A potential client who got busted !
-
We had a call this week from a company who have been using a SEO company providing link building services.
The back links they have been generating are seriously dodgy back links !
Here are some examples of the back links -
http://www.utc.fr/interactions/?FORUM-DEBAT-quel-s-role-s-pour-les
http://mad.blogtv.uol.com.br/2010/03/12/homenagens-ao-grande-cartunista-glauco
http://medical.gate2finance.com/node/67
Yes a seriously dodgy back link profile ! He received the following email from google via webmaster tools -
Dear site owner or webmaster of http://www.jumpforfun.co.uk/,
We've detected that some of your site's pages may be using techniques that are outside Google's Webmaster Guidelines.
Specifically, look for possibly artificial or unnatural links pointing to your site that could be intended to manipulate PageRank. Examples of unnatural linking could include buying links to pass PageRank or participating in link schemes.
We encourage you to make changes to your site so that it meets our quality guidelines. Once you've made these changes, please submit your site for reconsideration in Google's search results.
If you find unnatural links to your site that you are unable to control or remove, please provide the details in your reconsideration request.
If you have any questions about how to resolve this issue, please see our Webmaster Help Forum for support.
Sincerely,
Google Search Quality Team
I mentioned to the client I would speak to the community on SEO moz to the owner of the site and see what opinions other SEO's would have on solving this issue.
-
Hi there,
From the sounds of it, you have not seen a penalty yet. I've had a lot of calls and emails since my last post. My feeling is that you can either be proactive, and submit a reconsideration request before things go bad, or be reactive and see if anything happens. The latter strategy is better if there are a lot of links that you cannot clean up. In either case, don't do a reconsideration request until you've made a reasonable attempt to clean up the links.
Thanks,
Carson
-
Agree with Istvan, but I would also add - start creating some quality links!
Of course, getting these dodgy links removed should be your first step, but try and get a few quality links to outweigh these spammy ones. That will also help with resubmission if it comes to that.
-
Hey Garry,
Firstly I would start contacting these websites and kindly ask for a link removal (make sure to keep the archives of these messages in case of submitting for reconsideration).
Note, that you can handle the links that you have on your site, but you cannot those which are on other websites, owned by other companies.
If they do not respond with on the link removal, you can point out the message archives while resubmitting.
Good luck!
Istvan
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
-
Hi. Has anyone seen a drop in their PA recently? We have over 40 clients and 80% dropped and it has been like this for the past 2 months. I wanted to check if other websites are also experiencing this drop or is it just us?
I'm specifically asking for drops happened in the last 2 months, because before that we had a normal trend. Some websites would go up in their PA rankings and some would drop. But seeing 80% of our clients drop like this is just weird. Just wanted to see if other market leaders are also having the same issue so I can stop attributing it something X-Filish! Our clients are all .EDUs if anyone was wondering. Also the maximum drop has been 4 points in a month.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AP_Search0 -
A client rebranded a few years ago and doesn't want to be associated with it's old brand name. He wishes not to appear when the old brand is searched in Google, is there something we can do?
The problem is there was redirection between the old branded site and the new one, and now when you type in the name of the old brand, the new one comes up. I have desperately tried to convince this client there is nothing we can do about it, dozens of news articles crop up with the two brands together as this was a hot topic a few years ago, but just in case I missed something I thought I'd ask the community of experts here on Moz. An example for this would be Tyco Healthcare that became covidien in 2007. When you type tyco healthcare, covidien crops up here and there. Any ideas? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Netsociety0 -
How to handle potentially thousands (50k+) of 301 redirects following a major site replacement
We are looking for the very best way of handling potentially thousands (50k+) of 301 redirects following
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GeezerG
a major site replacement and I mean total replacement. Things you should know
Existing domain has 17 years history with Google but rankings have suffered over the past year and yes we know why. (and the bitch is we paid a good sized SEO company for that ineffective and destructive work)
The URL structure of the new site is completely different and SEO friendly URL's rule. This means that there will be many thousands of historical URL's (mainly dynamic ones) that will attract 404 errors as they will not exist anymore. Most are product profile pages and the God Google has indexed them all. There are also many links to them out there.
The new site is fully SEO optimised and is passing all tests so far - however there is a way to go yet. So here are my thoughts on the possible ways of meeting our need,
1: Create 301 redirects for each an every page in the .htaccess file that would be one huge .htaccess file 50,000 lines plus - I am worried about effect on site speed.
2: Create 301 redirects for each and every unused folder, and wildcard the file names, this would be a single redirect for each file in each folder to a single redirect page
so the 404 issue is overcome but the user doesn't open the precise page they are after.
3: Write some code to create a hard copy 301 index.php file for each and every folder that is to be replaced.
