Following urls should be add in disavow file or not
-
Hey Moz Friends,
Should I include following spam link urls in disavow file or not? OR Will Google handle automatically? These type I have thousands urls.
=>>>web-seek.org/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>web-seek.net/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>websearching.net/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42/
=>>>websearch.pl/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>web-search.net/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42/
=>>>web-pages.org/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42/
=>>>web-page.org/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>the-world.net/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>the-internet.tv/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>the-internet.in/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>the-globe.tv/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42/
=>>>theglobe.sk/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>theglobe.ru/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=
=>>>theglobe.pl/the_worlds_most_visited_web_pages_42.html<<<=Hope you will give any solution.
Waiting for your positive response.
-
That is just not the case. I saw the same from google, but disavowing globe domains helps in a big way.
-
I have heard the same, but experience shows that disavowing them most certainly helps as of 2/12/2020.
There is a utility that can find every globe domain in a MOZ Linking Domains CSV file, and its free.
https://dynamic.domains/disavow-utility.zip
Just use the_worlds_most_visited in the keyword field, and it will find every single globe domain in your file.
Sam
-
I hear what you are saying. Like you say there are people on both sides of the fence, I get rid of them and I am pretty sure I've seen some examples where it has actually benefited results
-
I disagree, but I know there are lots of people on both sides of the fence on this one!
"The globe is a known spam network", so one would assume Google is aware and just ignores it.
Google say (highlighting is me):
"Google works very hard to make sure that actions on third-party sites do not negatively affect a website. In some circumstances, incoming links can affect Google’s opinion of a page or site. For example, you or a search engine optimizer (SEO) you’ve hired may have built bad links to your site via paid links or other link schemes that violate our quality guidelines." - https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/2648487?hl=enAnd John Mueller said (highlighting is me):
"Random links collected over the years aren't necessarily harmful, we've seen them for a long time too and can ignore all of those weird pieces of web-graffiti from long ago. Disavow links that were really paid for (or otherwise actively unnaturally placed), don't fret the cruft." - https://twitter.com/JohnMu/status/1088929651593039872If you didn't go out and generate those links, I wouldn't worry about them.
Disavowing a known spam link site does not help Google clear up
-
The Globe is a known spam network and you should disavow links, at the least - from all spam sites. There have been several posts here over the past few months with users either seeing a dive in their results (and then I check their backlinks, finding billions of globe ones) or sharing their own disavow files. In most instances, most users have agreed that The Globe is a nasty spammy network which looks like it is link selling, which could potentially (in some circumstances, not all) lead to negative SEO impacts
If you identify pages as being part of The Globe network, I would strongly advise you to disavow them. We've had to disavow thousands for some clients who were negatively impacted and removing them did help
They are spammy link lists. The pages serve no function or purpose, other than (apparently) SEO. Google say time and again, these types of pages and links clutter up the web and cause lots of problems. They don't like these. Just because a web-pages isn't some kind of satanic gambling bdsm site, that doesn't mean it is a good link that you should keep
These days, standards are higher (IMO). Say no to these kinds of links
-
Thanks for reverting me. Can you share any article or forum where Google says that Google will discount these type links and won't penalize.
-
Sites like that will not do any harm (they won't do anything for your rankings to be fair). I wouldn't worry about disavowing, Google will be well aware of them and discount them, they won't penalise you.
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
-
URL masking
Hi all, Within my organization we maintain a bunch of websites, say child1.com, child2.com and child3.com. It was recently suggested that we merge all three into a single one, say mother.com. The marketing community within my organization strongly argued against this, mainly due to risks related to brand awareness, rank and traffic loss for each of these websites. But we resigned to the idea that we must do it, so we started considering the next proper steps. Now, my understanding is that setting up redirects is crucial in order to cushion the fall and mitigate the losses. However, some people are suggesting url masking. To me personally, url masking doesn't sound like a white hat practice, maybe it's borderline grey, but the bottom line is I need some advice on this topic. Could someone kindly address the following: 1. How is url masking different from url redirect? 2. Is url masking different from url cloaking? 3. Would google penalize us for implementing url masking? 4. Would that have any impact on our PPC campaigns? 5. Are there any documented cases of successful and google-sanctioned websites that are actively using url masking? 6. Are there any pitfalls to using this strategy? Thank you
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SimonaCretu0 -
What to do with internal spam url's google indexed?
I am in SEO for years but never met this problem. I have client who's web page was hacked and there was posted many, hundreds of links, These links has been indexed by google. Actually these links are not in comments but normal external urls's. See picture. What is the best way to remove them? use google disavow tool or just redirect them to some page? The web page is new, but ranks good on google and has domain authority 24. I think that these spam url's improved rankings too 🙂 What would be the best strategy to solve this. Thanks. k9Bviox
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | AndrisZigurs0 -
Google URL Shortener- Should I use one or multiple???
