WordPress Plugin Backlink?
-
When developing a WordPress plugin, is it OK to include a dofollow backlink with the name of the source site as the anchor text? Or would Google consider this spammy?
-
Taking a hit for manipulative tactics is usually something of a percentage game, one you don't want to play. The competitor may have an older domain and a stronger backlink profile. Sooner or later, even the larger brands get hit.
It was was a few years ago, almost to the day, that JC Penney was outed by the New York Times. This prompted a manual action. Your competitor may well fall to the next Penguin filter.
I've seen manipulation in a number of industries, sometimes it just takes time. Other times it takes someone with a little more clout. Though we can likely count on Penguin becoming a part of the algorithm, and we will most likely see another Penguin filter.
-
That is funny how that worked out. I used to live in Far North Dallas when I worked with a previous agency. Feel free to drop a private message.
-
Hi JaBacchetta,
Matt Cutts is quite clear about follow and nofollow links in widgets - see attached YouTube movie. Why your competitor was able to do a similar kind of thing and didn't got penalised is always the question.Are you 100% sure he hasn't received a warning. Maybe your competitor states upfront very clear a link is included.
Also it is unknown when you receive a visit from a crawler. So could be your competitor was just visit before the plugin went live, and you were visit after it was just live. I would also advice to take out the follow link a use a nofollow version.
How you will recover is depending on to many factors as the algoritme changes every day / week. Good luck with it.
-
Travis, by the way, looked up your company in Grapevine, TX... looks like we live right down the street from each other. I'm in the Keller area.
Small world.
-
Thanks for the replies. I'm going to get a bit more specific...
If you look at this page, in the top right sidebar, you'll find our WordPress widget in action. It shows a "Quote of the Day" with a quote from our website, and then it links to our site using our site's name as the anchor text. My thoughts on this are that we're providing value to other publishers, and they're feeding our content to their site (which qualifies as an endorsement of the content that we offer, which in turn validates a dofollow link). We're also using our site's name as the anchor text, rather than a keyword-stuffed link. This technique is clearly white-hat, in my opinion.
But, apparently Google did not like the idea. Since releasing the plugin 10 days ago, our rankings have dropped significantly across the board.
We're using 97thFloor as our SEO agency at the moment. Initially they said they thought the plugin might be a good idea, but they called me today to tell me to nofollow all the links, since our total backlinks had tripled in the last week, which they believe caused the rankings to drop.
We updated the plugin tonight to include nofollow on the backlink.
Interestingly, one of our competitors in the niche released a similar plugin, seen here. And their dofollow link is actually black-hat, with the anchor text being "more Quotes". They have not taken a hit at all. Is this because they've already got an established backlink profile?
And, now that we've nofollowed our plugin link, is it likely that our rankings will improve back to their original positions?
Appreciate any thoughts on this. Thanks!
-
Very. Bad. Idea. This is exactly the kind of manipulative linking process that Google punishes with the Penguin part of their algorithm. At best, use a nofollowed link, but I'd be very reluctant to do this at all if these will be sitewide links and will be a really large proportion of your total backlink profile.
If you stop and think about this for a moment, you'll see why this is so risky. Certainly many who might use your plugin have quality sites. But many more of the sites that will be linking to you are likely to be questionable or downright spammy. Plus, almost none of them are likely to be related to what your site is about.
All these things combine to create the very definition of unnatural linking in Google's eyes.
Hope that helps?
Paul
-
That likely falls into the Link Scheme category. I wouldn't recommend it.
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
-
301 Redirect Backlinks from Forbes,CNN.
Hello, I have seen on many places people are selling 301 Redirect Links Via Top Authority websites Like Forbes,CNN etc . How do they do it? and is it safe to have such links? I have researched a lot but not found any useful information to implement it. Any Idea how to do it? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Ademirates0 -
Does Google checks the author name of the articles with backlinks to a website?
