Is it worth disvowing scrappers' links?
-
Hello guys,
Do you think it is worth disvowing scrappers' links on otherwise good linking profile.
Sites like
Webmaster tools shows that sites like:
scrape our content and generated from 10 to 90 links to our pages.
Is removing these links waste of my time?
Thanks
-
I'm going to respectfully disagree with the answers already given. I ignore these links and do not disavow them. Every site has them.
The point of the disavow file is to tell Google not to count links that you have personally made for SEO purposes. You didn't make these links and I don't believe that Google wants you to disavow them. There's no harm in doing so but personally I ignore them.
-
Thanks
-
Thanks
-
I would disavow them. It seems like Google wants the cleanest backlink profile possible.
-
I make sure to disavow these as well. No need to disavow each link individually, just knock out the whole domain in the disavow.
This became common practice for me once I had to clean up a manual action penalty that wouldn't go away until the scrapers were disavowed.
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
-
Disavow links old links
We have built a lot of sites and there a few sites we no longer manage or want any association with. When I have looked at webmasters I can see 20 to 200+ odd links back to our site. The page however at source has no reference to our website. I have searched the code but there isn't anything. Is it safe to disavow these or just leave them?
Technical SEO | | Cocoonfxmedia0 -
301 and 302 for same link
Just trying to find out if this may be the root of a slight traffic dip and also if we should be redirecting differently. We relaunched and did 301 redirects to the new site, initially. Then, we decided to change from http to https. Our HTTP status now looks like this when using the MozBar: HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently – http://site.com/oldurl
Technical SEO | | MichaelEka
HTTP/1.1 302 Found – https://site.com/oldurl
HTTP/1.1 200 OK - https://site.com/new Should we be changing that 302 to a 301? Are we losing link equity due to this? Thanks.0 -
Creating in-text links with ' 'target=_blank' - helping/hurting SEO!?!
Good Morning Mozzers, I have a question regarding a new linking strategy I'm trying to implement at my organization. We publish 'digital news magazines' that oftentimes have in-text links that point to external sites. More recently, the editorial department and me (SEO) conferred on some ways to reduce our bounce rate and increase time on page. One of the suggestions I offered is to add the 'target=_blank" attribute to all the links so that site visitors don't necessarily have to leave the site in order to view the link. It has, however, come to my attention that this can have some very negative effects on my SEO program, most notably, (fake or inaccurate) time(s) on-page. Is this an advisable way to create in-text links? Are there any other negative effects that I can expect from implementing such a strategy?
Technical SEO | | NiallSmith0 -
Ratio of linking C-blocks to Linking domains
Hi, Our linkbuilding efforts have resulted in acquiring a high number of backlinks from domains within a C-block. We all know Google issues penalties whenever someone's link profile looks unnatural. A high number of backlinks but a low number of linking C-blocks would seem to be one of reasons to get penalized. Example: we have 6,000 links from 200 linking root domains coming in from 100 C-blocks. At what point should we start to worry about being penalized/giving off an unnatural look to mr G?
Technical SEO | | waidohuy0 -
No-follow links on advertising pages
Hi I run a job board that enables employers to post job vacancies and information about their organisations. These are 'paid for' pages (advertising) on our site. These link out to their own websites. My question is, would it be better for these links out to their sites to be no-follow? From my site's perspective, I cannot necessarily dictate the quality of their websites (although the majority are leading firms) as I would in article and feature content, where we do happily link out and refer to other quality sites with information that gives readers further information. I know that many large job boards do this where they run listings of feeds from other sites, but should we also do this at the page level where the link out is effectively paid for. What would be the pros and cons if I do or if I don't use no-follow? I hope this makes sense and look forward to some replies. Many thanks
Technical SEO | | CelestialChook0 -
Do you get credit for an external link that points to a page that's being blocked by robots.txt
Hi folks, No one, including me seems to actually know what happens!? To repeat: If site A links to /home.html on site B and site B blocks /home.html in Robots.txt, does site B get credit for that link? Does the link pass PageRank? Will Google still crawl through it? Does the domain get some juice, but not the page? I know there's other ways of doing this properly, but it is interesting no?
Technical SEO | | DaveSottimano0 -
OSE Link Differential
I have the chrome toolbar installed. In the SERP a site I was looking at had 686 links from 12 domains linking to the root domain. When I checked this site in OSE with filters set to all pages in root domain it shows 65 links from 12 domains. Can anyone explain the difference?
Technical SEO | | waynekolenchuk0 -
Switching ecommerce CMS's - Best Way to write URL 301's and sub pages?
Hey guys, What a headache i've been going through the last few days trying to make sure my upcoming move is near-perfect. Right now all my urls are written like this /page-name (all lowercase, exact, no forward slash at end). In the new CMS they will be written like this: /Page-Name/ (with the forward slash at the end). When I generate an XML sitemap in the new ecomm CMS internally it lists the category pages with a forward slash at the end, just like they show up through out the CMS. This seems sloppy to me, but I have no control over it. Is this OK for SEO? I'm worried my PR 4, well built ecommerce website is going to lose value to small (but potentially large) errors like this. If this is indeed not good practice, is there a resource about not using the forward slash at the end of URLS in sitemaps i can present to the community at the platform? They are usually real quick to make fixes if something is not up to standards. Thanks in advance, -First Time Ecommerce Platform Transition Guy
Technical SEO | | Hyrule0