Killed by penguin 3
-
So with the update to penguin 3.0 last week we notice that some clients have been significantly hit by the update. How do we rectify the situation for the poor links that are on the site.
We have used open site explorer and Google webmaster to try and identify which are the bad links to try and remove.
Now we can spot that some inbound links are from directories that may be perceived as low value/spam, but could not be sure what is affecting the ranking. The vast majority of these links are historical prior to inheriting this client recently and so do not have any logins to remove the links (if there are logins). These appear to be placed by teams outsourced in India. We would suspect that no site owner would spend the time removing links from the site any way.
How do we recover from the penguin hit. Is it just a case of trying to identify ones that we suspect could be perceived as spam and ask for these to be disavowed by Google? Do we contact all the sites to ask them to be removed and/or do we just push ahead with more engaging white hat methods of social SEO?
Are we likely to recover in the short term or be permanently hit. The site is for a small business with no more than 800 monthly hits so this fall from grace off very good front page positions is going to hit our client very hard even if the sins are from a previous business.
Any thoughts and suggestions PLEASE HELP
-
Thanks for the responses.
Looks like bit of a tough road ahead, but long term will be much for the better in cleaning up the (off)site.
The disavow exercise has been interesting in getting to review links in placed. There have been some strange links placed and very difficult to contact some websites to get them removed, but will try.
All the very best
-
-
Google is a bit secretive and hasn't let a lot slip out yet. My best guess would be when they next do an update if you have removed all the bad links you have the potential to increase, but this would be if Google thought you had cleaned up your bad links.
-
I use some software called ahrefs to get the full list of back links - even WMTs doesnt allow you to download the full list'
-
You could in theory have a link from a DA of 10 and be a great link, DA isn't really a great indicator - you could also have a link from a DA of 70+ and be a bad link. Check out these great articles:
http://moz.com/beginners-guide-to-seo/growing-popularity-and-links
http://moz.com/blog/category/link-building
But basically links need to be organic and natural, so if you have lots that are from forum signatures / comments, on websites outside your niche. If you sell garden furniture and have a lot of links sites about shoes for example, the odd one could be seen as relevant, but in general these aren't natural. You basically need to go to every page that is link to you and see if the link is relevant on the page, does it look natural and add value - or does it seem like it was just added in for the sake of a link.
- For disavow you simply upload a file, please keep this master file when uploaded as if you ever want to update this you need to include all previous bad links, as they don't keep an historical record and just use the latest file.
You only need to show evidence if you have a penalty in WMTs and are trying to have it removed.
-
-
In response to #1, unfortunately the answer is its impossible to know. We've had campaigns where disavowing links brought near immediate results, but we've also seen some that took months to correct.
As for #3, its more of a judgement call than a hard line on DA. As with all SEO, if there is good quality content on the page, then its a fine link to keep. If it looks borderline, probably better off disavowing it (better safe than sorry).
-
Thanks for getting back to us, really usefull and leads to several questions (sorry)
-
Your response implies will we only recover once links are removed/disavowed and the next update is in place. is this correct of do we see results once we have fixed the rot.
-
How do we get a FULL link list, even Open site explorer does not seem to do a full list.
-
How do we know which links affect us, i.e. is domain authority of the linking page relevant, if so what level would be acceptable. Most are above 25 DA that show in open site and would think this is OK?
-
Not having to disavow anything before, by showing evidence does that mean passing copies of email. How long after requesting to remove a link do we go and look to disavow in webmaster. getting links added can take upto 6 months so getting rid of them I am sure could take longer without fully knowing they are going to remove them anyway.
-
-
Hi
Good news - you can recover, the bad news - you have a lot of hard work to do, and when you will recover I don't know, Google hasn't yet confirmed how frequently the updates will roll.
First of all. Do a FULL link analysis and what ever links look unnatural and fake - disavow them straight away.
If you have a penalty you must show evidence you have tried to contact the webmaster's to get the links removed. Try to contact as many as possible and then do a disavow - the sooner the better.
Unfortunately, all you can do is hard work. Even if you did purely white hat going forward (and most sites I would say do Grey hat in my honest opinion, sending products out for review and a link, in my eyes is grey hat - but I digress), you still wouldn't recover.
The site is basically now on sinking sand any and good building you put on top is going to sink and be a waste of time, until you have sorted out the foundations (i.e. removed the bad links).
Sorry to say, this client is going to be taking up quite a bit of your time in the coming weeks, but you can be the good agency. Sit down with them and clearly explain everything what is wrong, what the previous agency / in house teams have done wrong and how your going to fix it. Then explain once you have fixed the issues, you are going to be good and do white hat techniques so that they never get penalised again - potential client for life. Put in the effort now and they will keep coming back.
Hope this is helpful.
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
-
New Flurry of thousands of bad links from 3 Spammy websites. Disavow?
