Google Manual Penalty - Unnatural Links FROM My Site - Where?
-
Hi Mozzers,
I've just received a manual penalty for one of my websites. The penalty is for 'unnatural links from my site which I find disturbing because I can't see that anything really wrong with it.
The website is www.lighting-tips.co.uk - its a pretty new blog (only 6-7 posts) and whilst I've allowed guest posting I'm being very careful that the content is relevant and good quality. I'm only allowing 1 - 2 links and very few with proper anchor text so I'm wondering what has been done so wrong that I'm getting this manual penalty? Am I missing something here?
Thanks in advance.
Aaron
-
Those guest blogs were mostly created for the purpose of improving another site's PageRank and manipulating the search results. Even if they're not paid links they are links that were made with the intention of gaming Google. If you remove the links or nofollow them and then file for reconsideration you'll get your penalty removed.
-
Hi Aaron,
Yup - MBG will be your downfall here. You will need to remove those posts to be considered for re-inclusion and the penalty lifted. Google has only just taken this action in the last day or two, so watch our for more analysis and blog posts / commentary on the fall-out and recovery. It has affected a huge collection of sites, including some that used MBG years ago and only for two or three posts.
Cheers,
Jane
-
Thanks Philip - As it happens it was part of myblogguest.com. I had no idea Google took it down. Looks like they really have it in for them.
The website has basically only guest blogs - I thought it'll be okay as long as the content was good and useful to real people and not too many links but obviously that's not the case.
So back to the drawing board.
Aaron
-
Curious... was your site apart of the MyBlogGuest.com network? They were recently taken down hard by Google.
Here's a recent Tweet from Matt Cutts stating that sites posting guest posts can receive manual penalties, not just sites that receive links from guest posts: https://twitter.com/mattcutts/statuses/446438659689316353
Your site does seem like pretty good quality, but the sole purpose of it appears to be for guest blogging opportunities. Someone manually reviewed it and decided it was penalty worthy... To be reconsidered you might need to either A) remove all the links or B) nofollow all the links. I'm not 100% sure if nofollowing is enough. You'll probably also want to start posting a lot more content that isn't guest blogs. You might be already doing that (I didn't look around for too long). Good luck, Aaron.
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
-
Why is this site not indexed by Google?
Hi all and thanks for your help in advance. I've been asked to take a look at a site, http://www.yourdairygold.ie as it currently does not appear for its brand name, Your Dairygold on Google Ireland even though it's been live for a few months now. I've checked all the usual issues such as robots.txt (doesn't have one) and the robots meta tag (doesn't have them). The even stranger thing is that the site does rank on Yahoo! and Bing. Google Webmaster Tools shows that Googlebot is crawling around 150 pages a day but the total number of pages indexed is zero. It does appear if you carry out a site: search on Google however. The site is very poorly optimised in terms of title tags, unnecessary redirects etc which I'm working on now but I wondered if you guys had any further insights. Thanks again for your help.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | iProspect-Ireland0 -
Site wide links Concept
Hi All, All type of site wide links are bad for Google or it depends upon other factors as well? For example if you talk about GoDaddy or any other service provider company they put their links on the footer of other websites so in this condition, Google will harm their rankings or not? Also elaborate the best practices for site wide links.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RuchiPardal0 -
Site DA and squeeky clean link building
Hello, We've got a piece of useful content we're doing outreach for. No sites we have found are in our exact niche, but there are generally relevant sites we're targeting. What's a good rule of thumb for the minimum PR or DA we should go after to make sure our link building is squeaky clean for the future?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobGW0 -
Unnatural links warning and steps to fix it
Hi there, Firstly our website is - imrubbish.co.uk Basically we were unintentionally using a rogue seo company for about 5 months who charged a lot of money and built absolute rubbish quality links. When i saw the type of links being built i immediately stopped them as i knew they were bad news but the damage had been done. I have since moved to a completely ethical seo company who for the past 6 months have tried with me to remove this penalty without success. Here are the steps we have taken. Unnatural links warning. Submitted a file with all the links we know are bad and resubmitted. Not good enough We then used disavow tool as there were so many links we had no control of. Along with a detailed write up of what has happened and who had done it. Not good enough Now the problem my seo guy thinks is because there are more and more links appearing almost daily that are still left over rubbish from the old seo company. I think there might also be other problems - maybe my anchor test distribution is spammy etc, i dont know and i am hoping someone can maybe help with a couple more pointers. I have asked a similar question before where there was a discussion about even just leaving it and concentrating on building more ethical links with brand anchor text but that was not working so we used the disavow tool. We have been stuck in this rut for over a year now and could really do with some extra help/guidance from anyone who has experience or knowledge of what we should do. I saw the post yesterday about this very subject and hope someone could help drill done specifically what could be the problem in our case. We would also look at hiring someone if they could help. Thank you Jon
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | imrubbish1 -
.GOV Link - same impact on my site's rankings whether link to home or Gov related category?
I own a job site and I am about to get a link from a .GOV. My site has a category called "State Jobs". Should I ask the ".Gov" to link to my homepage or to the state job page and use the anchor text "State Jobs". I understand "State Jobs" page would get a big kick by that being the anchor text and linking to that specific page, but the question I have is this: for my site as a whole (homepage and various categories) would they get around the same "push up" whether the linking is to 1) my homepage with anchor text being my site's name or 2) to the state job specific page and in this case the anchor text would be "State Jobs"? thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | knielsen0 -
Can links indexed by google "link:" be bad? or this is like a good example by google
Can links indexed by google "link:" be bad? Or this is like a good example shown by google. We are cleaning our links from Penguin and dont know what to do with these ones. Some of them does not look quality.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bele0 -
Google consolidating link juice on duplicate content pages
I've observed some strange findings on a website I am diagnosing and it has led me to a possible theory that seems to fly in the face of a lot of thinking: My theory is:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | James77
When google see's several duplicate content pages on a website, and decides to just show one version of the page, it at the same time agrigates the link juice pointing to all the duplicate pages, and ranks the 1 duplicate content page it decides to show as if all the link juice pointing to the duplicate versions were pointing to the 1 version. EG
Link X -> Duplicate Page A
Link Y -> Duplicate Page B Google decides Duplicate Page A is the one that is most important and applies the following formula to decide its rank. Link X + Link Y (Minus some dampening factor) -> Page A I came up with the idea after I seem to have reverse engineered this - IE the website I was trying to sort out for a client had this duplicate content, issue, so we decided to put unique content on Page A and Page B (not just one page like this but many). Bizarrely after about a week, all the Page A's dropped in rankings - indicating a possibility that the old link consolidation, may have been re-correctly associated with the two pages, so now Page A would only be getting Link Value X. Has anyone got any test/analysis to support or refute this??0 -
Is Google taking longer to rank new sites?
We run a lot of "niche blogs" and websites focused on fairly non-competitive keywords. At the start of the year, we used to be able to put up websites and be able to achieve almost instant rankings on these sites. However, recently, it seems to be taking a lot longer for these sites to rank. It also seems to be taking longer for Google to index links. Is this a recent change in Google to protect against spam and help filter out the lower quality sites? Has anyone else noticed this or is it just me?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ukss19840