Manual Removal Request Versus Automated Request to Remove Bad Links
-
Our site has several hundred toxic links. We would prefer that the webmaster remove them rather than submitting a disavow file to Google.
Are we better off writing web masters over and over again to get the links removed? If someone is monitoring the removal and keeps writing the web masters will this ultimately get better results than using some automated program like LinkDetox to process the requests? Or is this the type of request that will be ignored no matter what we do and how we ask?
I am willing to invest in the manual labor, but only if there is some chance of a favorable outcome.
Does anyone have experience with this? Basically how to get the highest compliance rate for link removal requests?
Thanks, Alan
-
I agree with Moosa here. When we went through this we used Link Detox to help identify the links we wanted to remove/disavow and RMOOV to send an automated email campaign. The response rate was less than 5%as I recall and usually took multiple emails if there was to be a response.
This is the nice thing about the tools as they track success for you. It's also a really good idea to use a "throw away"email address,as many of these may be reported by the recipients as spam and get your email account added to spam filters.I think the personal touch thing is more for outreach. Not worth the effort here.
Best!
-
Alan, if I would be at your place, I would have moved to a program like link detox instead of the manual labor and here are some reasons why!
- You are emailing to the real people so no matter what trick you use, there are chances that you may fail, especially if they have decided not to remove the links.
- The removal ratio can dramatically increase if you offer a small amount to remove a link but again disavow is a better and easy option that will help you save your time and money.
- Manual Labor to do a work that might or might not work is a bad investment in my opinion, on the other hand manual labor will be much more expensive as compare to a tool like Link Detox.
Link Detox will find bad links, email them and give you the list of bad links that contain your website link. You can get that data and create a disavow file and submit it to Google.
All in all, I understand your point but in my opinion it is not a very good investment.
Hope this helps!
-
Hi Alan
When I pull links, I do so from WMT, Majestic, OSE, and Ahrefs.
Reason being, you're going to see different links from different tools. No one source covers them all, so it's best to get as much data as you can from different places.
I will read into LinkDetox and tell you if anything is a red flag to me, but again, your statement from the other question thread seems like a lot money for automation and "too good to be true".
Please let me know if you have any more questions or comments - would love to help where I can and see you through! Best of luck!
-
Hi Patrick:
Thanks for your in depth response!! The expedite tools in Link Detox is described here: http://www.linkdetox.com/boost.
But if Google will now process disavow files in a few months as the MOZ blogpost your refer to states, I guess there is no point in using boast.
Our site never received a manual penalty from Googlebut did drop in ranking after the first Penguin in April 2012. Recover since then has been sporadic and uneven despite a major investment in SEO.
I have pretty much followed the procedure you describe. Only deviation is that I compiled the links from Google Webmaster Tools plus the Link Detox database. I wonder if we are missing a significant number of links by not sourcing AHREFs, MOZ. If I can identify 80-90% of the bad links I think it is sufficient. I don't expect 100% in removing them.
Thanks again for your assistance!!
Alan
-
Hi there
Based on some previous work I have done, webmasters are substantially more responsive to manual outreach and can definitely tell the difference.
Always include:
-
Their name
-
Both in the subject line and greeting
-
I like "Attn: (name) / Link Removal Request"
-
Their site domain name
-
Links to pages with examples of your link
-
Thank them for their time
-
Signature with proper contact information
Always respond to emails - good, bad, or indifferent - people respond to a real human being. Thank them for removal, kindly respond to apprehension or irritability, and answer (within reason) questions they may have. Do not be hostile back. I would usually send three emails:
1. Stating my reason for reaching out and where my link is located.
2. If I didn't hear back, about four days later, I would follow up. Again letting them know where my link is located.
3. If I didn't hear back, about 3-5 days later, I would let them know that this would be my last email before disavowing their link.Usually, I didn't make it to three. Remember to document and keep records of your outreach in case you somehow get a manual action - you'll need it.
Here is a great link removal resource:
Link Audit Guide for Effective Link Removals & Risk Mitigation (Moz)Always consider disavow files a tool and friend - they do work. If you can't get links removed and you fear a manual action, these will be your next line of defense - especially if you are dealing with hundreds of bad links.
Take the time to manually reach out to webmasters if you can - it will pay off. I also want to suggest LinkRisk as another tool to look into for your link audits and outreach. It has been a big help for me.
Hope this helps! Good luck!