Hi, This may sound a little too suspicious; but just want to take your suggestions and experience in this. We are trying to create articles on third party websites to increase backlinks, our brand popularity and awareness about our features. If the same author is mentioned in multiple or tens of articles with backlinks to same website; will Google monitor the author name? Is there anything wrong in creating too many external articles with same author name? Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | vtmoz0 -
Search Console Incorrectly Identifies WordPress Version and Recommends Update
Howdy, Moz fans, Today I received four emails from Google Search Console recommending I update WordPress. The message reads, "Google has detected that your site is currently running WordPress 3.3.1, an older version of WordPress. Outdated or unpatched software can be vulnerable to hacking and malware exploits that harm potential visitors to your site. Therefore, we suggest you update the software on your site as soon as possible." This is incorrect, however, since I've been on 4.3.1 for a while. 3.3.1 was never even installed since this site was created in September, 2015, so the initial WP Engine install was likely 4.3. What's interesting is that it doesn't list the root URL as the problem source. The email states that it found that issue on a URL that is set up via WP Engine to 301 to a different site, which doesn't use WordPress. I also have other redirects set up to different pages on the second site that aren't listed in the Search Console email. Anyone have any ideas as to what's causing this misidentification of WP versions? I am afraid that Google sees this as a vulnerability and is penalizing my site accordingly. Thanks in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | jmorehouse0 -
Backlink, how to delete or find who is linking to me?
Hi there guys, Can someone tell me how I go about finding who is linking to my site or how to find backlinks to my site and if it is a spam site or a site I don't know or want linking to me, how to stop them from linking to me and also how to delete their link? Thanks appreciate the time Cheers
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | edward-may0 -
Huffingtonpost selling anchor text backlinks?
I found this article on huffingtonpost.co.uk http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/john-maclachlan/top-5-most-influential-ma_b_3682369.html In the 2nd paragraph it has the words "mannequin retail displays", linked to a site that sells mannequins. The link has nothing to do with the story and it seem ( to me a least) its been paid for. Looking at other old posts by the same author its does not seem to be a one off: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/john-maclachlan/celebrity-honeymoons_b_3962560.html
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | PaddyDisplays
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/john-maclachlan/cruise-holidays_b_3898661.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/john-maclachlan/five-of-the-worlds-most-important-rivers_b_3761599.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/john-maclachlan/the-top-4-manliest-jobs-in-the-world_b_3694431.html I'm just surprised that a site as big as the huffington post selling back links in this way0 -
Are expired domains for Godaddy backlinks already reset by googel ?
When does Google actual reset backlinks to a domain. If i am buying expired domains from godaddy action for linking purpose am i wasting my time.Also if that the case whats the point of buying expired domains with many links pointing to them. If the backlinks to the expired domain still show up under my Google webmaster tool window does that mean Google counts that link?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Ryguy870 -
Finding and Removing bad backlinks
Ok here goes. Over the past 2 years our traffic and rankings have slowly declined, most importantly, for keywords that we ranked #1 and #2 at for years. With the new Penguin updates this year, we never saw a huge drop but a constant slow loss. My boss has tasked me with cleaning up our bad links and reshaping our link profile so that it is cleaner and more natural. I currently have access to Google Analytics and Webmaster Tools, SEOMoz, and Link Builder. 1)What is the best program or process for identifying bad backlinks? What exactly am I looking for? Too many links from one domain? Links from Low PR or low “Trust URL” sites? I have gotten conflicting information reading about all this on the net, with some saying that too many good links(high PR) can be unnatural without some lower level PR links, so I just want to make sure that I am not asking for links to be removed that we need to create or maintain our link profile. 2)What is the best program or process for viewing our link profile and what exactly am I looking for? What constitutes a healthy link profile after the new google algorithm updates? What is the best way to change it? 3)Where do I start with this task? Remove spammy links first or figure out or profile first and then go after bad links? 4)We have some backlinks that are to our old .aspx that we moved to our new platform 2 years ago, there are quite a few (1000+). Some of these pages were redirected and some the redirects were broken at some point. Is there any residual juice in these backlinks still? Should we fix the broken redirects, or does it do nothing? My boss says the redirects wont do anything now that google no longer indexes the old pages but other people have said differently. Whats the deal should we still fix the redirects even though the pages are no longer indexed? I really appreciate any advice as basically if we cant get our site and sales turned around, my job is at stake. Our site is www.k9electronics.com if you want to take a look. We just moved hosts so there are some redirect issues and other things going on we know about.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | k9byron0 -
Dealing with internal pages with bad backlinks - is this approach OK?
Hi all, I've just been going through every page of my company website, and found a couple of internal pages with nasty backlinks/profiles. There are a significant number of article marketing and rubbish directory pages pointing to these internal pages. These internal pages have low PR, yet are performing well in terms of SERPs. I was planning to: (1) change URLs - removing current (soon to be former) URLs from Google via Webmaster Tools. Then (2) remove website's 404 for a while so nasty links aren't coming anywhere near the website (hopefully nasty links will fail to find website and broken links will result in link removal - that's my thinking anyway). PS. I am not planning to implement any kind of redirect from the old URLs. Does this sound like a sensible approach, or may there be problems with it? Thanks in advance, Luke
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | McTaggart0