4: Write code to create a hard copy 301 .php file for each and every page that is to be replaced.
5: We could just let the pages all die and list them with Google to advise of their death.
6: We could have the redirect managed by a database rather than .htaccess or single redirect files. Probably the most challenging thing will be to load the data in the first place, but I assume this could be done programatically - especially if the new URL can be inferred from the old. Many be I am missing another, simpler approach - please discuss0 -
Client wants to show 2 different types of content based on cookie usage - potential cloaking issue?
Hi, A client of mine has compliance issues in their industry and has to show two different types of content to visitors: domain.com/customer-a/about-us domain.com/customer-b/about-us Next year, they have to increase that to three different types of customer. Rather than creating a third section (customer-c), because it's very similar to one of the types of customers already (customer-b), their web development agency is suggesting changing the content based on cookies, so if a user has indentified themselves as customer-b, they'll be shown /customer-b/, but if they've identified themselves as customer-c, they'll see a different version of /customer-b/ - in other words, the URL won't change, but the content on the page will change, based on their cookie selection. I'm uneasy about this from an SEO POV because: Google will only be able to see one version (/customer-b/ presumably), so it might miss out on indexing valuable /customer-c/ content, It makes sense to separate them into three URL paths so that Google can index them all, It feels like a form of cloaking - i.e. Google only sees one version, when two versions are actually available. I've done some research but everything I'm seeing is saying that it's fine, that it's not a form of cloaking. I can't find any examples specific to this situation though. Any input/advice would be appreciated. Note: The content isn't shown differently based on geography - i.e. these three customers would be within one country (e.g. the UK), which means that hreflang/geo-targeting won't be a workaround unfortunately.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | steviephil0 -
I've got duplicate pages. For example, blog/page/2 is the same as author/admin/page/2\. Is this something I should just ignore, or should I create the author/admin/page2 and then 301 redirect?
I'm going through the crawl report and it says I've got duplicate pages. For example, blog/page/2 is the same as author/admin/page/2/ Now, the author/admin/page/2 I can't even find in WordPress, but it is the same thing as blog/page/2 nonetheless. Is this something I should just ignore, or should I create the author/admin/page2 and then 301 redirect it to blog/page/2?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | shift-inc0 -
Looking to merge 2 domains to 1 - Got some questions - do you have the insight?
Hey Everyone, So the company I work for owns 2 domains. We have our main site which offers our portfolio of products and then we have a second domain, which we acquired, which focuses on one of our products (we also have this product available on our main site). So here is where things get tricky for me. This second site (the one that focuses on one of our products) has a HUGE following and a higher domain authority of 80 when our main site has an authority of 70. The higher up of the company want to merge the second popular site with our main site. There are many problems with this in my opinion since the following on this second site is very hardcore in the security space (I do not think that they will like to be sent over to a more corporate site) BUT I want to figure out the SEO value that can be gained or lost from this merge. Some questions... By 301 redirecting the pages over to our main page - I am assuming that the SEO power carries along with it so that these pages should still perform well? Will the domain authority of our main site go up with the merge since we are bringing over pages with a lot of equity? In your opinion, does it make more sense to keep the site with the higher authority since it is easier to host content that performs better? Anyone have any experience with this? SEO-wise do you think that this is a good idea or a bad idea? Thanks a lot! Pat
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PatBausemer0 -
Online Pharmacy Client
So... Have a client with a physical pharmacy in the UK, they are looking to branch out and start selling online... Primarily high value 'embarrassing medicines' etc... The have an existing companynamepharmacy.co.uk domain that has acted as a brochure site for the past 4 years (thats the domain age) still with low domain authority etc but they've also purchased a keyword match domain citynameonlinepharmacy.co.uk which they thought would be better to use... They are fully prepared for a reasonable wait on the organic listings and will head up the project with PPC and Google shopping integration which is known to be successful for other similar online pharmacies... Anyone tackled building an online pharmacy site from the ground up with any advice, specifically on the domain front, there is a trade off between the newly registered keyword match domain and the 4 year old company name match - Its clear with a pharma industry site we need to build trust so need to tick every box on that front...
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | digitalarts0 -
Client participated in Link farm.
Our client participated in link exchange activity between 2008-2009. The service they used was http://link2me.com/ Its an obvious link farm scheme and their drop in traffic/rankings correlates to panda release early this year. The site does have tons of unique content, their are no technical SEO issues. They DO have great inbound links from some very authoritative sites (ie: peta.org) They do not rank even for unique strings taken directly from their content. Rankings for some very n long tail terms are virtually non existant. So the question were trying to figure out is, did the domain get hit with a penalty bc of past link farm participation, if so how can we correct? -- killing the account with link2me has already been done Could the domain NOT be penalized, and since all those external links were penalized did our site lose authority?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vectormedia0