Large Number of Links appearing in Google Webmaster Tools
-
Hello,
In the last week we have noticed an extremely large number of backlink links appearing in Google Webmaster Tools.
One of the sites which links to us now have over 101,000 backlinks pointing to us, when in reality it should only have 300-600. We have check the websites have not been hacked, with hidden links etc, but we can not find any.
Has anyone else experienced problems with Google webmaster tools lately, displaying way too many links?
Or could this be a negative SEO attack, which is yet to emerge.
Thanks
Rob
-
Thanks for the update. Glad you got it figured out.
-
Hello,
Thank you for answering my question guys. I think it is a problem with a wordpress calender plugin, which is generating an large number of pages in the future, as follows,
calender/2014-12-28/
calender/2099-12-26/
Rob
-
It sounds to me like the site where the links are coming from could be at fault.
Do you know if they have made any changes recently? It is very easy for bad coding to produce thousands of pages that the site owners aren't even aware of (speaking from past experiences here). When you look at some of the pages where the links are coming from, do they look like nonsense pages?
It's a little difficult to tell exactly what is at fault without actually looking in more detail, but as this is just one site, it shouldn't cause you any issues - if it were an attack of some kind, then you would be seeing links from different domains, rather than just the one.
-Andy
-
Hi Rob,
You can check in Web master tolls the exact source (as exact urls) for the source of the links. if all are coming from the same domain - there is a problem there. If you think those links are bad for you - just disavow the entire domain, one line - and problem solved.
If you need links from this domain, but "not that many" you should take it up with them to solve it.
However - for this "boiler plate" type of links - I wouldn’t worry that much. If there are some issues with the links, google will just ignore and won't count them.
Cheers.
-
It could be a parameter problem.
For example. You might have a page with this URL... example.com/hiking/boots.html
But, google has found bad links to it like this.... (the crap after the ? is a parameter)
example.com/hiking/boots.html?sa=Xeiy7z8U5v5CsGgyQThyICgAg&
If you have a parameter problem you can...
use rel=canonical
Declare them in Webmaster Tools >> Crawl >> URL parameters
Strip them off with htaccess and a 301 redirect
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
-
Links Not Detected by MOZ, AHREFS, GSC-ARE THESE QUALITY LINKS?
Our SEO provider has been creating content (6 blog posts per month as well as building page write ups) and has been promoting that content. Several links per month have been created as a result of this effort. Many of the links have been from commercial real estate publications. I am concerned that the quality of these links is not high enough to improve our ranking. Most links do not appear on AHREFS, Google Search Console or MOZ. Is this a red flag that these links are weak? Ranking and traffic on the site have improved considerably since this provider began the project in April of 2019. They have been writing about 30 pages about New York City. commercial buildings each month in addition to 4 short blog posts and 2 extremely well researched and authoritative blog posts. My concern is that the links are not of sufficient quality to result increased ranking. That the improvement in ranking is solely due to the addition of new content rather than the creation of these links. Basically, that I am incurring the cost on an ongoing basis of an link building campaign with little to no benefit. That being the case, I would shift resources to content creation and increase and improve content rather than develop links with little value. A sample of links are below: Would greatly appreciate some feedback as to whether these are in fact helpful to the domain authority, reputation and ranking of our website. Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan1
Alan https://patch.com/new-york/bayside/bayside-queens-priciest-area-retail-office-space-study https://qns.com/story/2019/12/04/these-commercial-streets-in-queens-were-among-the-most-expensive-in-2019/ https://patch.com/new-york/brooklyn/flatbush-ave-priciest-retail-spot-outside-manhattan-study http://thejewishvoice.com/2019/12/07/nycs-most-expensive-commercial-streets-neighborhoods-in-2019-would-surprise-you/ https://atalyst.com/investment-banking-interview-metro-manhattan/0 -
Should I delete 'data hightlighter' mark-up in webmaster tools after added schema.org mark-up?
