Should you do a disavow even if you don't have a manual penalty?
-
If you are working on a website which has a history spammy links, but no manual penalty by Google... is it still worthwhile to still go through the link removal and disavow process?
Thoughts appreciated.
-
Thanks Sam and Matt,
Great responses and I'll now get going on disavowing the project I'm working on.
Much appreciated.
-
I agree with Samuel's response. Yes, you should disavow the bad links. Why wait to drop in rankings and see how long it takes to regain them? Given the time available you should always be creating the best profile you can and now that Google has given us this tool, use it.
(Just a note - we've proactively disavowed over 1200 clients link profiles and have NOT seen a negative effect on them. We have seen some good results even for those who didn't "have a penalty.")
-
The short answer? Matt Cutts, the head of Google's web-spam team, says, "Yes!" Look at this article. Here's the main quote:
"If you are at all worried about someone trying to do negative SEO or it looks like there's some weird bot that's building up a bunch of links to your site and you have no idea where it came from, that's the perfect time to use disavow as well," Cutts said. "I wouldn't worry about going ahead and disavowing links even if you don't have a message in your webmaster console."
The long answer? In my opinion, I would agree. If you think that there's even a chance that you could be hit by a penalty now or in the future, then I would disavow. Obviously, you want to prevent this from occurring long before it would ever happen. And if you are questioning whether your links may cause your site to get hit, then you likely have a problem simply because you're asking yourself the question.
However, it always depends on the site itself. If you or a bad SEO have done things like bulk directory submissions with exact-match anchor text, then you surely want to disavow them as soon as possible. But if you only have a few questionable links, then it's less urgent. But I would disavow any and all of them and start focusing on earning links (rather than building them) through content and PR (as I wrote in this Moz post).
Good luck!
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
-
Once you have cleaned up links / disavowed them how to get google to take notice quicker
Once we have contact webmasters and had some links removed / changed from money anchor text to brand anchor text. Or failing that once we have submitted spam URLs to our disavow file, should we just wait and keep and eye on the how quickly google re caches the URLs or should we try and force google to recrawl the urls quicker by submitting them to Google's submit url tool ?
Link Building | | jpeg800 -
How important are 'anchor' text links now
We have started building some good links but I'm just wandering how important anchor based text ones are now.
Link Building | | nick-name123
I'm not talking about spamming/going too heavy but a few here and there. What's your recent experience?0 -
Google Don't allow to publish duplicate content for other website?
Hi All, How can share other website content in our website and same for other user, how can share our content on his website? Everyone is saying, sharing content will be good but Google saying you can add duplicate content so i want to know process for content sharing to earning natural links. Thanks, Akhilesh
Link Building | | dotlineseo0 -
SEO Consultant Wants to Disavow Organic Links
Hi, We're working with a SEO consultant. They made a second check of our inbound links and want to disavow some of the links that seems organic to me. They claim they're bad by their characteristics. Should we act as they suggest or not? Or should we run from them?;-) Here are some links in question:
Link Building | | nikitin.i
http://www.wowresource.eu/index.php?showtopic=14942 http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080208070036AAE1ePo https://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/39144/visual-watermark All point to http://www.visualwatermark.com0 -
Google Penalty
Hi all, I've been having some trouble with Google lately. Awhile back I came across a quality site that had a "Useful Links" directory. I searched the site and finally found an email. I emailed the webmaster and requested a link. They obliged but wanted a link back, so I wrote a nice blog post that included a link to their site. This brings me to question number one: 1. Would Google see this as a link exchange? Problem number two with the link from this site. My site is fairly new with not much of a link profile. What I discovered was that they displayed random links from the "Useful Links" directory in the sidebar and in the footer. So all of a sudden we have a ton of links from one website. This site has hundreds maybe even thousands of pages. 2. Would Google see all of these links and think that they were paid or spam? We've had a nice steady increase in traffic from Google then all of a sudden it dropped to nothing for two days and has come back a little. Here is my data from open site explorer: 1/15/2013 PA=27/100 DA=14/100 LRD=5 Total Links=42 2/12/2013 PA=31/100 DA=19/100 LRD=9 Total Links=137 3/19/2013 PA=28/100 DA=18/100 LRD=5 Total Links=212 We experienced the drop in Google traffic on 2/4/2013. So according to open site explorer everything is ok. But is this big jump in links a problem? Thanks to anybody that reads this long post. 🙂
Link Building | | brandzz0 -
Looking for some help on disavow
I received a message from Google WMT on July 23rd about unnatural links to my site. And my ecommerce site suffered a big drop on sept 29th about 70% drop in organic traffic. My it guys have discovered that our past seo companies placed ton of bad links to our site. we have contacted lots of these companies for 3 weeks after we lost our traffic to remove their links. Some of them did remove them i believe and most of them did not even reply back. We have learned about the disavow tool in 3 rd week in Oct after that we have compiled the links and submitted the file on Oct 22nd and submitted a reconsideration on Oct 23rd. We got a reply back on Nov 12th saying that "Specifically, look for possibly artificial or unnatural links pointing to your site that could be intended to manipulate PageRank. Examples of unnatural linking could include buying links to pass PageRank or participating in link schemes." I did not participate in any link schemes or otherwise suggested practice here. So my question at this point is, is it possible that google' quality team did not see the file or did not take it in to consideration. How long would it take this tool to work? is there an example of this file where i can see how the format should be if any different than how we had it. my site is goldenageusa.com Thank you
Link Building | | orion680 -
Think I'm ready to do some link building. Couple questions.
Getting ready to do some link building. I've got several lists of competitors' links, including a bunch of sites with broken links that would be a great fit to link to us. I've got a capable VA to get started work on reaching out to people. Just curious if this is the right game plan, seems a little simple: For this round of link building I'm thinking all the links would point to my root domain. -Find quality sites/links to go after -Find an email to the owner/webmaster -Have the VA send them a value proposition email(i.e. why it's good fit for all)...or tell them about broken links etc. -Follow up myself when a response is generated. -Hope/verify they link to us. Thanks for the help with the newbie questions.
Link Building | | astahl110 -
Do you think it's a good idea to try to find synergy between clients for blog posts/citations/links, or should you keep clients away from each other?
Say you have for example three (in this case) clients, and: Client A sells red widgets Client B is a doctor Client C sellls blue widgets With some research, you find that: Red widgets (A) can make the process of blue widget creation (C) even more effective. Red widgets (A) can protect you from harmful things that doctors (B) are qualified to recommend that you stay away from. Furthermore, there are things that doctors (B) recommend that you do in order to maximize the benefits of red widgets (A) Blue widgets (C) carry with them certain potential health risks, which according to doctors (B) can be minimized using the following means Sometimes blue widgets (C) can be used to effectively repair red widget (A) factories ...and so forth. Sure you're really writing these articles to generate links and exchange authority, and frankly you started with "how can I find synergy between these clients?" rather than a with a great article subject that needed a citation which luckily happened to be another client, but the citations are legitimate and the clients are qualified to speak on the subjects where their expertise and interests overlap. Would you consider going ahead with this? Does anyone have any experience doing it? I could see potential pitfalls if clients were to interact with each other, but keeping yourself as the intermediary might well work and overall it seems like a decent way to grab low-hanging fruit as they say. What do you guys think?
Link Building | | PathMarketing0