+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: How To Survive Google's Unnatural Links Warnings & Avoid Over-optimisation

  1. #1
    Top Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Nr Manchester UK
    Posts
    2,114
    Thanks
    291
    Thanked 652 Times in 376 Posts
    Rep Power
    36

    How To Survive Google's Unnatural Links Warnings & Avoid Over-optimisation

    Nice article on SEO Moz by Modesto Siotos and it's worth following the links in the article to some other really useful info.

    How To Survive Google's Unnatural Links Warnings & Avoid Over-optimisation


    The signal I'm most curious about is how Google would recognise an unnatural spread of authority links. Perhaps if the distribution was top heavy? Maybe there's a natural ratio of authority links to less authoritative links. If this becomes a popular theory, I expect an authority link % to spring into being, just like their used to be with keyword density....

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JJMcClure For This Useful Post:

    Kay (5 May 2012), KenW3 (5 May 2012)

  3. #2
    Administrator Kay is a Premium Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    No fixed abode (from Scotland)
    Posts
    5,739
    Blog Entries
    2
    Thanks
    4,120
    Thanked 3,119 Times in 1,985 Posts
    Rep Power
    88
    Some good stuff in there, thanks, JJ.

    I enjoyed reading this one about six changes to make (linked to from the article you mentioned), but not because I was learning anything new. It was reassuring. Some of us have been doing things that way for years. Reciprocal links? Urgh! Cruddy link filled footers? Lots of my competitors do that - we don't. So far I am liking the Penguin. Oh, and BTW, despite our AS income having been on a horrible downward trend since Panda, it's suddenly on the up-and-up again since Penguin.

    I expect that just as Panda penalised some people unfairly, so will Penguin, but for me personally Penguin is a step in the right direction.
    British Expat - helping people to live and work abroad since the year 2000.

    My Blog - come in and have a look around, you might find something of interest. Comments are welcome! (dofollow)



  4. #3
    Top Contributor grynge is a Premium Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    2,719
    Blog Entries
    6
    Thanks
    1,534
    Thanked 1,782 Times in 944 Posts
    Rep Power
    57
    Wow so much I have missed out on. I have to go through the logs and see where I stand. Can't wait to see which sites got hit and which didn't. I know a couple of my small sales sites have been making sales so they must not have gotten hit and some of my AS revenue is down so I must have been hit there. Will be an interesting couple of weeks catching up to what has gone on lol
    And they thought me broken, that my tongue was coated lead, but I just couldn't make my words make sense to them, if you only listen with your ears ... I can't get in
    Non ducor, duco

  5. #4
    Administrator Clinton is a Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Essex, UK
    Posts
    7,502
    Blog Entries
    30
    Thanks
    4,151
    Thanked 2,916 Times in 1,636 Posts
    Rep Power
    107
    There was a PR update the other day as well (though nobody seems to have mentioned it anywhere here on any thread).
    Show your support - Like us on Facebook

  6. #5
    Established Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    La France, SC
    Posts
    223
    Thanks
    372
    Thanked 180 Times in 77 Posts
    Rep Power
    10
    Just FYI; I concentrate my efforts on on-site SEO. It is the only thing I have total control over. I use good techniques and, like Kay, none of those six things from the article surprised me. External link building is something I need to learn more about; most of the techniques I've read about seem kinda dodgy to me.

    I read the article as well as the linked articles. I did some google searches looking for more information on things I didn't fully understand. I am still a little confused about the following.

    A. Excessive Link Acquisition Check
    Acquiring a high number of links over a short period of time has never been a good practice and webmasters need to keep an eye on the levels of acquired links, especially these days that negative SEO seems to become more of an issue.
    D. How To Check For Unnatural Link Authority Spread
    Another area where overoptimisation can occur is when backlinks are consistently gained from authoritative domains.
    Assumptions:
    • When they are talking about "a high number of links over a short period" in A. that include the links from "authoritative domains" in D.
    • They are two different measurements though; one is for the total number of links and one is for the percentage of those links that are authoritative links.
    • The penalty appears to be for a spike in getting the links, ie. a large amount of links in a short period of time.

    Questions:
    • 1. I'm not sure what a large amount of links is nor do I know what a short period of time is. Does anyone have any ballpark figures that I might find helpful?
      • a. Are we talking about 10's in x amount of time, 100's in x amount of time, 1000's in x amount of time, or more than that?
      • b. Is the time-frame in hours, days, weeks, or something else?
    • 2. Why not just spread the links over a longer period of time to avoid the spike? I don't think this would help with the authoritative links since it is a percentage... then again maybe it would. Now I've really flippin' confused myself! Dag nab it!

