Why should I reach out to webmasters before disavowing links?
-
Almost all the blogs, and Google themselves, tell us to reach out to webmasters and request the offending links be removed before using Google's Disavow tool. None of the blogs, nor Google, suggest why you "must" do this, it's time consuming and many webmasters don't care and don't act. Why is this a "required" thing to do?
-
If it is unlikely that a webmaster will reply or looks as though the site is trying to hide contact details then you may not need to contact webmasters before disavowing as it is a waste of time. But in a lot of cases it is more beneficial to you to have a bad link removed than to just disavow it, so it can be worth contacting a webmaster to remove a link.
If you are under a penalty though, Google will want to see you are doing everything you can to remove unnatural links and may want to see evidence that you are trying to contact webmasters to remove links rather than just putting everything into a disavow file, because links that are disavowed can just be taken out of the disavow file and be 're-avowed'.
Kind Regards
-
It actually isn't required - Google have no way of telling if you have tried to contact webmasters and ask for a link to be removed. I have done many disavows without this (at the site owners requests) with fantastic results.
One of the Matt Cutts videos actually says that if you just notice a lot of links that are appearing and shouldn't be there, or you don't know where they came from, just go ahead and disavow them.
-Andy
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
-
Following urls should be add in disavow file or not
Hey Moz Friends, Should I include following spam link urls in disavow file or not? OR Will Google handle automatically? These type I have thousands urls. =>>>web-seek.org/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Rajesh.Prajapati
=>>>web-seek.net/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>websearching.net/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42/
=>>>websearch.pl/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>web-search.net/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42/
=>>>web-pages.org/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42/
=>>>web-page.org/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>the-world.net/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>the-internet.tv/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>the-internet.in/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>the-globe.tv/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42/
=>>>theglobe.sk/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>theglobe.ru/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>theglobe.pl/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<= Hope you will give any solution. Waiting for your positive response.0 -
Pinging Links
Interested to know if anybody still uses the strategy of pinging links to make sure they get indexed, there are a number of sites out there which offer it. Is it considered dangerous/spamy?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | seoman100 -
Is a recent hack or the disavow tool causing my alarming dropping in rankings!
My business site has been very successful organically for many years. Just recently we got hit with a spam hack and it was resolved within 3 days. However now my rankings are plummeting and I am so stressed out! So here is some timeline information any info would help: Sept. 4th hack first detected on Google Sept. 7th site completely clean, reconsideration accepted, spam content and links removed. Manual actions cleared. Rankings at this time have not been affected. Sept. 11th disavowed a few incoming links that were completely spam. (In hindsight I know this could have been the beginning of the end using this tool) Sept. 21st start to notice first significant drop in rankings and I went into GWT and downloaded latest 1000 links, I realized ALL of these were either hacked sites as well with spam content linking to our now delete spam content or inappropriate adult content. Sept. 22 Disavowed the 1000 domains (there are still probably 1000-2000 more) As of today rankings have SIGNIFICANTLY dropped, I have resubmitted sitemaps, image sitemaps, fetch and rendered as google. I'm stressing out incredibly and feel like I have made an error and that my site will never recover. I've worked using ALL white hat seo and the site used to rank very well top of page one for almost all my keywords. I feel lost and don't know what else I can do - and I know many say wait but it feels like forever. Is it possible that I didn't make a mistake using the disavow and that Google just took a while to penalize for the hack? Please any advice or experiences I would love to hear and appreciate so much anyone who takes the time to respond.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | seounicorn0 -
Disavow or not? Negative SEO
Since last November we have been receiving a lot of low quality backlinks from over 700 websites. It looks like one of our pages from our website has been copied with the links being kept as they are. I have left a link to an example of this here: https://goo.gl/eWQODJ Please note, all examples seem to be copied in the same way. We have also started seeing a decrease in the amount of organic traffic (Analytics Picture), As you can see the decrease is not yet so drastically high, but it is still a decrease and this is the third consecutive month we have seen this decrease. Do you think it is worth it to use Disavow tool for all of these bad link or not? uuuLt
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Tiedemann_Anselm1 -
Link Audit: How do I decide what is a good or bad link?
