Unnatural Links Warning Disappeared from Search Console Account
-
Hello all,
In 2013 I had an Unnatural Links Warning message in my GWT account. I believe that it was a result of the work of an old SEO company. When I received the warning I was working with an SEO. He helped me clean up some links. He also uploaded a disavow file for me. He did not file a reconsideration request. He told me that it was not necessary at the time. The message disappeared from my account.
A few months ago a similar message appeared in the manual accounts section of my account. I gathered inbound links from GWT, Majestic, etc. I went through them myself and tried to contact lots and lots of webmasters. I got many links cleaned up. I spent several months on this project.
I just logged into my Search Console account this afternoon and clicked through everything and guess what... that manual penalty message is gone. So... what does that mean?
I assume that I should still upload the disavow file for the sites that did not respond to me that are spammy. Should I still try to file a reconsideration request even though there doesn't seem to be a manual penalty?
How should I proceed? Thanks.
Melissa
-
Your article pretty much sums of my situation.
The warning that I saw a couple of months ago was a "partial match manual penalty", but it is gone now.
I want to see if I can get a few more things to come do or add the no follow and then I will go ahead with the disavow.
Thanks for your response.
-
Hi Melissa,
All manual penalties do expire. But just to be sure...is it just the message that disappeared, or did the entire manual action disappear? To know, go to Search Traffic --> Manual Actions. Do you see "no manual webspam actions" there? If so, then most likely the penalty expired.
I wrote more about this here:
If your manual action expired, then the good news is that you don't need to try contacting each site owner to get links removed. Remove the unnatural link that are in your control (if any) and disavow the rest on the domain level. Most sites that get unnatural links penalties also have issues with penguin algorithmically, so you definitely want to make sure your link profile is clean.
-
I am actually going to keep doing a little more cleaning and then upload the disavow. Hopefully this will do the trick.
Thanks for your responses.
-
This is correct, I've seen the same thing happen and it's true that penalties do sometimes just expire. And as Andy says, it doesn't mean that all that auditing work you did was for naught. You can still upload a disavow file, and you've been excused from the ritual of begging for Google's forgiveness
-
Hi Melissa,
Penalties do actually just expire, but it isn't like there is a set time period for this, so if you have no mention in Webmaster Tools of any penalty, then you really don't have one. You won't be given the option to try and do a reconsideration request either. I am pretty sure it was John Mueller that confirmed this.
I would still go through and disavow sites that have not got back to you though, just as best practice and to do a little damage mitigation. You may find that the penalty comes back at some point in the future if you don't.
-Andy
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
-
Poor internal linking?
Hi guys, Analyzing a large e-commerce site 10,000 pages on Magento and not getting much organic traffic to level 3 sub-category pages, the URLs are like: Primary Keyword Target: BODY MOISTURISERS https://www.adorebeauty.com.au/skin-care/bath-body/moisturisers.html Primary Keyword Target: LIP MASKS https://www.adorebeauty.com.au/skin-care/masks/lip-masks.html Plus another 40 other URLs at level 3 with low organic performance. Authority of the domain is strong, so it's not an authority issue I believe its internal linking. Besides linking form the blog and breadcrumbs is there anything we can do to improve internal linking to these level 3 pages? Cheers.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nattyhall0 -
Search Console - Best practice to fetch pages when you update them?
Hi guys, If you make changes to a page e.g. add more content or something is it good practice to get google to fetch that page again in search console? My assumption is this way, Google can review the updated page quicker, resulting in faster changes in the SERPs for that page. Thoughts? Cheers.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | wozniak650 -
URL Parameters Settings in WMT/Search Console
On an large ecommerce site the main navigation links to URLs that include a legacy parameter. The parameter doesn’t actually seem to do anything to change content - it doesn’t narrow or specify content, nor does it currently track sessions. We’ve set the canonical for these URLs to be without the parameter. (We did this when we started seeing that Google was stripping out the parameter in the majority of SERP results themselves.) We’re trying to best strategize on how to set the parameters in WMT (search console). Our options are to set to: 1. No: Doesn’t affect page content’ - and then the Crawl field in WMT is auto-set to ‘Representative URL’. (Note, that it's unclear what ‘Representative URL’ is defined as. Google’s documentation suggests that a representative URL is a canonical URL, and we've specifically set canonicals to be without the parameter so does this contradict? ) OR 2. ‘Yes: Changes, reorders, or narrows page content’ And then it’s a question of how to instruct Googlebot to crawl these pages: 'Let Googlebot decide' OR 'No URLs'. The fundamental issue is whether the parameter settings are an index signal or crawl signal. Google documents them as crawl signals, but if we instruct Google not to crawl our navigation how will it find and pass equity to the canonical URLs? Thoughts? Posted by Susan Schwartz, Kahena Digital staff member
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AriNahmani0 -
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 -
My warning report says I have too many on page links - 517! I can't find 50% of them but my q is about no follow
if we put 'no follow' on some of these links does that mean the search engines won't index the no follow pages even if those pages are linked to from elsewhere? no link juice will flow from the page with the (no follow) links on? Just trying to understand why my rankings have dropped so dramatically in the last 6 weeks or so since we redesigned the site, and it might be that now we have too many links on the homepage. This is the page http://www.suffolktouristguide.com/ All suggestions appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SarahinSuffolk0 -
Link Anchor Text
As I keep studing SEO I reach to the conclusion that the Anchor Text from other site is crucial to get more positive results for our website and for the link-building strategy. My question is - Is it better to have an Anchor Text to my main link our should I ask for a determine targeted keyword? Tks in advance! Pedro M Pereira
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PedroM0 -
Is there an optimal ratio of external links to a page vs internal links originating at that page ?
I understand that multiple links fro a site dilute link juice. I also understand that external links to a specific page with relevant anchortext helps ranking. I wonder if there is an ideal ratioof tgese two items
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Apluswhs0 -
Is linking to search results bad for SEO?
If we have pages on our site that link to search results is that a bad thing? Should we set the links to "nofollow"?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline0