Best practice to disavow spammy links
-
Hi Forum,
I'm trying to quantify the logic for removing spammy links.
I've read the article: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-to-check-which-links-can-harm-your-sites-rankings.Based on my pivot chart results, I see around 55% of my backlinks at zero pagerank.
Q: Should I simply remove all zero page rank links or carry out an assessment based on the links (zero pagerank) DA / PA. If so what are sensible DA and/or PA metrics?
Q: What other factors should be taken into consideration, such as anchor text etc.
-
I would never get rid of links simply based on pagerank (or DA/PA). I would evaluate my links based on whether or not they were natural or self-made.
The first thing you need to decide though before slashing links is whether or not your links are actually hurting you. If your rankings dropped it doesn't necessarily have to be because of spammy links as there are many algorithm factors that could be in play.
Now, if your rankings dropped significantly on a Penguin refresh day, then yes, you could consider removing or disavowing the links. Most SEOs agree that the key to recovering from Penguin is to do that. You may not even have to remove them. Just disavowing is likely enough for Penguin. But no one can say for sure because Penguin hasn't refreshed since the disavow tool was released.
But be careful messing around with the disavow tool. I've seen sites that had other issues such as Panda or site structure issues that went and cut a bunch of potentially spammy links out and damaged their rankings even further.
-
-
It appears that their are. Duke Tanson wrote a really good article regarding using the disavow tool. He shares that the tool he used for this task was http://tools.seogadget.co.uk/ - stating, "I got all the contact details of the domains I wanted to remove using this tool."
-
If you know for certain the links are negatively impacting your site, I would probably send a couple of emails to the webmaster over the course of a week or two. This would show that you have tried multiple times to resolve the issue and give the webmaster time to resolve the issue for you. If multiple weeks have passed with no reply, you may have to take matters into your own hands with the disavow tool.
Hope this helps.
Mike
-
-
Thanks for your reply.
I have a couple of further questions.
Q: Are there any free tools or free online services that I can use to gather a live email address for a given site.
Q: Additionally, how long from sending "Removal Link" email before using Disavow?
-
Yup. Those look pretty spammy.
You should first try to contact the webmaster of these sites and request that your links be removed.
Google wants you to try as hard as you can to personally get your links removed from spammy sites prior to using the Disavow tool. It is also recommended that you save email correspondence between yourself and these webmasters to prove to Google you are actively trying to clean up your backlinks.
Does that help?
Mike
-
If they have a PR of 0, it would probably be worth your time to contact the webmaster and request you link be removed.
I do not believe that getting those types of backlinks removed would do any harm on your site. It would probably be more beneficial than anything.
Good luck.
Mike
-
Mike, this is very helpful information for me as well.
I'm curious - I also discovered I have links with 0 PR and have been wondering if I should put some time in to get them removed. Not with the disavow tool, but by writing to the webmaster or seeing if there is sanything on those sites that allows me to request that my link be removed. I also have not received any messages or warnings in GWT about penalties.. I did have a major drop in The SERPs for a couple of my keywords -still healthy for others and my business name URL. Do you feel it could do harm if I were to try to get the links removed?
-
Matt Cutts says that you should use the disavow link tool very carefully and only in certain circumstances.
I found this article very helpful: 6 Things To Think About Before Disavowing Links from Search Engine Land. It states, "If you haven’t actually been penalized and you start disavowing your links, you’re essentially outing yourself to Google that you manipulated the system. Make sure that you equivocally know you were penalized and it’s not just some random fluctuation in rankings, a sitemap or indexing problem, or an accidentally no-indexed page."
And according to Google Webmaster Tools , "This is an advanced feature and should only be used with caution. If used incorrectly, this feature can potentially harm your site’s performance in Google’s search results. We recommend that you disavow backlinks only if you believe you have a considerable number of spammy, artificial, or low-quality links pointing to your site, and if you are confident that the links are causing issues for you. In most cases, Google can assess which links to trust without additional guidance, so most normal or typical sites will not need to use this tool."
Hope this information answers your questions.
Mike
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
-
Are These Links Junk?
I hired an SEO to create incoming links to me website insisting that only white hat techniques be used. The SEO was highly recommended by a family friend. In 3 months about 14 links to my site were obtained. The URLs for the domains where the links originate are below. I paid $8,000 for the services of the SEO provider to create the links over 4 months. When I looked at the links more carefully I noticed that the sites did not seem to have owners. That there was no phone number, physical address and scant information about ownership. I also noticed that most pages had outgoing links of a promotional nature. Also, that content created for me had grammatical and occasional spelling errors. The links did not look bad in terms of MOZ domain authority and MOZ page authority, but when I went subscribed to AHREFS a few days ago and evaluated the links, I noticed that the URL rating (somewhat equivalent to MOZ page authority) was really low. Furthermore, noticed that one of the domains solicits paid links from gambling sites. The SEO who sourced the links on my behalf says he will explain why I "have nothing to worry about". Dividing his monthly fee by the number of links and I paid $571 per link. Is it possible the the below domains could have pages that I would want links from? Would these links be potentially worth more than a few hundred dollars? O are these sites more like a cheap PBN or maybe "the hoth". If the links are in fact good I would be delighted. But if they are of poor quality could I legitimately ask for a refund? Also, are these domains so bad that it is imperative for me to get the links removed? <colgroup><col width="198"></colgroup>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan1
| https://www.equities.com |
| http://www.realestaterama.com |
| https://moneyinc.com |
| https://homebusinessmag.com |
| http://digitalconnectmag.com |
| https://suburbanfinance.com/ |
| http://www.homebunch.com |
| http://inman.com |
| https://www.propertytalk.com/ |
| http://activerain.com |
| https://www.conservativedailynews.com/ |
| http://moneyforlunch.com/ |
| http://baltimorepostexaminer.com/ |
| https://www.tgdaily.com/ |
| |0 -
Footer no follow links
Just interested to know when putting links at the foot of the site some people use no-follow tags. I'm thinking about internal pages and social networks. Is this still necessary or is it an old-fashioned idea?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoman100 -
What link would be better?
Hi Guys, Just wondering what would be better in this instance: finding an old post (with good authority) and getting a link from that old article or creating a brand new article and adding the link to that. Finding an old post (with good authority) and getting a link from that old article Creating a brand new article and adding the link to that. Both naturally link out to the page you want a link too. To me, number 1 as the page already has authority but then again number 2 since Google might place some weight to recency. Any thoughts? Cheers.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | spyaccounts140 -
Links not removed
Hello, I want some help regarding Bad links, I have Uploaded Disavow links, webmaster tools before 4-5 months But still, They are showing in Back links to my Site & Not disavow, can any one Help For this ? why they still appears in backlinks to my site, Why not removed Still ? Thanx in Advance, Falguni
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Sanjayth0 -
My company wants to set up some blogs - what's best practice in getting started from scratch?
My company wants to set up two or three blogs (on previously unused domains) with the idea being to disseminate good content that gets picked up in SERPs and acts as a lead generator, shows us to be authorities in our market, creates brand (or individual employee who's doing the blogging) awareness etc... From scratch, what are all the boxes that should be ticked to make this work from the outset? What are the must haves?With all the ideals in place, how long could it realistically take to make this work? What are some pitfalls to look out for? Any advice in general will be appreciated. Thanks, M
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Martin_S0 -
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 -
Best practice to avoid cannibalization of internal pages
Hi everyone, I need help from the best SEO guys regarding a common issue : the cannibalization of internal pages between each other. Here is the case : Let's say I run the website CasualGames.com. This website provides free games, as well as articles and general presentation about given categories of Casual Games. For instance, for the category "Sudoku Games", the structure will be : Home page of the game : http://www.casualgames.com/sudoku/ Free sudoku game listings : (around 100 games listed) http://www.casualgames.com/sudoku/free/ A particular sudoku game : http://www.casualgames.com/sudoku/free/game-1/ A news regarding sudoku games : http://www.casualgames.com/sudoku/news/title The problem is that these pages seem to "cannibalize" each other. Explanation : In the SERPS, for the keyword "Casual Games", the home page doesn't appear well ranked and some specific sudoku games page (one of the 100 games) are better ranked although they are "sub-pages" of the category.. Same for the news pages : a few are better ranked than the category page.. I am kind of lost.. Any idea what would be the best practice in this situation? THANKS a LOT.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | laboiteac
Guillaume0 -
Do outbound links matter?
The value of inbound links is clear but do the number of outbound links matter when it comes to SEO and search engine rankings?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | casper4340