-
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 link explorer
I was checking this new tool which is really cool by the way and was wondering if I can outrank big guys with just content. I have a Domain authority of 28 with a spam score of 28 % Can I outrank with amazing content a site that hase a domain authority of 50 and a spam score of 1 % ? Should I ask for all my bad links to be removed so that my spam score goes down or doesn't it matter anymore those days and what matters is good content, link just don't count anymore ? Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics1 -
Base href + relative link href for canonical link
I have a site that in the head section we specify a base href being the domain with a trailing slash and a canonical link href being the relative link to the domain. <base <="" span="">href="http://www.domain.com/" /> href="link-to-page.html" rel="canonical" /> I know that Google recommends using an absolute path as a canonical link but is specifying a base href with a relative canonical link the same thing or is it still seen as duplicate content?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Nobody16116990439410 -
Removing pages from index
My client is running 4 websites on ModX CMS and using the same database for all the sites. Roger has discovered that one of the sites has 2050 302 redirects pointing to the clients other sites. The Sitemap for the site in question includes 860 pages. Google Webmaster Tools has indexed 540 pages. Roger has discovered 5200 pages and a Site: query of Google reveals 7200 pages. Diving into the SERP results many of the pages indexed are pointing to the other 3 sites. I believe there is a configuration problem with the site because the other sites when crawled do not have a huge volume of redirects. My concern is how can we remove from Google's index the 2050 pages that are redirecting to the other sites via a 302 redirect?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | tinbum0 -
Disavow Links & Paid Link Removal (discussion)
Hey everyone, We've been talking about this issue a bit over the last week in our office, I wanted to extend the idea out to the Moz community and see if anyone has some additional perspective on the issue. Let me break-down the scenario: We're in the process of cleaning-up the link profile for a new client, which contains many low quality SEO-directory links placed by a previous vendor. Recently, we made a connection to a webmaster who controls a huge directory network. This person found 100+ links to our client's site on their network and wants $5/link to have them removed. Client was not hit with a manual penalty, this clean-up could be considered proactive, but an algorithmic 'penalty' is suspected based on historical keyword rankings. **The Issue: **We can pay this ninja $800+ to have him/her remove the links from his directory network, and hope it does the trick. When talking about scaling this tactic, we run into some ridiculously high numbers when you talk about providing this service to multiple clients. **The Silver Lining: **Disavow Links file. I'm curious what the effectiveness of creating this around the 100+ directory links could be, especially since the client hasn't been slapped with a manual penalty. The Debate: Is putting a disavow file together a better alternative to paying for crappy links to be removed? Are we actually solving the bad link problem by disavowing or just patching it? Would choosing not to pay ridiculous fees and submitting a disavow file for these links be considered a "good faith effort" in Google's eyes (especially considering there has been no manual penalty assessed)?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Etna0 -
OSE link report showing links to 404 pages on my site
I did a link analysis on this site mormonwiki.com. And many of the pages shown to be linked to were pages like these http://www.mormonwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Planning_a_trip_to_Rome_By_using_Movie_theatre_-_Your_five_Fun_Shows2052752 There happens to be thousands of them and these pages actually no longer exist but the links to them obviously still do. I am planning to proceed by disavowing these links to the pages that don't exist. Does anyone see any reason to not do this, or that doing this would be unnecessary? Another issue is that Google is not really crawling this site, in WMT they are reporting to have not crawled a single URL on the site. Does anyone think the above issue would have something to do with this? And/or would you have any insight on how to remedy it?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ThridHour0 -
How many back links a day?
I am the owner of a very small business who can not afford a decent SEO company. So I am doing my SEO myself. I am producing good amount of content. But at the same time I am way behind my competition in back linking. Can you please let me know as a rule of thumb, how many external do-follow links a day I should make to be on the safe side? Thanks all
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AlirezaHamidian0 -
Fastest Way To Remove Footer Link? (post-Panda)
Hello, I have a website with 1k+ links pointed directly to an inner page and home page from blogspot domains. There are 3 links in the footer that points to different locations. 1st anchor text points to the person who designed the page template and links to their website (this doesn't affect us) 2nd anchor text uses a direct keyword that I am trying to rank for and links to the inner page. 3rd anchor text uses my website name and links to the home page I know that these are not good links and the content inside the pages are irrelevant to my own website. The links are embedded into the template on the footer and is site wide.I have already contacted the designer and have the links removed but those that have downloaded the templates still have the footer link. What would be the best way to remove all these footer links? Trying to contact each individual person who is using the template is not working out as most have not responded and some of the websites have not seen an update in years! Any thoughts? If you need additional information feel free to send me a direct message so I can send you an exact link.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Shawn1240 -
Best internal linking structure?
We are considering implementing a site-wide contextual linking structure. Does anyone have some good guidelines / blog posts on this topic? Our site is quite (over 1 million pages), so the contextual linking would be automated, but we need to define a set of rules. Basically, if we have a great page on 'healthy recipes,' should we make every instance of the word 'healthy recipes' link back to that page, or should we limit it to a certain number of pages?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline0