially want to hear if you've had luck with just building good websites and being successful based on the content itself, but an open discussion of either side is welcome. Leaning towards just building good websites and letting the Google algo do it's thing. Would love to hear your experiences either way. Thanks.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobGW3 -
Is there a paid link hierarchy?
It seems like the more I learn about my competition's links, the less I understand about the penalties associated with paid links. Martindale-hubbard (in my industry) basically sells links to every lawyer out there, but none of the websites with those links are penalized. I'm sure you all have services like that in your various industries. Granted, Martindale-hubbard is involved in the legal community and it's tied to Lexis Nexis, but any small amount of research would tell you that paid links are a part of their service. Why does this company (and companies that use them) not get penalized? Did the penguin update just go after companies that got links from really seedy, foreign companies with gambling/porn/medication link profiles? I keep reading on this forum and other places that paid links are bad, but it looks to me like there are fundamental differences in the penalties for paid links purchased from one company vs another. Is that the case or am I missing something? Thanks, Ruben
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | KempRugeLawGroup0 -
Bad link backs out of my control
I have a big concern with my website. Recently I have been combing through the back links that I have been able to find associated with my web domain. Almost half of the links- 52 links- are from kinder-host. They are from what looks like could be valid sources, like babies-r-is.com/kinder-host.com or babies.kinder-host.com/page/6 etc. but they are junk. Some of these links are from articles I've written that are ripped off and placed on these websites along with my links. Some of the sites I can't even find the link but its there somewhere. Another 40 of the links are from attracta.com and although I can tell I have links on there to my website as well, I don't even see the link on the page and it is not related to my website. It's another junk site. So, I have bad link backs and no control over it. My understanding is this is potentially very harmful to my website! What can I do about it?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | JAGA0 -
Strange Pingback/Blog Comment Links
On one of my sites I've noticed some strange links from Google Webmaster Tools recent links feature. They are pingbacks/blog comments but they are using keyword anchor text and linking to my site. I know we are not doing this. Should I be concerned about this possibly being negative SEO? Here's a sample (be careful, shady site)
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | eyeflow0 -
Would you get link from this blog?
I have an opportunity to place a guest blog on a site. The site has the following metrics: DA/PA: 24/36 Inbound links: 3K+ from 16 root domains Here is what makes me uneasy: The number of links from the same domain, suggesting sitewide or footer links When I look at the backlinks, there are links from sites like http://best-american-law-firms.info/, or http://www.luvbuds.info/. They sare blogroll links that are likely paid for. Would you get a link from this blog?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | inhouseseo0 -
Google-backed sites' link profiles
Curious what you SEO people think of the link profiles of these (high-ranking) Google-backed UK sites: http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains?site=www.startupdonut.co.uk http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains?site=www.lawdonut.co.uk http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains?site=www.marketingdonut.co.uk http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains?site=www.itdonut.co.uk http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains?site=www.taxdonut.co.uk Each site has between 40k and 50k inlinks counted in OSE. However, there are relatively few linking root domains in each case: 273 for marketingdonut 216 for startupdonut 90 for lawdonut 53 for itdonut 16 for taxdonut Is there something wrong with the OSE data here? Does this imply that the average root domain linking to the taxdonut site does so with 2857 links? The sites have no significant social media stats. The sites are heavily inter-linked. Also linked from the operating business, BHP Information Solutions (tagline "Gain access to SMEs"). Is this what Google would think of as a "natural" link profile? Interestingly, they've managed to secure links on quite a few UK local authority resources pages - generally being the only commercial website on those pages.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | seqal0 -
How Do You Determine If A Link Is Quality?
What tools and signals do you use to determine if a link is quality or not? How can you tell if a link is going to hurt your ranking?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | anchorwave0