Thousands of Links from mrwhatis.net
-
Google WMT shows that there are thousands of links pointing to the pages of my website from mrwhatis.net. Among the links, hundreds of them have the same anchor text. Here are some examples.
http://mrwhatis.net/a-canon-in-music-for-kid.html
http://mrwhatis.net/canon-chords-piano-in-c.html
http://mrwhatis.net/canon-d-major-piano-chord.html
http://mrwhatis.net/canon-d-major-piano-mp3-free-downloa.html
http://mrwhatis.net/canon-d-major-piano-sheet-fre.htmland more....
The links pointing to my site on the above pages share the same link title "Canon In D Sheet Music | Canon In D Music Score".
My question is - are these links considered unnatural links by Google based on your experience? Why and why not? I want to get some ideas before I ask Google to disavow these links.
Thanks.
John
-
I ignore these links when I'm doing a backlink audit. If you've got a penalty, I would look elsewhere for culprits. There's no harm in disavowing mrwhatis, but my guess is that Google knows that these are not self made links and just ignores them too.
-
Hi John,
In the case where you did receive a warning, feel free to aggressively try to remove the links and / or make a disavowal submission. For generic warnings, I don't believe example links are given - I have seen example links provided in follow-up emails to the webspam team though.
If the rest of your profile is, to your knowledge, clean then I would start with these links. It's disappointing on Google's part because they used to be quite adept at ignoring links like this that should be discounted - their spam trigger finger is a lot itchier now than in days past and a lot of legitimate sites are getting caught in the mix.
-
Hi Jane,
We did receive a warning from Google. Here is the message.
"Unnatural links to your site—impacts links
Google has detected a pattern of unnatural artificial, deceptive, or manipulative links pointing to pages on this site. Some links may be outside of the webmaster’s control, so for this incident we are taking targeted action on the unnatural links instead of on the site’s ranking as a whole."
Matt Cutts said that some bad link examples will be provided along with the warning. But I could not find the examples. Where can I find the examples in WMT? It makes it much harder to figure out which links should be removed or disavowed without the example links.
Thank you very much for your reply and information. They are very helpful.
John
-
Hi John,
This looks like a aggregation website that links to a wide range of relevant sites, including Yahoo, Merriam-Webster, YouTube, etc. Unless you are receiving unnatural link warnings in Webmaster Tools, I would definitely not do anything like disavowal submissions (you should never do this until you have received a warning / penalty or are sure that you are a victim of an attack anyway), as is documented here:
http://moz.com/blog/googles-disavow-tool-take-a-deep-breath
http://searchengineland.com/matt-cutts-qa-how-to-use-google-link-disavow-tool-137664
A year or so ago, I had a client decide of their own accord that they were going to disavow "one link, to test impact". This is most certainly not what the tool is meant for - definitely save it for a last-resort when you are in trouble, not just because there are some directory links or similar out there
I would not be concerned about these unless you see a big drop in rankings or receive warnings, at which point the idea is to clean up every link that you don't consider high quality. Until then, Alan is correct - many many sites have this sort of site linking to them and Google understands that they have not been built for malicious purposes. When Google messes up and decides that these _are _malicious, disavowal is at your disposal.
If they still bother you because they take up a large portion of your backlink profile or you suspect ranking issues, try contacting the site to have your links removed before using disavowal. Not only does it make any future submissions or reconsideration requests more likely to succeed, but it can mean you take the care of the issue without having to involve the Webspam team at Google at all.
Cheers,
Jane
-
We all have them, no don't worry, google would have ignored them long ago.
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
-
Reasonable to Ask URL of Link from SEO Providing New Links before Link Activation?