I also discovered that a website www.prlog.ru put 32 links to my website. It is a russian site. It has a 32% spam score. Is that high? I think I need to disavow. Another spammy website link has spam score of 16% with with several thousand links. I added one link to the site medexplorer.com 6 years ago and it was fine. Now it has thousands of links. Should I disavow all three?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Boodreaux0 -
Link profile heavy with press release syndication links caused drop at Penguin 2.0
I'm wrestling with something that I'm hoping members of the community can provide input on.... I've working with an enterprise level client that is in the business of data capture and distribution. I've diagnosed a clear drop of traffic on May 22nd, i.e a loss of search visibility post Penguin 2.0. Their link profile is big! Discussions with internal stakeholders who have been with the company 10's of years confirm that no "link building" service providers have ever been hired and no over-zealous employee is ever likely to have tried to "do" link building internally. They are just one of those lucky companies that by their nature publish information that people want to link to and share. As a first port of call I've grouped links by anchor text and can see groups of hundreds of matching anchors based on their brand URL and specific page titles. The matching anchors have resulted from big take up of interesting data that they have marketed via press releases. NOT for link purposes. My question is this.... Does the community think or have evidence (or can point me toward any case studies) that show that Press release syndication alone could result in: a) a penguin penalty or...
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | QubaSEO
b) a devaluing of press release type links during Penguin 2.0 that could have resulted in a loss of search visibility and give the impression of a penalty Your thoughts are much appreciated!0 -
Does this graph look like a Penguin 2.0 hit?
Hello,Does the attached graph look like a Penguin 2.0 hit? Keep in mind that on our eCommerce site most purchases are from return customers. I forgot to add here that we cut a bunch of paid links in May 2013 as well. We quit cutting paid links when our rankings dropped - we thought it was the paid links. We currently have 30% paid links. Penguin 2.0 was on May 22. ga2.png
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobGW0 -
Partial match penalty & Penguin 2.1 smack
Our site is large and allows business owners to post their inventory for sale. We also make websites for those businesses that post their inventory. We link back to the home page of our site from each of those business websites using our domain name as the anchor text. Last summer we got a partial match penalty from Google "Unnatural links to your site—impacts links Google has detected a pattern of unnatural artificial, deceptive, or manipulative links pointing to pages on this site. Some links may be outside of the webmaster’s control, so for this incident we are taking targeted action on the unnatural links instead of on the site’s ranking as a whole. " We investigated and noticed a large amount of links from spammy sites, forum signatures, blog comments, etc. We think we were hit by a negative SEO campaign. We started cleaning up the backlinks and disavowing them. Every reconsideration request since has been denied with more examples of these horrid links. The final reconsideration request gave as examples of how we're violating Google link quality guidelines, our own sites we make for businesses. "_Google has received a reconsideration request from a site owner for domainname.com. We've reviewed the links to your site and we still believe that some of them are outside our quality guidelines." _ So here's the issue I need your advice on. We have tens of thousands of business websites linking back to our main site using our domain name. We're assuming this is the reason Google gave them as examples for violating link quality guidelines. **How can we fix this without losing traffic from removing all those backlinks or make our traffic tank worse than it has? ** Can we replace the domain name with our logo image and still link? Can we nofollow all those links? Can we link not to the home page but to internal pages or sections with no more than 10% of the links, linking to each section? Should we just remove the links and cry?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | CFSSEO0 -
11 000 links from 2 blogs + Many bad links = Penguin 2.0\. What is the real cause?
Hello, A website has : 1/ 8000 inbound links from 1 blog and 3000 from another one. They are clean and good blogs, all links are NOT marked as no-follow. 2/ Many bad links from directories that have been unindexed or penalized by Google On the 22nd of May, the website got hurt by Penguin 2.0. The link profile contains many directories and articles. The priority we had so far was unindexing the bad links, however shall we no-follow the blog links as well? Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | antoine.brunel0 -
Penguin 2.1 Penalty- Can't Understand why hit by it?
Hi, I have lost all my rankings after Penguin 2.1 update. I haven't did anything wrong. Want to know the root cause of the penalty so that I can overcome this. Any help would be appreciated. Website: http://tiny.cc/hfom4w
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | chandman0 -
Penguin Maybe? Ranking low for main term: Trying to find cause and correct
Hello, For nlpca(dot)com one of our main keywords is the term "NLP" We are ranking 25th for that term.Possible causes: 1. keyword stuffing on home page, though we need to use the term over and over again to describe ourselves. Also, competitors like nlpco(dot)com and nlpu(dot)com also mention "NLP" a lot 2. Backlink profile: see this spreadsheet. We have a lot of sites from other countries and many sitewides but all natural and almost all branded. Ou company names are NLP Institute of California, NLP California, and NLP and Coaching Institute. 3. nlpcacoach(dot)org is a sitewide footer link. So is iepdoc.nl. We're going to ask the first site to take our link down. 4. No "What is NLP" article. I think that might help. 5. Most of our 60 articles are posted on other sites. We author about 30 of them. I'm working on authorship via rel="author" and rel="me" links. There's usually 2 authors 6. Most of the title tags used to be 4 keywords separated by pipes -"|" I changed them all after the updates took the keyword "NLP" down. That's about all I can think of. What do we do or clean up?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobGW0 -
How to handle footer links after Penguin?
With the launch of Google's Penguin I know that footer links could possibly hurt rankings. Also too many links on a page are also bad. I have a client http://www.m-scribe.com That has footer links creating well over 100 links on many of their pages. How should I handle these footer links? Suggestions are greatly appreciated.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | RonMedlin0