I am conducting a link audit for one of my formerly high-ranking pages. But despite reading quite a bit on the issue, I am still quite confused as to how to decide whether to keep or remove a link. Some links come from directories and social bookmarking sites. I know that generally speaking, you do not want to be on these types of sites, but what if their domain authorities, pageranks, and mozTrusts scores are good? For example, here is one of my links for "envelopes": http://www.folkd.com/detail/www.jampaper.com%2FEnvelopes The page itself has no MozRank, MozTrust, or links but the domain has an authority of 88, a MozRank of 6.41, a mozTrust of 6.31. Should I be looking on a page level or domain level basis? It also has over 5 million links, with over two million of those being external followed links. Is the high quantity of links a warning sign? I also used a free online tool (thesitevalue.com) to determine how much traffic the domain gets. Apparently it receives over 350,000 unique visits daily, so it must be useful to people. This, combined with the fact that we've received 5 visits from the link over the last year (not a lot, but something), makes me believe that the link's intent wasn't purely to "trick" Google. Despite this, I still have a feeling the link could be considered low-quality based on the domain's appearance. Similarly, some of our links are coming from domains named linkdirect.info, backlinks8.com, tolinkup.com, findyourlink.info, searchengineurl.com, websubmissionfree.com. Is it safe to assume these are harmful links strictly because of their names? Thank you!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | jampaper0 -
Link Espionage?
Can anyone tell why pages like this are linking to our site? http://iga.edu/facebooktabs/images/inscribirse/formulario/en/noclosingcost.html This .edu page looks benign, however if you read it, it wont take long to see what appears to be machine generated content related to finance. It has ONLY ONE outgoing link and it to my site. To me it seems to be an attempt to make us look like a link buyer. We aren't! There are dozens of these type of pages linking to us. Here's the text around the link to our site, ERATE.com Apr the origination fee alone will cost you at closing however what your broker isn t should you pay a loan origination fee or get a no fee mortgage when refinancing refinancing mortgage rates scandal could cost you a year arkansas california colorado connecticut delaware. Any insight and opinions are welcome. Jeff Howard
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | corlin0 -
Penguin link removal what would you do?
Hi Over the last 4 months I have been trying to remove as many poor quality links as possible in the hope this will help us recover. I have come across some site's that the page our back-link is on has been de-indexed, goggle shows this when I look at the cached page... 404. <ins>That’s an error.</ins> The requested URL /search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGNI_enGB482GB482&q=cache:http%3A%2F%2Fforom.eovirtual.com%2Fviewtopic.php%3Ff%3D4%26t%3D84 was not found on this server. <ins>That’s all we know.</ins> If goggle is showing this message do I have to still try to remove the link, or is it a case goggle has already dismissed the link?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | wcuk0 -
Opinions Wanted: Links Can Get Your Site Penalized?
I'm sure by now a lot of you have had a chance to read the Let's Kill the "Bad Inbound Links Can Get Your Site Penalized" Myth over at SearchEngineJournal. When I initially read this article, I was happy. It was confirming something that I believed, and supporting a stance that SEOmoz has taken time and time again. The idea that bad links can only hurt via loss of link juice when they get devalued, but not from any sort of penalization, is indeed located in many articles across SEOmoz. Then I perused the comments section, and I was shocked and unsettled to see some industry names that I recognized were taking the opposite side of the issue. There seems to be a few different opinions: The SEOmoz opinion that bad links can't hurt except for when they get devalued. The idea that you wouldn't be penalized algorithmically, but a manual penalty is within the realm of possibility. The idea that both manual and algorithmic penalties were a factor. Now, I know that SEOmoz preaches a link building strategy that targets high quality back links, and so if you completely prescribe to the Moz method, you've got nothing to worry about. I don't want to hear those answers here - they're right, but they're missing the point. It would still be prudent to have a correct stance on this issue, and I'm wondering if we have that. What do you guys think? Does anybody have an opinion one way or the other? Does anyone have evidence of it being one way or another? Can we setup some kind of test, rank a keyword for an arbitrary term, and go to town blasting low quality links at it as a proof of concept? I'm curious to hear your responses.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | AnthonyMangia0