LEDSupply.com is my site, and before becoming familiar with schema mark-up I used the 'data-highlighter' in webmaster tools to mark-up as much of the site as I could. Now that Schema is set-up I'm wondering if having both active is bad and am thinking I should delete the previous work with the 'data highlighter' tool. To delete or not to delete? Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | saultienut0 -
Multiple sitewide (deep)links devalued by Google?
In my experience sitewide links can still be very powerful if used sensibly and in moderation. However, I'm finding that sitewide text blocks with 2 or 3 (deep)links to a single domain appear not to be working that well or not at all in raising the authority of those target pages. Anyone having the same experience? In your experience, is the link value diminished when there are multiple deeplinks to a single domain in a sitewide text area? Is anything more than 1 link per target domain bad? Or could it even be that it's not so much the number of deeplinks to a single domain that matter, but purely the fact that they are sitewide "deeplinks"? Are sitewide deeplinks treated differently than sitewide links linking to an external homepage? Very interested in hearing your personal experience on this matter. Factual experience would be best, but "gut feeling" experience is also appreciated 🙂 Best regards, Joost
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JoostvanVught0 -
Anyone Have a Tool or Method to Track Successful Link Removals?
Hello All, I am undertaking the daunting task of a link removal campaign. I've got a pretty good plan for my work flow in terms of doing the backlink research, gathering contact information, and sending the email requests. Where I'm a bit stuck is in regards to tracking the links that actually get removed. Obviously if someone replies to my email telling me they removed it, then that makes it pretty clear. However, there may be cases where someone removes the link, but does not respond. I know Moz has a ton of link tools (which I'm still getting familiar with). Is there a report or something I can generate that would show me links that did exist previously but have now been removed? If Moz cannot do it, does anyone have a recommendation on another tool that can track links to inform me whether or not they have been removed. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Lukin0 -
Technical Question on Image Links - Part of Addressing High Number of Outbound Links
Hi - I've read through the forum, and have been reading online for hours, and can't quite find an answer to what I'm searching for. Hopefully someone can chime in with some information. 🙂 For some background - I am looking closely at four websites, trying to bring them up to speed with current guidelines, and recoup some lost traffic and revenue. One of the things we are zeroing in on is the high amount of outbound links in general, as well as inter-site linking, and a nearly total lack of rel=nofollow on any links. Our current CMS doesn't allow an editor to add them, and it will require programming changes to modify any past links, which means I'm trying to ask for the right things, once, in order to streamline the process. One thing that is nagging at me is that the way we link to our images could be getting misconstrued by a more sensitive Penguin algorithm. Our article images are all hosted on one separate domain. This was done for website performance reasons. My concern is that we don't just embed the image via , which would make this concern moot. We also have an href tag on each to a 'larger view' of the image that precedes the img src in the code, for example - We are still running the numbers, but as some articles have several images, and we currently have about 85,000 articles on those four sites... well, that's a lot of href links to another domain. I'm suggesting that one of the steps we take is to rel=nofollow the image hrefs. Our image traffic from Google search, or any image search for that matter, is negligible. On one site it represented just .008% of our visits in July. I'm getting a little pushback on that idea as having a separate image server is standard for many websites, so I thought I'd seek additional information and opinions. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MediaCF0 -
Google showing 10 million less links than October
I've received no messages from Google about 'iffy' links whatsoever, and the links they're reporting in Webmaster Toosl have declined by 10 MILLION since October. We did go through a CMS upgrade in December which I believe had some impact, and then I set a preferred domain at the end of last month, but we were bleeding links before then. Any idea what could have happened? We don't engage in any link building schemes whatsoever, and like I mentioned, I've received no messages at all from Google regarding a penalty.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Aggie0 -
New links appeared, how do I test to see if they are good or bad?
I've just noticed 5 links appear via Majestic. Opensiteexplorer hasnt picked these up yet. I want to check if I should get these removed or leave them be. How can I check to see if the link is good or bad?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JohnPeters0 -
My site links have gone from a mega site links to several small links under my SERP results in Google. Any ideas why?
A site I have currently had the mega site links on the SERP results. Recently they have updated the mega links to the smaller 4 inline links under my SERP result. Any idea what happened or how do I correct this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | POSSIBLE0