I have a client with a number of YouTube videos. I'm using Google URL Shortner to allow the link to show in the YouTube text (as its a long URL). Many of these links go to the same page ex .com/services-page Should I use a single short URL for each video linking to the .com/services-page or should they be unique each time? If unique, would Google possibly think I'm trying to manipulate results? Thanks in advance. I'm just not sure on this one and hope someone knows best practice on this. Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | mgordon1 -
How Important is it to Use Keywords in the URL
I wanted to know how important this measure is on rankings. For example if I have pages named "chair.html" or "sofa.html" and I wanted to rank for the term seagrass chair or rattan sofa.. Should I start creating new pages with the targeted keywords "seagrass-chair.html" and just copy everything from the old page to the new and setup the 301 redirects?? Will this hurt my SEO rankings in the short term? I have over 40 pages I would have to rename and redirect if doing so would really help in the long run. Appreciate your input.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | wickerparadise0 -
Vanity URLs Canonicalization
Hi, So right now my vanity URLs have a lot more links than my regular homepage. They 301 redirect to the homepage but I'm thinking of canonicalizing the homepage, as well as the mobile page, to the vanity URL. Currently some of my sites have a vanity URL in a SERP and some do not. This is my way of nudging google to list them all as vanity but thought I would get everyone's opinion first. Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | mattdinbrooklyn1 -
One page with multiple sections - unique URL for each section
Hi All, This is my first time posting to the Moz community, so forgive me if I make any silly mistakes. A little background: I run a website that for a company that makes custom parts out of specialty materials. One of my strategies is to make high quality content about all areas of these specialty materials to attract potential customers - pretty strait-forward stuff. I have always struggled with how to structure my content; from a usability point of view, I like just having one page for each material, with different subsections covering covering different topical areas. Example: for a special metal material I would have one page with subsections about the mechanical properties, thermal properties, available types, common applications, etc. Basically how Wikipedia organizes its content. I do not have a large amount of content for each section, but as a whole it makes one nice cohesive page for each material. I do use H tags to show the specific sections on the page, but I am wondering if it may be better to have one page dedicated to the specific material properties, one page dedicated to specific applications, and one page dedicated to available types. What are the communities thoughts on this? As a user of the website, I would rather have all of the information on a single, well organized page for each material. But what do SEO best practices have to say about this? My last thought would be to create a hybrid website (I don't know the proper term). Have a look at these examples from Time and Quartz. When you are viewing a article, the URL is unique to that page. However, when you scroll to the bottom of the article, you can keep on scrolling into the next article, with a new unique URL - all without clicking through to another page. I could see this technique being ideal for a good web experience while still allowing me to optimize my content for more specific topics/keywords. If I used this technique with the Canonical tag would I then get the best of both worlds? Let me know your thoughts! Thank you for the help!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | jaspercurry0 -
How to resolve - Googlebot found an extremely high number of URLs
Hi, We got this message from Google Webmaster “Googlebot found an extremely high number of URLs on your site”. The sample URLs provided by Google are all either noindex or have a canonical. http://www.myntra.com/nike-stylish-show-caps-sweaters http://www.myntra.com/backpacks/f-gear/f-gear-unisex-black-&-purple-calvin-backpack/162453/buy?src=tn&nav_id=541 http://www.myntra.com/kurtas/alma/alma-women-blue-floral-printed-kurta/85178/buy?nav_id=625 Also we have specified the parameters on these URLs as representative URL in Google Webmaster - URL parameters. Your comments on how to resolve this issue will be appreciated. Thank You Kaushal Thakkar
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Myntra0 -
301 domain name URL variants for canonicalization question in htaccess?
#1 RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^xyz.com [NC] RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.xyz.com/$1 [L,R=301] What I want to do here is to redirect URLs that have omitted the “www.” prefix to the full “www.xyz.com” home page URL. That means the home page URL http://xyz.com will not resolve on its own, but instead will redirect to http://www.xyz.com (without trailing slash). #2 RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} ^[A-Z]{3,9}\ /([^/]+/)*(default|index).(html|php|htm)\ HTTP/ [NC] RewriteRule ^(([^/]+/)*)(default|main|index).(html|php|htm)$ http://www.xyz.com/$1 [L,R=301] What I want to do here is to ensure that any home page URL that includes several versions of explicit page name references, such as default.htm or index.html, will be redirected to the canonical home page URL, http://www.xyz.com (without trailing slash). Are the rewrite rules correct? Thanks in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | esiow20130