Google Manual Penalty - Dilemma?
-
Hi Guys,
A while back, my company had a 'partial match' manual penalty from google for 'unnatural links' pointing to our site.
This glorious feat was accomplished by our previous SEO agency for quite heavily spamming links (directories, all kinds of low quality sites).
That being said, when the penalty hit we really didnt see any drop in traffic. In fact, it was not long after the penalty that we launched a new website and since our traffic has grown quite significantly. we've doubled our total visits from prior penalty to now.
This previous SEO also did submit a couple of reconsideration requests (both done loosely as to fool Google by only removing a small amount of links, then abit more the next time when it failed - this was obviously never going to work). Since then, I myself have submitted a reconsideration request which was very thorough, disavowing 85 Domains (every single one at domain level rather than the individual URLs as I didnt want to take any chances), as well as getting a fair few links removed from when the webmaster responded. I documented this all and made multiple contacts to the webmasters so i could show this to Google.
This reconsideration request was not successful - Google made some new backlinks magically appear that i had not seen previously. But really, my main point is; am I going to do more damage removing more and more links in order to remove the penalty, because as it stands we haven't actually noticed any negative effects from the penalty! Perhaps the negative effects have not been noticed due to the fact that not long after the penalty, we did get a new site which was much improved and therefore would naturally get much more traffic than the old site, but overall it has not been majorly noticed.
What do you guys think - is it worth risking drop in rankings to remove the penalty so we don't face any future issues, or should I not go too heavy with the link removal in order to preserve current rankings? (im really interested to see peoples views on this, so please leave a comment if you can help!)
-
That's the problem...it's often hard to tell whether a link is natural or not. For example, a local directory listing might be ok, but it could be unnatural. If it helps, I wrote a Moz article that describes different kinds of unnatural links: http://moz.com/ugc/what-is-an-unnatural-link-an-in-depth-look-at-the-google-quality-guidelines
-
Thanks for your response, you've clarified a lot for me here.
Essentially, so long as only the unnatural links are removed I should not harm my sites ranking?That is, so long as Google agree on which links are the unnatural ones!
I better get to work auditing all of these links - see you again in afew years! haha.
-
"Google made some new backlinks magically appear that i had not seen previously."
This made me chuckle. Google is a strange animal. John Mueller has said many times that looking at your links in Webmaster Tools is enough, but I will often get back example unnatural links that are not in Webmaster Tools. This is one of the reasons why when I do a backlink audit I combine links from a number of different sources including OSE, ahrefs and majestic.
Now, I have seen sites lift penalties by just going on their Webmaster Tools links but really it's best to get them from multiple sources.
BUT...even when I combine every possible source I can find I will quite often get example links back from Google that don't exist on ANY backlink checkers. These are tough. But usually they are clues that can help you to find more links. For example, often when this happens it's a scraped version of a press release that is given. What I'll do is take a chunk of text in quotes and search for it on Google and often I'll find 3-4 additional links that weren't in my audit list.
Another thing you can do is download new links from GWT as often new ones will pop up even if they are years old.
Are you going to do more harm to your site than good? That depends on how good you are at auditing links. If you're only getting rid of unnatural links then you won't hurt your site and you may even see an improvement in rankings either immediately, a few weeks after the penalty is lifted, or when Penguin refreshes. But, if you're guessing at your disavow decisions then yes, if you disavow good links you're going to do harm to your site.
Best of luck!
-
Keep doing what you're doing. As long as you know how to properly identify if a site/link is good or bad, you shouldn't hurt your site. Better to do this work now and prevent another penalty in the future than to put it off.
RE: total backlinks - I recommend combining and deduping Open Site Explorer, Webmaster Tolls, Majestic, and AHREFs for the most thorough picture.
-
It will often take multiple requests for Google to remove a manual penalty to ensure you put enough effort in to cleaning up your link profile.
What tools did you use to find your links? It's best to use a combination of tools to find all of the possible links to your site. The amount of links you remove/disavow is relative to the size of your link profile, some sites have had to remove or disavow 1,000s of domains.
Ensure the links that you remove are exact match links or those from directories and guest blogging etc.
It's best to remove more links than not enough as even having poor links will result in Google marking you down. If you're not thorough enough, there's every chance you could get penalized again in the future. Also make sure your recon request is clear and simple and clearly demonstrates the work you have done to remove or disavow any offending links.
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
-
Should I Report A SEO Agency to Google
Our competitor has employed the services of a spammy SEO agency that sends spammy links to our site. Though our rankings were affected we have taken the necessary steps. It is possible to send evidence to Google so that they can take down the site. I want to take this action so that other sites will not be affected by them again.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Halmblogmusic0 -
Hacked Websites (Doorways) Ranking First Page of Google
Hello Moz community! I could really use your help with some suggestions here with some recent changes I've noticed in the Google serps for terms I've been currently working on. Currently one of the projects I am working on is for an online pharmacy and noticed that the SERPs are being now taken up by hacked websites which look like doorways to 301 redirect to an online pharmacy the hacker wants the traffic to go to. Seems like they may be wordpress sites that are hacked and have unrelated content on their websites compared to online pharmacies. We've submitted these issues as spam to Google and within chrome as well but haven't heard back. When searching terms like "Canadian Pharmacy Viagra" and other similar terms we see this issue. Any other recommendations on how we can fix this issue? Thanks for your time and attached is a screenshot of the results we are seeing for one of our searches. 1Orus
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | monarkg0 -
Homepage not ranking for branded searches after Google penalty removal
Hi all, A site I work on was hit with a manual action penalty some time ago for spammy links built by a former SEO agency. It was a partial match penalty so only affected some pages - most likely the homepage. We carried out a lot of work cleaning up links and disavowed suspicious links which we couldn't get removed. Again, most of these were to the homepage. The disavow file was uploaded to Google last Friday and our penalty was lifted this Tuesday. Since uploading the disavow file, our homepage does not show up at all for branded searches. I've carried out the obvious checks - robots.txt, making sure we're not accidentally noindexing the page or doing anything funky with canonicals etc and it's all good. Have any of you guys had a similar experience? I'm thinking Google simply needs time to catch up due to all the links we've disavowed and sitting tight is the best option but could do with some reassurance! Any past experiences or advice on what I might be missing would be great. Thanks in advance, Brendan.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Brendan-Jackson1 -
Keywords in Google Local results
We have a client in the moving business and I'm absolutely flabbergasted by the "local" results and the number of them that are not following Google's guidelines for Google Local accounts. 3 of them are using exact match keyword strings as their company names. I've reported all 3, every week for the last 2 months and have not seen a single dip in the rankings. Meanwhile our client has a duplicate listing we've verified and "suspended" and it hasn't changed for 4 months! Any tips? I've attached a photo of the listings as well. xwWZWyT.gif
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SmartWebPros0 -
Google authorship and multiple sites with multiple authors
Hi guys :). I am asking your help - basically I would like to know what would be the best way to set all of this up. Basically I have two main (e-commerce) sites, and a few other big web properties. What I would like to know is if it is ok to link the main sites to my real G+ account, and use alias G+ accounts for other web properties, or is that a kind of spamming? The thing is that I use a G+ account for those e-commerce sites, and would not necessarily want the other web properties to be linked to the same G+ account, as they are not really related. I do hope I was clear. Any insight would be appreciated. Thanks.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | sumare0 -
What Google considers to be a branded keyword?
We can set our own keywords as branded in SeoMoz campaign, but Google would not necessarily see them like branded. After reading the Blog post at http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-wpmuorg-recovered-from-the-penguin-update I had a question: Are there known rules (or at least guesses) what Google considers a branded keyword/anchor text? I guess the first one would be your website domain. So bluewidget.com for example would be a branded keyword for bluewidget.com website. How about Blue Widget or Blue Widget Company?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SirMax0 -
Why is Google not punishing paid links as it says it will?
I've recently started working with a travel company - and finding the general link building side of the business quite difficult. I had a call from an SEO firm the other day offering their services, and stating that they had worked with a competitor of ours and delivered some very good results. I checked the competitors rankings, PR, link profile, and indeed, the results were quite impressive. However, the link profile pointed to one thing, that was incredibly obvious. They had purchased a large amount of sidebar text links from powerful blogs in the travel sector. Its painfully obvious what has happened, yet they still rank very highly for a lot of key terms. Why don't Google do something about this? They aren't the only company in this sector doing this, but it just seems pointless for white hats trying to do things properly, then those with the dollar in their pockets just buy success in the SERPS. Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | neilpage1230