First attempt at manual penalty removal fails - all example links provided by Google not in Majestic, GWT, Ahrefs, LinkDetox, or OSE.
-
Hello all,
I am trying to recover a site from a manual penalty. I already submitted once. Here's what we did. We took the link profile from webmaster tools, majestic seo, ahrefs, link detox, and ose. We manually looked at every link to exclude good links. Then used a tool to run the removal campaign. Submitted a disavow file and reconsideration request.
Google came back with a denial. When I looked at the three example links that Google provided, they were definitely spammy (forum profile and comment spam). But none of them were in any of the original csv downloads from GWT, Ahrefs, Majestic, OSE, or LinkDetox.
What can I do?
Thanks in advance for any help.
-
One of the example links provided isn't even in the index apparently.
I've had that happen to me before. I usually explain in my reconsideration request that this example is no longer in the index. But, I also try my best to see if I can find similar indexed links that I have not dealt with. Usually there are others there.
For your search, don't use the link: operator. Google's link operator does not work well. The rest of your search should work well, but if your keyword phrase is a popular one then you'll have to be more creative. Have they used the same username in profiles? That would be something to search for.
-
Okay, interesting. One of the example links provided isn't even in the index apparently. Also, I am trying the following search, but I think I am doing something wrong because I am getting zero results back.
inurl:member -site:clientsite.com + "keyword phrase" + link:clientsite.com
I am trying to find pages link to my client's site, that are not on my client's site, that have member in the url, that use keyword somewhere.
What am I doing wrong?
-
I find that this is really common for sites that have utilized low quality forum and spam comment links. Google will often come back with example links that are in the index but nowhere to be found in any of the backlink checkers. I usually find though that with some creative thinking you can find more of these links to try to remove and disavow.
Look for patterns in your forum links. For one of our clients, the forum links given to us by Google were all Russian forum profiles all on a phpBB platform (I believe...can't remember all of the details right now.) We did some Google searches like the following:
inurl:user/profile "keyword"
inurl:user/profile "username"
"powered by phpbb" + "keyword" <--This only works if you have a relatively unique keyword or username
"powered by phpbb" + "username"
Of course, these are just examples though. You may need to be more creative in the searches that you do.
Similarly, we will often get example links that are press releases and not in our backlink checkers. You can search for text from your press releases in quotes to find more. This also works well if you have used boilerplate author bio text for low quality articles.
I believe that the reason why Google wants you to find these before they remove your penalty is that these links will hurt the site in the Penguin algorithm if not removed. It is unfair that these links are not in WMT, but the work must be done to try to find them.
One other thought is to ask your client if they have a list of known links that were made. This may seem obvious, but I've had a couple of cases where clients were able to contact the offshore linkbuilding firm that made links for them and suddenly we have a list of hundreds of links that we can deal with.
Best of luck!
-
How do you obtain a complete link sample indeed. You really can't. Even the best programs may show only 25-30% of your entire profile at any one time (and in some cases only 15%). According to Google, all you are "supposed" to need is the export from GW Tools, that's clearly not the case.
Unfortunately, if you are only at 52% removal on your existing links that's not nearly high enough. I'd personally recommend trying again to get that number up, on your existing links, but make sure to run a NEW download from GW Tools regularly, they appear to be updating that bi-monthly now so new links are probably already in your account.
Keep working and consider adding www.linkrisk.com into your analysis as well. That's another pretty good source of links and it does a good job of sorting the links into suspect classes for you so also very helpful.
Sorry I can't be of more help.
-
Thanks for responding. I actually did exactly what you suggested the first time around. I pulled from every available source including Majestic, GWT, OSE, LinkDetox, and Ahrefs. I was only able to achieve a 52% removal. But I ran it for a month and contacted some webmasters up to 9 times. I did disavow at the domain level and linked to both the disavow and link pruning sheets within your the request.
And again, the link examples that came back were not in ANY of the tools and sources used. So my question is, how do I obtain a more complete link sample.
-
Ouch, I just lost my entire response to you so unfortunately, this one won't be as detailed.
What you described is common. Google doesn't provide a full backlink view of your links and I've personally experienced what you've experienced, receiving sample links that are not referenced at all in the Google link download I originally worked from. To combat this, use multiple sources: Majestic SEO, Open Site Explorer, Google Download, Ahrefs, etc. I then take these links and import ALL of them into the Link Detox tool over at www.linkresearchtools.com. The tool does a fantastic job of auto-sorting the duplicates for you. Do this so you work with a larger sample going forward.
Unfortunately, now that you've been denied Google won't even consider looking at another recon submission for at least another 3-5 weeks. Take that time to run a more complete link sample then refine your analysis around the sample link classes and anchor texts they provided. Finally, the standard for Unnatural Link Manual Action removal campaigns is high: think 70%. So try your best to remove as much as you can. What you can't, make sure to DISAVOW at the domain level and link to both your Disavow File AND your Link Pruning Sheets within your next Reconsideration Request.