    Thanks for the assistance.

  7. #6
    Top Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Nr Manchester UK
    Posts
    2,114
    Thanks
    291
    Thanked 652 Times in 376 Posts
    Rep Power
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by succor View Post
    Questions:
    • 1. I'm not sure what a large amount of links is nor do I know what a short period of time is. Does anyone have any ballpark figures that I might find helpful?
      • a. Are we talking about 10's in x amount of time, 100's in x amount of time, 1000's in x amount of time, or more than that?
      • b. Is the time-frame in hours, days, weeks, or something else?
    • 2. Why not just spread the links over a longer period of time to avoid the spike? I don't think this would help with the authoritative links since it is a percentage... then again maybe it would. Now I've really flippin' confused myself! Dag nab it!
    Nothing about the speed of link acquisition being a spamming signal makes any sense to me. It means I can bomb your site and get you penalised and it doesn't take into account the fact that there are perfectly credible reasons why a site might gain links fast, for example if something goes viral, or it it's news related and time critical. Now news sites and blogs risk penalties if they post something that lots of people link to in a short time?

    It's not logical.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to JJMcClure For This Useful Post:

    succor (6 May 2012)

  9. #7
    Established Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    La France, SC
    Posts
    223
    Thanks
    372
    Thanked 180 Times in 77 Posts
    Rep Power
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by JJMcClure View Post
    Nothing about the speed of link acquisition being a spamming signal makes any sense to me. It means I can bomb your site and get you penalised and it doesn't take into account the fact that there are perfectly credible reasons why a site might gain links fast, for example if something goes viral, or it it's news related and time critical. Now news sites and blogs risk penalties if they post something that lots of people link to in a short time?

    It's not logical.
    Thank you for the reply. I agree that it doesn't make any sense. One or two of the links mention negative SEO and some of my search results also imply that it is possible to get someone else's site penalized. I hadn't thought about the legitimate examples you provide for a spike happening. Yes, from what I read, it appears they will be penalized.

    While I agree with you and I appreciate the response, it doesn't answer my questions; the only reason I bring this up is because you quoted my questions. Anybody else want to take a stab at it?

  10. #8
    Top Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Nr Manchester UK
    Posts
    2,114
    Thanks
    291
    Thanked 652 Times in 376 Posts
    Rep Power
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by succor View Post

    While I agree with you and I appreciate the response, it doesn't answer my questions; the only reason I bring this up is because you quoted my questions. Anybody else want to take a stab at it?
    No one knows the numbers but I'm sure some people will do a 'keyword density myth' on this too and come up with arbitrary numbers for it. I'd assume that if I bomb your site with a million spammy links that might be enough

    The best rule of thumb is that if it looks unnatural, it'll trip a filter, or it should do but they do miss stuff. What looks unnatural for one site won't for another so I don't even think this is about numbers, it's about fitting spammy looking profiles and that will vary from site to site.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to JJMcClure For This Useful Post:

    succor (6 May 2012)

  12. #9
    Established Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    La France, SC
    Posts
    223
    Thanks
    372
    Thanked 180 Times in 77 Posts
    Rep Power
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by JJMcClure View Post
    No one knows the numbers but I'm sure some people will do a 'keyword density myth' on this too and come up with arbitrary numbers for it. I'd assume that if I bomb your site with a million spammy links that might be enough

    The best rule of thumb is that if it looks unnatural, it'll trip a filter, or it should do but they do miss stuff. What looks unnatural for one site won't for another so I don't even think this is about numbers, it's about fitting spammy looking profiles and that will vary from site to site.
    Yea, I was afraid the numbers questions answers would be just a bunch of guesses.

    Your explanation about the unnatural helps and it actually makes sense. Sometimes when I read I get information overload and things don't click so to speak. Because of your answer several things I have read are starting to make more sense. Thanks.

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Hidden links... can google see them..?
    By MrP in forum Website 101
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 4 July 2011, 9:31 pm
  2. Adsense bans and warnings
    By Clinton in forum Making Money Online, Monetization
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 18 June 2011, 10:33 am
  3. Site Blocking in Google - yet another replacement for links?
    By Clinton in forum General & Miscellaneous
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11 March 2011, 5:57 pm
  4. Google showing negative links in WMT
    By Clinton in forum General & Miscellaneous
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 24 February 2011, 9:13 am
  5. Changes In The Way Google Webmaster Tools Reports Links
    By hooperman in forum General & Miscellaneous
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 18 October 2010, 11:00 am

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts