Google launches their Disallow Tool
-
-
Hi Irving,
Today i have Compiled a comprehensive backlink report for one of my hotel client (http://www.fairfieldinnhotelcedarrapids.com/).I have identified all bad links and create one .txt file and upload via google disallow tool. now my question is, How do i know that all dead links has been removed? Is there any way to know status?
Thanks
-
If you Disavowed "good" links to your site, your rankings may be lowered as a result.
If you Disavowed "bad" links, then your Penguin issue could be reduced or resolved.
The best course of action is to allow a trained SEO professional examine each linking domain to determine if the links violate Google's Guidelines and only Disavow the links which do violate those guidelines. Also, the Disavow tool should not be used until after every possible action has been taken to remove the link. Google is quite clear on this topic. If you use the Disavow tool without "significantly" reducing the manipulative links to your site, it likely will not help.
-
I admit it... I panicked and disavowed a ton of domains that I didn't recognize as good links and I went from mid-page-2 to lower-page-3. So...my question is: what happens if I submit a new disavow file that has only a fraction of the links. Or, better yet, what if I delete the disavow file altogether with a file that has a comment saying Oops, sorry, we didn't know what we were doing with this tool and respectfully request to undo our mess".
A very good SEO told me to not chase after my disavow list, and I get what he's saying, but it's hard to not remember the days pre-disavow when I was at least on page 2 ... I was on page 1 for 14 years since 1998 until penguin hit! (I sell bean bag chairs and am speaking of serps for "bean bag chairs").
www.ahhprods.com in case anyone is curious
Thanks!
-
So far my webmaster response is about 10%, so you have no idea how much this tool can relieve some pain after so many attempts.
To the best of my knowledge, the Disavow Tool will have absolutely no impact on your success rate. It seems designed to help ensure webmasters who have a manual penalty lifted are not affected by Penguin.
-
This is gonna be interesting how everything works out.
I've sent a reconsideration request a day or two prior to the release. I will see how that request goes and then update the spreadsheet with new links I've removed as well as using disavow.
So far my webmaster response is about 10%, so you have no idea how much this tool can relieve some pain after so many attempts.
-
The damage was done before i came on the picture and there is no stats from before. the site rangs below other sites owned by the same clent with much weaker linking profiles. As i mentioend the site has the best of links, this is why i am prepared to get rid of any links that look even the slightest doggy. The site should rank number 1 when you look at the competition
I just dont have the time or budget to try to ask for removal, a attemp was made long ago with no sucess.
-
Very busy with a new project out of Arizona.
i have been following Mitt closely. He might just get over the line.
-
-
Thanks... Should have read the YouTube description.
-
This says to me that your site was spared an across the board penalty, but your rankings for specific keywords that have been overused in your anchor text have been suppressed. I would look at your incoming link anchor texts and see which one(s) you are no longer ranking for.
-
Excellent sir.
We will know pretty soon how everything shakes out once people start reporting back, but my suggestion would be that if you have a site that is not penalized you should NOT use this tool as an effort to try and clean up any spammy back links and clean up your good-to-bad backlink ratio. The reason is, this is a tool to be used as a last effort in trying to come back from a penalty when there are some links you tried to remove but simply cannot.
Sending this report will put eyeballs on your site and bring unnecessary attention to your site. Why ask Google to review your backlink profile and look at the nastiest links pointing to your site if your site is currently healthy.
An exception to this rule I think would be if you notice you are clearly under a negative SEO attack. Then it would make sense to be proactive.
-
Very solid analysis Ryan, good stuff.
-
Long time comming and quiite a messy interface. why they could not do somthing like Bing did with there tool is a mystery.
I have a client with a unatural link warning, saying "for this specific incident we are taking very targeted action on the unnatural links instead of your site as a whole"
to me this sounds like these links have been discounted anyhow and that the site is not punished, and maybe no need to do anything, but then goes on to say "If you are able to remove any of the links, please submit a reconsideration request, including the actions that you took."
so that makes me think i do need to do something. not very clear.
This client has a lot of very good links from CNN, NYT and a host of others, but partisipated in a link wheel. The blogs in this link wheel are real blogs rather than your obvious mass made for links blogs and makes it hard to identify what are what. i am thinking to disavow anything thats could be doggy, he has such good links I think it better to have a few false positives rather then leave any bad links in the profile.
Back to my first point, i was hoping for a click and job done approch link in BWMT.
-
Nice write-up Ryan, thanks.
Looks like an aggressive tool, I can see a lot of Webmasters running into trouble with this one.
If you contact a blog to get a link removed and then realise after actually I have made a mistake, or you login to a directory and remove it yourself and realise after you have made a mistake you can work on getting it back.
I get the feeling if you don't go through the process Ryan put down and you make a mistake with the Disallow Tool you wont be able to get those links back.
-
You are so right Ryan! This tool is not a shortcut at all. I fear that a lot of webmasters who have an unnatural links warning are going to jump straight to the disavow tool and ignore the actual reconsideration request process. As Matt says in the video, you still need to make a thorough attempt at trying to get the links removed on your own in order to have a manual penalty revoked.
-
Thanks for opening this discussion Irving. I have had calls from clients today regarding this "change" and it seems many site owners are simply caught up in the idea without realizing the true impact of this change. Resolving a manual Google penalty for manipulative links involves 4 steps prior to the release of this tool:
1. Compile a comprehensive backlink report. Many sites which suffer from a manipulative link penalty are absolutely doomed to have their Reconsideration Requests declined before they are even submitted. Why? Because they have not captured all the links to their site. You cannot rely on any single tool or even 2 tool combination. For each client I work with we compile a list of every known backlink to their site. How? By combining Google + Bing + OSE + Majestic + AHREFs data. Each data source offers links the others do not seem to find.
2. Properly identify all the manipulative links to the target site. Once again, many site owners repeatedly fail their Reconsideration Request and have no real chance at success because they try to take the easy way out. Attempting to replace real effort with fake work is what caused the penalty in the first place.
a. A thorough understanding of the difference between an organic link and manipulative link is required. In short, you must calibrate your understanding of links to match Google. How do you view free directory links? The reality is 99%+ of them are manipulative. How about press releases? Do you think most press releases are organic links? When site owners pay another company to publish articles they wrote with links back to their site, does that sound natural to you?
b. How about broken links? Can you use an automatic link checker and then if the link is not on the URL simply cross it off the list? In a significant percent of cases the link has simply moved to another page on the linking site. Some sites have very dynamic link structures where one day a URL is at ?page=20 and the next it is at ?page=21. Other sites make URL changes over time. You must search each site using their search widget and a Google site: search before assuming the site's link is gone.
c. Is the link marked NoFollow? You need to keep searching the page to ensure there are not other followed links on the same page.
The above are just some examples of gaps in the process of many who attempt to resolve this type of penalty. The disavow tool's introduction does not impact this step.
3. Webmaster Outreach. Once you have a comprehensive list of all known links to your site and have properly identified all the manipulative links, there is a need to contact every site on the list. Another common issue is those attempting to resolving a manipulative link issue give up far too easy. Site owners can be contacted via their WHOIS email address, the email address on their site AND the contact form on their site. You can call them, send a letter and chase them down on social networks. This type of sincere effort can lead to 50%+ reduction in links to your site.
Once sincere and comprehensive efforts have been made to remove the links, Google can clearly tell because there will be a "significant" reduction in manipulative links. At that point, THEN the Disavow tool can be used.
4. Filing a thoroughly documented Reconsideration Request. Three days later, the Reconsideration Request can be submitted.
So the introduction of this tool actually did not reduce any step in the process at all. Matt clearly outlined Google's expectation the tool is only used after a webmaster outreach campaign has been completed. If you expect to be able to simply submit a list of links without webmaster outreach, you are likely going to be disappointed.
Watch the first 2 minutes of the video a few times. Matt clearly says "...when you have contacted each webmaster multiple times....and there are only a small fraction of links left....that is when you can use the tool."
-
Nice summary at SEWatch:
http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2217602/Google-Disavow-Links-Tool-Now-Available
I'm curious about the "Most sites shouldn’t use this tool,” Cutts said. “Use caution." caveat. I've basically got only one client out of many that I'd even need to consider using this for. But I can't help but imagine hyper paranoid SEOs trying to massage their link profile down to the last drop of relevance. My gut feel is that this is a 'last resort' tool, and not a 'everyday SEO' tool.
-
Based on what Matt said, it sounds like Google only wants you to use the tool for links that you've tried to remove manually but couldn't. My guess is they may ignore your disavowals if you rely too much on the tool.
-
The links are in the YouTube video description.
"Access the feature here:
https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/disavow-links-main" -
Cutt's did not indicate how to download the tool. Did I miss that?
-
Thanks for the heads up. Just watched the video.
-
Really looking forward to this tool... But Joeys question is Really important. Does anyone have suggestions?
-
Awesome tool. How can I tell which links to my site I should disavow? We get a bunch of random links per day that look spammy, but how can I tell for sure that removing them will help rather than hurt?
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
-
Export domain reference full on google search console
Hi all My website is https://simthanglong.vn/ and it have +7000 Referring domains from competitor use tools bad backlink. i want to disavow it but Google Search Console accept export up to 1000 domains. So, What I have to do. Help me Please.67oetuz.jpg
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | simthanglongdotvn0 -
Apparent Bot Queries and Impressions in Webmaster Tools
I've been noticing some strange stats in Google Webmaster Tools for my forum, which has been getting spam queries with impressions and no clicks. See the queries in the attached images. This might be a motive for the spammers or scrapers. I set the date range to just 22 Aug - 22 Nov and I see very obviously the spike is due to impressions. Questions: What should/can I do? Is Google doing something about this? How to avoid this? o6gKB
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SameerBhatia0 -
Google Organic Ranking & Traffic Dropped
Hello, We have been struggling to keep our website (http://goo.gl/vS37qA) ranking well in Google since April 30, 2015. For some reason at that time, there were around 15000 blocked pages (mainly Magento layered navigation pages) showing in Google's Search Console. We used canonical tags, and now all these pages have been removed from Google's index and Google Search Console. We didn't do anything that is against Google's Guidelines. Currently in Google Search Console we see:- Around 50 crawl errors- no malware- no blocked pages - no other error messages in both Webmasters tool.We have never practiced black hat SEO, paid for links, or used tactics that Google penalizes. We noticed in the last few months there are around 1000 Chinese/Russian/Japanese links points to our website, and we have used the disavow tool to notify Google of these attacks.Any help would be greatly appreciated in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | NancyH0 -
Google webmasters tools, Majestic and Ahref in a simple case study (Bad links and Good links)
Hey guys, This case study started from here. A simple summary, I discover that I got +1000 backlinks from Blogspot though Google webmasters tools after making a connection with owners of these blogs which points to my new blog. Before starting I proudly invite Thomas Zickell and Gary Lee in this discussion. I wish you accept my invitation. Let's go to the main point, I've used Google webmaster tools so I will start with. Then Ahref which used by **Thomas **and then Majestic which used by Gary. Take a look at "001" screenshot, you will see that Google webmaster tools discovered 1291 links points to my site. Take another look at "002" screenshot, you will find that there are 22 domains points to my site. Most of them are good links since they are coming from websites such as Google.com, Wikipedia.org, Reddit, Shoutmeload, WordPress.org, ...etc. Beside +1000 backlinks came from Blogspot.com (blogs). Also, there's some bad links such as this one came from tacasino.com Necessary to say that I've got some competitors and they nicely asked me to stop the competition for some keywords and I've ignored their request. So, I'm not surprised to see these bad links. At "002" screenshot, we can see that Google didn't discover the bad links as they discovered the good links. And they discovered a lot of backlinks which not discovered by any other tools. **Let's move to Ahref, ** I will use screenshots provided by Thomas. At "003" screenshot, you can see Ahref report that say 457 links from 10 domains. By the way, social engagements data are wrong. I got more than zero engagements .. really. At "004" screenshot, you can see domains points to my site, links with anchor text. Take a look at the second link you will find that it's a spammy link coming from PR2 home page since it's is over optimized. the third link is also a spammy link since it coming from a not-relevant website. Beside other bad links need to be removed. So, Ahref didn't discover all of my good links. Instead of that it discovered few good links and a lot of bad links. In a case like this a question come needs to be answered since there are some people trying so hard to hurt my site, Do I have to remove all this bad links? Or, just links discovered by Google. Or, Google understand the case? **Let's move to majestic, ** Gray Lee provided data from majestic which say "10 Unique Referring Domains, with 363 links, 2 domains make up a majority." Since Gray didn't take any screenshots I will provide mine. At "005" screenshot, you can see some of the bad links discovered by Majestic. Not all of them discovered by Ahref or Google. In the other hand, Majestic didn't discover all of my Good links. Also, there's a miss understand I would like to explain here. When I published the Discussion about +1000 link. Some people may think that I trying to cheat you by providing fake info and this totally wrong. I said before and I'm saying that again you are so elite and I respect you. Also, I'm preparing for an advanced case study about this thing. If any expert would like to join me this will be great. Thank you for reading and please feel free to share you thoughts, knowledge and experience in this Discussion. EE5bFNc jYg21cf Xyfgp28.png iR4UOwi.png D1pGAFO
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Eslam-yosef1 -
When you get a new inbound link do you submit a request to google to reindex the new page pointing at you?
