Disavow without penalty
-
Hi fellow Mozians,
I have come up with a doubt today which I would appreciate your thoughts on.
I have always been convinced that the disavowal tool can be used at any time as part of your backlink monitoring activities- if you see a dodgy backlink coming in you should add it to your disavowal file if you can't get it removed (which you probably can't). That is to say that the disavowal tool can be used pre-emptively to make sure a dodgy link does do your site any harm.
However, this belief of mine has taken a bit of a beating this morning as another SEO suggested that the disavowal tool only has en effect if acompanied by a reconsideratiosn request, and that you can only file a reconsideration request if you have some kind of manual action. This logic describes that you can only disavowal when you have a penalty.
This theory was backed up by this moz article from May 2013:
https://moz.com/blog/google-disavow-tool
The comments didnt do much to settle my doubts.This Mat Cutts video, from November 2013 seems to confirm my belief however:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=86&v=eFJZXpnsRscIt seems perfectly reasonable that Google does allow pre-emptive disavowal-ing, not just because of the whole negative seo issue, but just because nasty links do happen naturally. Not all SEOs spend all their waking hours building links which they know they will have to disavowal later shoudl a penalty hit at some point, and it seems reasonable that an SEO should be able to say- "Link XYZ is nothing to do with me!" before Google excercises retribution.
If, for example you get hired working for a company that HAD a penalty due to spammy link building in the past that has been lifted; but you see that Google periodically discovers the occasional spammy link it seems fair that you should be able to tell google that you want to voluntarily remove any "credit" that that link is giving you today, so as to avoid a penalty tomorrow.
Your help would be much appreciated.
Many thanks indeed.
-
Thanks for the help everyone!
-
Hi!
As others above me stated, it is perfectly fine to use disavow tool regardless to penalties, in my niches we tend to get a lot of negative SEO efforts against our sites, mostly from adult and pharmaceutical-remedies type of rubbish sites.
But again, it is a wild-wild expertise area where most of us has fixations
including me
good luck..
-
Google has said you can disavow anytime, disavowing is only telling google that you want these backlinks to be nofollow and not pass any linkjuice so they wont help or harm you.
You don't need to be penalized to use the disavow tool, you merely need to have backlinks or domains to add to the disavow file.
It's common for SEOs to disavow urls / domains monthly, however most will tell you to do an audit yearly and keep up on new backlinks as they come in.
I've used the disavow tool but before I did, I did about a few weeks research into what it means to disavow and why one would disavow as well as how to properly disavow. No where did I read you only use the disavow tool if you have a penalty, especially since if you were hit by penguin you wouldn't really know, so Google had to leave the door open on that one.
-
I felt similar inasmuch as how often to disavow. My research show if you have been penalized disavow regularly, if not then annually with some monitoring is fine. Pre-Emptive disavow seems slightly proactive, I only disavow 3 to 5 bad links after 6 months.
Hope this helped
KJr
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
-
DIsavow links even without a penalty?
This is a sort of follow-on question from a previous one I asked, where I was being advised to do this. I've inherited a poor client link profile from a previous provider, with tons of partial match links for "IT support" on a lot of low quality directories. It has been at least a year now since they were built, and I'm concerned that the abundance of them will make it harder to rank for any "IT support" keywords due to over-optimization. This is frustrating since "IT support London" is the main keyword for the home page. On the previous thread, I was advised to disavow these old links and move on, though I have heard from many in the SEO community (and read) that using the disavow tool unless absolutely necessary (i.e. In the case of a penalty) is a mistake, since it is effectively notifying Google that you have been "misbehaving" and you should stay away from sending these types of signals altogether. Can anyone with experience in this matter please advise on this? Thank you in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | zakkyg1 -
Very Slow Recovery after Manual Penalty Removed - Are we missing something?
Our site was handed a manual penalty in November 2013 where exact match anchor text and low quality directory submissions seemed to be the problem. We began the process of link removal, reconfiguration and disavowing. We had already planned to change our domain in early 2014 to coincide with our SSL certificate renewal and although we were hesitant to do this with the manual penalty still there we proceeded and 301'd most of the site but left the pages that were the landing page for most of the exact match links as 302 to the new domain. We continued to work on removing the manual penalty for the old domain as we didn't want it to pass over to the new one and eventually this was removed n March 2014 Now the penalty is gone are we safe to change those 302 redirects to 301 so everything redirects. The problem we have is that six months on, a lot of the pages for the old domain are still indexed and even though we are indexed for the new domains are rankings haven't recovered. Is it just a case of needing to build up a new quality link profile to replace the links that were disregarded or removed when recovering from the penalty or we missing something else
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ham19790 -
Disavow Links & Paid Link Removal (discussion)
Hey everyone, We've been talking about this issue a bit over the last week in our office, I wanted to extend the idea out to the Moz community and see if anyone has some additional perspective on the issue. Let me break-down the scenario: We're in the process of cleaning-up the link profile for a new client, which contains many low quality SEO-directory links placed by a previous vendor. Recently, we made a connection to a webmaster who controls a huge directory network. This person found 100+ links to our client's site on their network and wants $5/link to have them removed. Client was not hit with a manual penalty, this clean-up could be considered proactive, but an algorithmic 'penalty' is suspected based on historical keyword rankings. **The Issue: **We can pay this ninja $800+ to have him/her remove the links from his directory network, and hope it does the trick. When talking about scaling this tactic, we run into some ridiculously high numbers when you talk about providing this service to multiple clients. **The Silver Lining: **Disavow Links file. I'm curious what the effectiveness of creating this around the 100+ directory links could be, especially since the client hasn't been slapped with a manual penalty. The Debate: Is putting a disavow file together a better alternative to paying for crappy links to be removed? Are we actually solving the bad link problem by disavowing or just patching it? Would choosing not to pay ridiculous fees and submitting a disavow file for these links be considered a "good faith effort" in Google's eyes (especially considering there has been no manual penalty assessed)?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Etna0 -
Duplicate keyphrases in page titles = penalty?