Good luck and if you remember nothing from this answer remember this going forward:
Golden Rule of Link Building: "Any link on which YOU can control the placement and or anchor text rich nature, is an UNNATURAL LINK."
I hope this was helpful.
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
-
Is Link equity / Link Juice lost to a blocked URL in the same way that it is lost to nofollow link
Hi If there is a link on a page that goes to a URL that is blocked in robots txt - is the link juice lost in the same way as when you add nofollow to a link on a page. Any help would be most appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Andrew-SEO0 -
Internal Linking
Hi, I'm doing internal anchor text links. Relative path. if I use /destination-page instead of https://website.com/destination-page will I still receive a transfer of internal Google trust to the destination page? Does google treat just the / url the same as full url??
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Scotty_Wilson0 -
Site deindexed after HTTPS migration + possible penalty due to spammy links
Hi all, we've recently migrated a site from http to https and saw the majority of pages drop out of the index. https://www.relate.org.uk/ One of the most extreme deindexation problems I've ever seen, but there doesn't appear to be anything obvious on-page which is causing the issue. (Unless I've missed something - please tell me if I have!) I had initially discounted any off-page issues due to the lack of a manual action in SC, however after looking into their link profile I spotted 100 spammy porn .xyz sites all linking (see example image). Didn't appear to be any historic disavow files uploaded in the non https SC accounts. Any on-page suggestions, or just play the waiting game with the new disavow file? Hku8I
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CTI_Digital0 -
What Links to Disavow?
I am looking through my website's link profile that I pulled directly from Google Webmaster Tools. What is the best way to determine the links to disavow? Maybe the Webmaster Tools list is not the best list for this process but I really need to clean up the links that are hurting the site's SEO. Does anyone have any insight?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PartyStore0 -
Recovered from Manual Penalty but rankings still suck
Hi All, We got a penalty Last March 2014 ( Side Wide Link - unnatural links) which we recovered from quickly and this changed to Partial Match penalty (impact links) which we recovered from back in December 2014. Our Site profile has been cleaned up but our rankings still suck for some of our main keywords (+500) . Also our traffic and local rankings still suck in some cases. From an SEO point of view our site is pretty good, we've done everything google has recommended including schema.org, mobile responsive, unique content (which we write regulary) and we only have a few duplicate pages. Our domain authority is better than our competitors but yet our rankings and traffic are still no way as good as theirs. Do anyone know if recovering from an impact links penalty take longer than 4 months . I know that google says than it discounts those links but I get the feeling google may be looking at an old dataset due to not rerunning panda & penguin since our penalty was removed and this may be whats affecting things. Does anyone have any ideas? I am more than happy to post my url if someone fancies taking a quick look ? to see if it's anything obvious ? thanks Pete
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PeteC120 -
Does including your site in Google News (and Google) Alerts helps with SEO?
Based on the following article http://homebusiness.about.com/od/yourbusinesswebsite/a/google-alerts.htm in order to check if you are included you need to run site:domain.com and click the news search tab. If you are not there then... I ran the test on MOZ and got no results which surprised me. Next step according to :https://support.google.com/news/publisher/answer/40787?hl=en#ts=3179198 is to submit your site for inclusion. Should I? Will it help? P.S.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeytzNet
This is a followup question to the following: http://moz.com/community/q/what-makes-a-site-appear-in-google-alerts-and-does-it-mean-anything0 -
Rotating content = Google Penalty?
Hi all. We have an ecommerce site which features various product sections. In each section you might have 60 products each displayed neatly in pages of 10. We recently added functionality, so that if a product is out of stock, it will automatically drop that product to the back of the list and bring another in stock one forward. We're just worried that Google will view the same information, repeatedly rotating on the first page of 10 products (the page that ranks) and think we're in some way trying to trick Google into thinking the content is fresh? Does anyone have a throw on this? Is it likely to penalise us? Thank you!!! Ben
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bnknowles10 -
Using rel="nofollow" when link has an exact match anchor but the link does add value for the user
Hi all, I am wondering what peoples thoughts are on using rel="nofollow" for a link on a page like this http://askgramps.org/9203/a-bushel-of-wheat-great-value-than-bushel-of-goldThe anchor text is "Brigham Young" and the page it's pointing to's title is Brigham Young and it goes into more detail on who he is. So it is exact match. And as we know if this page has too much exact match anchor text it is likely to be considered "over-optimized". I guess one of my questions is how much is too much exact match or partial match anchor text? I have heard ratios tossed around like for every 10 links; 7 of them should not be targeted at all while 3 out of the 10 would be okay. I know it's all about being natural and creating value but using exact match or partial match anchors can definitely create value as they are almost always highly relevant. One reason that prompted my question is I have heard that this is something Penguin 3.0 is really going look at.On the example URL I gave I want to keep that particular link as is because I think it does add value to the user experience but then I used rel="nofollow" so it doesn't pass PageRank. Anyone see a problem with doing this and/or have a different idea? An important detail is that both sites are owned by the same organization. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ThridHour0