I'm just starting my link building campaign in earnest, and received my first good quality inbound link less than an hour ago. My initial thought was that I should go directly to google, and ask them to reindex the page that linked to me... If I make a habit of that (getting a new link, then submitting that page directly to google), would that signify to google that this might not be a natural link building campaign? The links are from legitimate (non-paid, non-exchange) partners, which google could probably figure out, but I'm interested to know opinions on this. Thanks, -Eric
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | ForForce0 -
Google says 404s don't cause ranking drops, but what about a lot of them
Hello, According to Google here, 404s don't cause rankings to go down. Our rankings are going down and we have about 50 or so 404s (though some may have been deindexed by now). We have about 300 main products and 9000 pages in general on this Ecommerce site. There's no link equity gained by 301 redirecting the 404s. A custom 404 page has been made linking to the home page. There's nothing linking to the pages that are 404s Provided that no more 404s are created, can I just ignore them and find the real reason our rankings are going down?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobGW0 -
When to NOT USE the disavow link tool
Im not here to say this is concrete and should never do this, and please if you disagree with me then lets discuss. One of the biggest things out there today especially after the second wave of Penguin (2.0) is the fear striken web masters who run straight to the disavow tool after they have been hit with Penguin or noticed a drop shortly after. I had a friend who's site who never felt the effects of Penguin 1.0 and thought everything was peachy. Then P2.0 hit and his rankings dropped of the map. I got a call from him that night and he was desperately asking me for help to review his site and guess what might have happened. He then tells me the first thing he did was compile a list of websites back linking to him that might be the issue and create his disavow list and submitted it. I asked him "How long did you research these sites before you came the conclusion they were the problem?" He Said "About an hour" Then I asked him "Did you receive a message in your Google Webmaster Tools about unnatural linking?" He Said "No" I said "Then why are you disavowing anything?" He Said "Um.......I don't understand what you are saying?" In reading articles, forums and even here in the Moz Q/A I tend to think there is some misconceptions about the disavow tool from Google that do not seem to be clearly explained. Some of my findings with the tool and when to use it is purely based on logic IMO. Let me explain When to NOT use the tool If you spent an hour reviewing your back link profile and you are to eager to wait any longer to upload your list. Unless you have less than 20 root domains linking to you, you should spend a lot more than an hour reviewing your back link profile You DID NOT receive a message from GWT informing you that you had some "unnatural" links Ill explain later If you spend a very short amount of time reviewing your back link profile. Did not look at each individual site linking to you and every link that exists, then you might be using it WAY TO SOON. The last thing you want to do is disavow a link that actually might be helping you. Take the time to really look at each link and ask your self this question (Straight from the Google Guidelines) "A good rule of thumb is whether you'd feel comfortable explaining what you've done to a website that competes with you, or to a Google employee" Studying your back link profile We all know when we have cheated. Im sure 99.9% of all of us can admit to it at one point. Most of the time I can find back links from sites and look right at the owner and ask him or her "You placed this back link didn't you?" I can see the guilt immediately in their eyes 🙂 Remember not ALL back links you generate are bad or wrong because you own the site. You need to ask yourself "Was this link necessary and does it apply to the topic at hand?", "Was it relevant?" and most important "Is this going to help other users?". These are some questions you can ask yourself before each link you place. You DID NOT receive a message about unnatural linking This is were I think the most confusing takes place (and please explain to me if I am wrong on this). If you did not receive a message in GWT about unnatural linking, then we can safely say that Google does not think you contain any "fishy" spammy links in which they have determined to be of a spammy nature. So if you did not receive any message yet your rankings dropped, then what could it be? Well it's still your back links that most likely did it, but its more likely the "value" of previous links that hold less or no value at all anymore. So obviously when this value drops, so does your rank. So what do I do? Build more quality links....and watch you rankings come back 🙂
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | cbielich1 -
Google-backed sites' link profiles
Curious what you SEO people think of the link profiles of these (high-ranking) Google-backed UK sites: http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains?site=www.startupdonut.co.uk http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains?site=www.lawdonut.co.uk http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains?site=www.marketingdonut.co.uk http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains?site=www.itdonut.co.uk http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains?site=www.taxdonut.co.uk Each site has between 40k and 50k inlinks counted in OSE. However, there are relatively few linking root domains in each case: 273 for marketingdonut 216 for startupdonut 90 for lawdonut 53 for itdonut 16 for taxdonut Is there something wrong with the OSE data here? Does this imply that the average root domain linking to the taxdonut site does so with 2857 links? The sites have no significant social media stats. The sites are heavily inter-linked. Also linked from the operating business, BHP Information Solutions (tagline "Gain access to SMEs"). Is this what Google would think of as a "natural" link profile? Interestingly, they've managed to secure links on quite a few UK local authority resources pages - generally being the only commercial website on those pages.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | seqal0