Hello Mozzers - just looking at a website which has duplicate keyphrases in its page titles... So you have [keyphrase 1] | [exact match Keyphrase 1] Now I happen to know this particular site has suffered a dramatic fall in traffic - the SEO agency working on the site had advised the client to duplicate keyphrases. Hard to believe, huh! What I'm wondering is whether this extensive exact match keyphrase duplication might've been enough to attract a penalty? Your thoughts would be welcome.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Algorithm Penalty?
I've read the FAQs and searched the help center. The URL in question is: http://goo.gl/9lGqxDSince this website was relaunched around the same time as the Panda algorithm update, it's dropped from the 1st page of results down to page 6 or lower. Essentially, this website no longer ranks well in the Google UK for relevant keywords to the business when combined with the place names in it's geographical operation areas.It's worth noting that the website ranks very well in other search search engines such as Bing! The website had a lot of spammy links which we've requested to be removed from the respective site owners. Most of which are either non-responsive or want extortionate amounts of money to remove the links so we have used Google disavow links tool. We suspect the site is being penalised as a result of the spammy inbound links something which is supported by the fact that only the new pages or pages with fresh content are ranking (http://goo.gl/D1NpxH). However, Google Webmaster tools reports no messages or critical issues.On the whole the website is updated occasionally. The writing is very easy to understand, it's quick to load, URLs are clear and the titles and descriptions are partly optimised.We're believe that our only option is to abandon the current domain and completely rewrite the content for a new domain. Does anyone else have any ideas how we can fix this before we go ahead?Many thanks, Ben
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | chichesterdesign0 -
Keyword Research: How best to target keywords without using a region as part of the search query.
When doing keyword research and trying to rank for a keyword. I am wondering if we need to localize the query by adding a city to it. For example Phoenix Web Design vs. just targeting web design since Google is localizing search results now. Then when creating content and optimizing the site do we just put the keyword in the title and page content or do we also add the region/city to the keyword phrase? Any insight would be appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | hireawizseo0 -
Best practice to disavow spammy links
Hi Forum, I'm trying to quantify the logic for removing spammy links.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Mark_Ch
I've read the article: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-to-check-which-links-can-harm-your-sites-rankings. Based on my pivot chart results, I see around 55% of my backlinks at zero pagerank. Q: Should I simply remove all zero page rank links or carry out an assessment based on the links (zero pagerank) DA / PA. If so what are sensible DA and/or PA metrics? Q: What other factors should be taken into consideration, such as anchor text etc.0 -
Recommendation to fix Google backlink anchor text over optimisation filter penalty (auto)
Hi guys, Some of you may have seen a previous question I posted regarding a new client I started working with. Essentially the clients website steadily lost all non domain name keyword rankings over a period of 4-12 weeks, despite content changes and various other improvements. See following:: http://www.seomoz.org/q/shouldn-t-google-always-rank-a-website-for-its-own-unique-exact-10-word-content-such-as-a-whole-sentence After further hair pulling and digging around, I realised that the back link anchor text distribution was unnatural for its homepage/root. From OSE, only about 55/700 of links anchor text contain the clients domain or company name!....8%. The distribution of the non domain keywords isn’t too bad (most repeated keyword has 142 links out of the 700). This is a result of the client submitting to directories over the last 3 years and just throwing in targeted keywords. Is my assumption that it is this penalty/filter correct? If it is I guess the lesson is that domain name anchor texts should make up more of your links? MY QUESTION: What are some of the effective ways I can potentially remove this filter and get the client ranking on its homepage again? Ensure all new links contain the company name?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Qasim_IMG
Google said there was no manual penalty, so not sure if there’s any point submitting another reconsideration request? Any advice or effective experiences where a fix has worked would be greatly appreciated! Also, if we assume company is "www.Bluewidget.com", what would be the best way to link most naturally: Bluewidget
Blue widget
Blue widget .com
www.bluewidget.com
http://www.bluewidget.com....etc I'm guessing a mix of the above, but if anyone could suggest a hierarchy that would be great.0