Link Research Tools
-
Is anyone else here a user of Link Research Tools?
I recently completed a Link Detox for my sites. However, it is saying that links from high quality press release sites are deadly and should be removed. They are also saying the same about the links from the Yellow Pages.
Obviously I know these tools are automated, but does anyone know why they are showing these links as 'deadly' and should be removed?
I have tried contacting LRT about this issue but am yet to receive a reply.
-
I think must be used just like a tool to get important data, but you must review each link one by one. I have recently had a penalty from google, and used link detox. It was nice to get the data and other information, like sitewide links, same ip c-block and so on, but, you need to check each one and make a decistion about it.
Use the "Ultimate guide to Google Penalty removal" that you can find here in Moz to decide which links are good for you and which are bad.http://moz.com/blog/ultimate-guide-to-google-penalty-removal
it was useful for me.
I am still involve trying to remove my penalty. The first Reconsideration Request was send mostly with Link Detox information, and it didn't work, we are now working in a more manual and human perspective.Hope you get rid of that penalty!!
-
Its' a personal choice yes Google doesn't like directories but they can still work especially if they are relevant. Changing to a no follow would fix any issue but knowing the cost behind it for me I'd like some bang for my buck and keep it follow if its relevant and working for you. As I said though everyone is different. the bigger directories like yell/yahoo etc. are normally fine in Google's eyes. Ill let you make our own mind up
best of luck
-
Thanks for your response.
For example, the link we have on Yell is saying that it is a 'Deadly Risk' because it looks 'highly unnatural'. From reviewing all our links, i think that LRT classifies all links from directories as 'Deadly'. However, we receive a lot of enquiries from Yell, so it would be silly to remove it. Perhaps it should be changed to a nofollow?
-
Link detox has a column (I think its rules) that tells you why its been marked up (e.g algorithm picked it up, holding page etc.) it can suffer from more than one but as you mentioned its automated and shouldn't be taken seriously at first glance.
Link detox can be great for helping you but you will still want to go through and manually look at the links as they wont all be "toxic" and it even mentioned on exporting that the links may not all be harmful so don't worry too much.
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
-
Will noindex pages still get link equity?
We think we get link equity from some large travel domains to white label versions of our main website. These pages are noindex because they're the same URLs and content as our main B2C website and have canonicals to the pages we want indexed. Question is, is there REALLY link equity to pages on our domain which have "noindex,nofollow" on them? Secondly we're looking to put all these white label pages on a separate structure, to better protect our main indexed pages from duplicate content risks. The best bet would be to put them on a sub folder rather than a subdomain, yes? That way, even though the pages are still noindex, we'd get link equity from these big domains to www.ourdomain.com/subfolder where we wouldn't to subdomain.ourdomain.com? Thank you!
Reporting & Analytics | | HTXSEO0 -
UTM Links Showing Up as Separate Pages in Google Analytics
Hey everyone, I was just looking at landing pages in Google Analytics, and in addition to just the URL of the landing page, the UTM links are being listed as separate pages. Is this normal? I anticipated seeing the landing page URL and then using the secondary dimension to see source/medium. If this isn't normal, what would I check next?
Reporting & Analytics | | rachelmeyer0 -
Page Name Tracking - Without UTM links
Hello, Our current site is fully html with no cms. We're moving to a newer version today with a typo 3 cms. My one worry is as follows; On some pages an internal link opens a jquery lightbox, inside the lightbox will be a video or download link. I cannot simply add a standard event url like I wanted to (utm_ link) as the pages are linked via the cms pointing to different pages, not the url's. We really need the following appearing in Analytics, whether its an event or landing page; The click of the light-box link The click of the video OR download link inside the lightbox. I would really, really appreciate any help on this as the new website is going live today, regardless whether this has been resolved. Thank you very much in advance of any replies. twY8s8B.jpg
Reporting & Analytics | | Whittie0 -
Any issues with Google impressions dropping in Webmaster Tools?
I'm seeing a drop in impressions across all my websites that are hosted at a certain location. Just wanted to make sure that it is not some reporting issue that others are seeing.
Reporting & Analytics | | tdawson090 -
Google Analytics VS target="_blank" internal links: How much wrong is it?
I am working on an e-commerce website, and our CEO is sure that having target="_blank" in internal search result is boosting the conversion (not sure, but it's not an issue at the moment). The problem is that Google Analytics sees all URLs visited from search results as entrances/direct visits, hence the Booking Funnel Tracking does not work as it was supposed to. Is there any way to recover the tracking? Or we shall get the rid of target="_blank" attribute?
Reporting & Analytics | | apartmentGin0 -
Schema Rich Snippet Markup tool is validating the markup but it says it isn't in Webmaster Tools.
All my Schema Rich Snippets are being validated in the webmaster tools Rich Snippet tester tool here http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets But when I go take a peek at the new tab in Webmaster tools when I'm signed into my analytics account it shows there are no active Markups on my site. Has anyone else been having this issue? If it says it's working in the Google tool from the link above should I even be worried if its not showing up when I'm signed into my analytics account? Thanks.
Reporting & Analytics | | DCochrane0 -
Do Google Analytics filters affect link building?
We recently made a few link wheels for specific product pages. We've been having great results with all of the wheels except for one. The one we are having issues with is the only link that we were using a Google Analytics filter on; it looks like this http://domain.com/page.htm?zSource=Specific Keyword%tracking My question is does Google ignore links that are obviously utilizing their analyitcs custom filters? We're doing some more testing to try to find out if it truly is the link or if the wheel is a bad one. There are so many things that could go wrong but with so many of our link wheels working well, I wonder if the filters are what is causing such results.
Reporting & Analytics | | MichealGooden0 -
Why are Seemingly Randomly Generated URLs Appearing as Errors in Google Webmaster Tools?
I've been confused by some URLs that are showing up as errors in our GWT account. They seem to just be randomly generated alphanumeric strings that Google is reporting as 404 errors. The pages do 404 because nothing ever existed there or was linked to. Here are some examples that are just off of our root domain: /JEzjLs2wBR0D6wILPy0RCkM/WFRnUK9JrDyRoVCnR8= /MevaBpcKoXnbHJpoTI5P42QPmQpjEPBlYffwY8Mc5I= /YAKM15iU846X/ymikGEPsdq 26PUoIYSwfb8 FBh34= I haven't been able to track down these character strings in any internet index or anywhere in our source code so I have no idea why Google is reporting them. We've been pretty vigilant lately about duplicate content and thin content issues and my concern is that there are an unspecified number of urls like this that Google thinks exist but don't really. Has anyone else seen GWT reporting errors like this for their site? Does anyone have any clue why Google would report them as errors?
Reporting & Analytics | | kimwetter0