Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Why would a domain show up in Webmaster Tools but not latest links?
-
I am going through links and trying to figure out what to disavow. I found a domain under "Who links the Most" I wanted to see what the exact link was and I can't find it when I download all links. Why would that be?
-
We have never done anything blackhat or spammy, but over time we have just acquired crappy links. We had a traffic drop when the first penguin was rolled out so we thought cleaning up some of the old crap would be a good idea.
-
I have seen links reported in GWT that when I clicked on were not there. I like to look at the page source and search for the link just to see if it might be hidden. But all I can guess is the GWT data is old and the link is no longer valid. Recently I read this article by Marie Haynes http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2374406/Penguin-Recovery-Should-You-Be-Removing-Links-or-Just-Disavowing and asked her in the comments what she thought about proactive disavow. Take a look but basically she says if you have no history of shady spammy links, you have nothing to worry about. But please read her words as she is very respected in this area.
-
We aren't in any sort of penalty, the site has been around close to 14 years and over time it has just picked up some crappy links. I figured it would be a good idea just to be proactive and get rid of stuff that I know is bad.
-
The only thing I can think of is that Google's John Mueller has said in the past that they only show a sample of links not all the links which has been a giant pain for many trying to do clean ups, however they have also said if it is not in WMT latests links then you need not bother with it as part of your disavow.
However if you are aware of a link and you think it is a poor one that you want to disassociate yourself with then I would add it and make a note about it if you are also in a penalty that needs a reconsideration request. It shows you are looking further than the bare minimum.
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
-
Why Is Google Webmaster Tools Pulling Zero Keyword Data?
I just linked a Google Webmaster Tools account to Google Analytics for a client, and Search Engine Optimization reports are showing up in Google Analytics as enabled, but there is zero keyword data, landing page data, etc., in the reports themselves. Has anyone encountered this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | yoursearchteam0 -
New Domain Vs. Existing Domain
Hello, A potential client of mine has been blacklisted because of bad SEO process basically they have over 1,500 toxic links on their site. They have penalised to such an extent that they are now on page 12 for most of their keywords and not ranking well on brand terms either. They are keen to on to a new domain entirely and ditch their current domain when we design their new site. I wanted to get people's opinion on whether this is the best course of action or should we try to salvage the current domain? Many thanks, Mat
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Barques-Design0 -
Unpaid Followed Links & Canonical Links from Syndicated Content
I have a user of our syndicated content linking to our detailed source content. The content is being used across a set of related sites and driving good quality traffic. The issue is how they link and what it looks like. We have tens of thousands of new links showing up from more than a dozen domains, hundreds of sub-domains, but all coming from the same IP. The growth rate is exponential. The implementation was supposed to have canonical tags so Google could properly interpret the owner and not have duplicate syndicated content potentially outranking the source. The canonical are links are missing and the links to us are followed. While the links are not paid for, it looks bad to me. I have asked the vendor to no-follow the links and implement the agreed upon canonical tag. We have no warnings from Google, but I want to head that off and do the right thing. Is this the right approach? What would do and what would you you do while waiting on the site owner to make the fixes to reduce the possibility of penguin/google concerns? Blair
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BlairKuhnen0 -
When crawls occur - when will my links show up in Open Site Explorer
Hello everyone, I've been building links for a while now and none of them show up in Explorer. My domain authority hasn't changed for about a month or so. When does Google do crawls and when does SEOMoz do crawls? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Harbor_Compliance0 -
How long for Google Webmaster tools to update/reflect link changes
Hi all, Does anyone know or have experience of how long GWMT takes to update its data?, we did some work on our link profile back in October/November but are still seeing old links (removed) showing in GWMT. Thanks in advance,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | righty0 -
Should I report unnatural links via Webmasters?
We have a client who fired their last SEO firm for backlinking. The company has the actual emails and evidence that it found. On July 19, 2012, they received a notice in Webmasters that "unnatural links" had been detected to their site. The notice states that they should request reinclusion, but Matt Cutts is saying something different: https://plus.google.com/u/3/109412257237874861202/posts/gik49G9c5LU My client wants to ensure that they are NOT impacted, so should they notify Google anyways? The notice in Webmasters reads: Dear site owner or webmaster of…. We’ve detected that some of your site’s pages may be using techniques that are outside Google’s Webmaster Guidelines. 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. We encourage you to make changes to your site so that it meets our quality guidelines. Once you’ve made these changes, please submit your site for reconsideration in Google’s search results. If you find unnatural links to your site that you are unable to control or remove, please provide the details in your reconsideration request. If you have any questions about how to resolve this issue, please see our Webmaster Help Forum for support. Sincerely, Google Search Quality Team
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dknewmedia0 -
How to get the 'show map of' tag/link in Google search results
I have 2 clients that have apparently random examples of the 'show map of' link in Google search results. The maps/addresses are accurate and for airports. They are both aggregators, they service the airports e.g. lax airport shuttle (not actual example) BUT DO NOT have Google Place listings for these pages either manually OR auto populated from Google, DO NOT have the map or address info on the pages that are returned in the search results with the map link. Does anyone know how this is the case? Its great that this happens for them but id like to know how/why so I can replicate across all their appropriate pages. My understanding was that for this to happen you HAD to have Google Place pages for the appropriate pages (which they cant do as they are aggregators). Thanks in advance, Andy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AndyMacLean0 -
DNS(Name servers), IP and domain.. All Showing Same Site...
Hello, My site is hosted on VPS with dedicate IP. The problem I am facing is my site is indexed and cached by domain, IP address and name server. I am able to open all the pages via www.xyz.com and and IP 1.1.1.1 and the name sever like ns1. hosted.com And if I USE site operator in google for 1.1.1.1 and ns1.hosted.com there are so many pages which is cache and in sites. Is it any server issue my hosting company give me a reply as given below "This is because that site is on the same ip as the nameserver. This is completely correct and normal. This is not an error." Is it true ? can you help me in this issue? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | semshah1430