My firm has hired an SEO to create links to our site. We asked the SEO to provide a list of domains that they are targeting for potential links. The SEO did not agree to this request on the grounds that the list is their unique intellectual property. Alternatively I asked the SEO to provide the URL that will be linking to our site before the link is activated. The SEO did not agree to this. However, they did say we could provide comments afterwards so they could tweak their efforts when the next 4-5 links are obtained next month. The SEO is adamant that the links will not be spam. For whatever it is worth the SEO was highly recommended. I am an end user; the owner and operator of a commercial real estate site, not an SEO or marketing professional. Is this protectiveness over process and data typical of link building providers? I want to be fair with the provider and hope I will be working with them a long time, however I want to ensure I receive high quality links. Should I be concerned? Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan1
Alan0 -
Breadcrumbs versus in context link
Hi, I remember reading that links within the text have more value than breadcrumbs links for example because in context links are surrounded by the right content (words) but google search engine optimisation starter guide says breadcrumbs are good, so which one is recommended ? Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
Directory links with no follow
Hi I'm researching competitor backlinks & they have a lot of directory links which are no follow - but they rank very well. Is this type of link building even allowed by google? I know they they aren't allowed followed directory links, but will no following them help with rankings?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
Base href + relative link href for canonical link
I have a site that in the head section we specify a base href being the domain with a trailing slash and a canonical link href being the relative link to the domain. <base <="" span="">href="http://www.domain.com/" /> href="link-to-page.html" rel="canonical" /> I know that Google recommends using an absolute path as a canonical link but is specifying a base href with a relative canonical link the same thing or is it still seen as duplicate content?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Nobody16116990439410 -
Links on page
Hi I have a web page which lists about 50-60 products which links out to either a pdf on the product or the main manufacturers website page containing product detail. The site in non e-commerce is this the site/page likely to get hit by Penguin? Would it be best to create a separate page for the product/manufacturer group i.e 5 or 6 pages but linking out to the PDFs etc...?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Cocoonfxmedia0 -
Advice on Link Removal Services
Hello everyone, Due to the Penguin update my site unfortunately took a bit of a hit. A little while ago I submitted all of our questionable/bad links to the disavow tool, however I still wante to go back and delete any and all problematic links that are still out there. Ive looked into many services, however I haven't been too impressed. Removeem - The email addresses they provided weren't always valid, and their email tool didn't always deploy correctly - a lot of cross referencing and was not saving me any time. Link Detox - Free trial was a bust. They show you 10 links on the free trial, however for me, 9 of the 10 were all the same. Couldn't get a good feel of their system. Rmoov - Their tool is one where you upload your own links, and they help manage everything, however they DONT allow you to email through their system, so Im not sure how this helps my process if I have to do everthing manaully anyway. A lot of sites I see are also a full service approach that charge you based on how many links they remove, and this can get quite costly. I have also contacted:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Lukin
Link Delete - No reponse from multiple email requests
Linkquidator - No response
Infatex - No response My questions to all of you are: Is there any company out there that you recommend that provide a self service tool [online or desktop driven]? Is this even an avenue I should explore, or should I compile my own list [as 3rd party algorithms are not always accurate] and reach out to sites manually? Is disavowing good enough and Im just spinning my wheeles trying to now get them all removed? Thanks!0 -
Linking Back
Hello, I have a blog www.digitaldiscovery.eu and I have been working the link building. Now I have a few links pointing into my blog and in Google Webmaster and in Open Site Explorer I can see the URL of those websites. In scale from 1 to 10 how usefull is to have a blogroll in my blog pointing back to those high PR links? How usefull is this in link-building strategy? Tks in advance! PP
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PedroM0 -
Google is not Indicating any Links to my site
We built a new store on another ccTLD and linked to it from some of our other domains in a few locations. I am noticing that with the Google operator command "links:" we are seeing nothing linking to our site anywhere. Some things to clarify: These are not no-follow links These pages linking to our new domain are indexed The pages being linked to on our new domain are indexed This is not a flash site or heavy in JavaScript The links existed the day the site was launched so when the new pages were crawled they existed. "Site:" command in Google shows me that my new site is indexed. What could potentially be causing this? I am trying to get these newer ccTLD's to begin ranking and I understand that I need to get links going to these pages since they are fairly new (2.5 months) so I can outrank the .com in the SE's in those locales. (Like Google.co.uk)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DRSearchEngOpt0