Remove spam url errors from search console
-
My site was hacked some time ago. I've since then redesigned it and obviously removed all the injection spam. Now I see in search console that I'm getting hundreds of url errors (from the spam links that no longer work).
How do I remove them from the search console. The only option I see is "mark as fixed", but obviously they are not "fixed", rather removed.
I've already uploaded a new sitemap and fetched the site, as well as submitted a reconsideration request that has been approved.
-
Hi Ruben,
I had the same issue with one of the websites and what Bas has recommended is great. We've done both methods and it cleared 90% of them. We are still getting a few in the search console and I am planning to update the disavow list, and hopefully they will disappear completely.
Hope Bas's recommendations will work for you.
Good luck,
Monica.
-
Removing them from the Console will have no effect on your site, Ruben - its' purely for your own housekeeping purposes.
Mark them fixed to get them out of the lists so that real ones will be easier to spot as they come up. As long as the spam links are landing on a real hard 404, they will eventually drop out. But it will take a considerably long time because those spam pages are such low value that Google isn't likely to recrawl them to discover the 404 very often. (Not that that will do you any harm, just annoying to look at.)
Also - don't be alarmed if some of those you mark "fixed" show up back in the list in a couple of months - that's not indicative of any problem.
Hope that helps?
Paul
-
Hi Ruben,
You've uploaded a new site map so Google will correct this over time.
Method #1: In the mean time you can manually delete the URL's from Webmaster Tools:
https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/url-removalYou can find this link in 'Google-index' and after that 'Remove URLs'. I have translated those terms from Dutch so give me some slack
Post the URL you can to delete and hit Enter. Will take some effort but i've noticed a couple of days ago that it works like a charm.
In the mean time Google will remove the old URL's permanently from the index.
Method #2: If you are familiar with .htaccess-files you can also mention the old URL's there and give a 410-status code. '410' stands for "The URL is gone and i have no new URL for you". Or - as someone wrote a couple of years ago - "It's gone, No really: it's gone."
Perhaps this link will help you on your way:
http://www.quickonlinetips.com/archives/2014/11/http-410-error-pages-htaccess/Good luck!
Bas
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
-
Search Console Click Through Results
Hi Moz Community, I've newly started using Google's search console on a regular basis, and I have a query about the results coming from the platform. For example, I added this article URL to the console with field "URL containing" and "URL exact", and the results showed 71 clicks and 436 impressions over 12 months. However, when looking at the queries that show in the results to see where the clicks are coming from, all of them state there's no clicks from the dozen or so queries that show. Am I doing something wrong here? Is there a field I need to fill in to show more results/top results? I've tested a few article URL's and the same has happened. Thanks in advance for any help.
Algorithm Updates | | FunktionEvents1 -
Should one end URLs with or without a slash?
Moz, I am noticing that I need to go back and update my outbound links to your site. There are a lot of them because your content is so great and we love you guys. Could you explain your logic for making the change? Example on my Valid JSON-LD image sizes page: [https://moz.com/blog/state-of-searcher-behavior-revealed/](https://moz.com/blog/state-of-searcher-behavior-revealed/) redirected to: [https://moz.com/blog/state-of-searcher-behavior-revealed](https://moz.com/blog/state-of-searcher-behavior-revealed)
Algorithm Updates | | jessential0 -
Google inaccurate results: Common or error?
Hi all, While searching for our primary keyword, I can see 2 websites on second page results which are non-related to the keyword or industry but their company name is this keyword. Like if I want to rank and searching for "SEO", there are 2 websites which called "seo trucks" and "seo paints". I wonder how Google is ranking these websites for high competition keyword with 1 million searches per month. So the keyword in URL and this keyword mentioned across the website being their brand name taking over the other potential ranking factors like backlinks, relevant content, user clicks, etc..... Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
What does it exactly means when Google brings the "brand name" to the beggining of the page title in search results when it was actually given at the end?
We see many times...page titles starts with "brand name: page for etc" where actually "brand name" has been given at the end and keywords at beginning. Why does Google make this change? I noticed this happens when similar title tags are used by multiple websites for high difficulty keywords. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Image Thumbnail in Google Mobile Search results
HI all, We can see that Google is now showing thumbnails of products in the search results on mobile.
Algorithm Updates | | RetailClicks
Very nice, but... What are specs of our snippets to show? Cause i see it at other search results of websites, but not ours?
Please help us out. Thanks!
Jeroen http://searchengineland.com/google-mobile-search-results-now-showing-images-snippets-2589190 -
Why are organic search results vastly different on Bing, Google and Yahoo Search
We searched two words for a client so see how/where their site returned results. Depending on both the browser we used and the search engine, the results were so vastly different we were shocked. The site returned #2 or 3 on Bing and YahooSearch and not until the 3rd page for Google! And it also returned much worse on Chrome than any other browser, a Google product. I know this topic must be covered somewhere, or perhaps someone would be kind enough to chime in and shed some light? We have been working hard to optimize for Google and failing, but doing very well everywhere else. What gives?
Algorithm Updates | | jimmyzig1 -
Google is forcing a 301 by truncating our URLs
Just recently we noticed that google has indexed truncated urls for many of our pages that get 301'd to the correct page. For example, we have:
Algorithm Updates | | mmac
http://www.eventective.com/USA/Massachusetts/Bedford/107/Doubletree-Hotel-Boston-Bedford-Glen.html as the url linked everywhere and that's the only version of that page that we use. Google somehow figured out that it would still go to the right place via 301 if they removed the html filename from the end, so they indexed just: http://www.eventective.com/USA/Massachusetts/Bedford/107/ The 301 is not new. It used to 404, but (probably 5 years ago) we saw a few links come in with the html file missing on similar urls so we decided to 301 them instead thinking it would be helpful. We've preferred the longer version because it has the name in it and users that pay attention to the url can feel more confident they are going to the right place. We've always used the full (longer) url and google used to index them all that way, but just recently we noticed about 1/2 of our urls have been converted to the shorter version in the SERPs. These shortened urls take the user to the right page via 301, so it isn't a case of the user landing in the wrong place, but over 100,000 301s may not be so good. You can look at: site:www.eventective.com/usa/massachusetts/bedford/ and you'll noticed all of the urls to businesses at the top of the listings go to the truncated version, but toward the bottom they have the full url. Can you explain to me why google would index a page that is 301'd to the right page and has been for years? I have a lot of thoughts on why they would do this and even more ideas on how we could build our urls better, but I'd really like to hear from some people that aren't quite as close to it as I am. One small detail that shouldn't affect this, but I'll mention it anyway, is that we have a mobile site with the same url pattern. http://m.eventective.com/USA/Massachusetts/Bedford/107/Doubletree-Hotel-Boston-Bedford-Glen.html We did not have the proper 301 in place on the m. site until the end of last week. I'm pretty sure it will be asked, so I'll also mention we have the rel=alternate/canonical set up between the www and m sites. I'm also interested in any thoughts on how this may affect rankings since we seem to have been hit by something toward the end of last week. Don't hesitate to mention anything else you see that may have triggered whatever may have hit us. Thank you,
Michael0 -
How do you get the Mini-Embed-Link-Thingies in search results?
Rand Fishkin touched on the tiny links that can appear for your search result - not the 6 pack of links that show the structure of your site, but the 2-4 links that show up on one line below your meta description. Any idea how to earn or influence these? He mentioned them in the "New Opportunities in Google's Search Results" webinar from May 2011 on Slide 19 if that helps. An example would be if you search "seo guide" in Google search, the SEOmoz link has those mini links below the meta description. Are they random or can they be influenced?
Algorithm Updates | | Hakkasan0