How Long for Penguin Recovery if All Links Were Removed at Once?
-
Hi, I was wondering if anyone had thoughts on length of time before a Penguin recovery can take place, assuming you removed all the bad links at once? I have a client that has a Penguin penalty, with all the bad links pointing in to a domain, which then redirected to theirs. So, I simply had that domain removed and it now returns a 404 instead of redirecting to the main site. Now all of the bad backlinks do not pass through.
All of this happened at once about 5 weeks ago. I was glad to discover such an easy solution, but am wondering how long something like this would take. My initial thought was it would take 2 or 3 months to see recovery, but I was hoping since the issue was fixed so quickly, recovery would be faster. Any experience with Penguin recoveries with all spam links removed (less that 100 links) at once?
-
Assuming that those are the only unnatural links the site had, there's a good chance that when Google refreshes the Penguin algorithm again the site will once again look clean in the eyes of Penguin and be able to rank again.
However, if Penguin refreshes soon, there is a chance that not much will change as Google needs time to revisit each of the offending linking domains and recognize that they are no longer linking to you (even if it is through a 301). This is why some sites need to sit through two refreshes before they see a recovery.
Keep in mind as well that the site has to have good links in order to see a recovery. If the previous rankings were only supported by the equity that came through the 301 (prior to getting affected by Penguin) then you might not see much improvement once Penguin refreshes.
Gary mentioned that the next Penguin refresh is probably going to be in the next two weeks. I don't know that anyone knows that for sure...I'm thinking that this is a guess as it has already been seven months since the last refresh and historically the longest Google has gone between refreshes is 6 months. I agree that it makes sense for Google to do it soon, but it still could be several months if that's what they decide to do.
-
Yes, it may likely also have something to do with the sitewide.
It also sounds like you aren't being told the whole story, by your account.
-
Hi Gary,
The fact that it is just one site makes me question if the one site was an old penalized version of the site that they tried to 301 their way out of?
Not likely, they're two separate businesses. I really have no idea who redirected that site to the current site in question (nor does the owner). All I know is the owner says "they used to use that site"... when I saw the site was penalized and that all the bad links pointed to this other site, I quickly stopped the link flow from the bad site to the current site.
Are some of the other links bad but you don't believe they are?
No, they just have a handful of backlinks from local directories like merchant circle, etc. They're all the complete norm.
I do wonder though if it has anything to do with the sitewide footer link they have linking back to the SEO company that had gotten them into this mess (also, this particular link is "keyword -rich")
-
Gary brought up a pretty good point. "So I do wonder if there are more than just that issue. Are some of the other links bad but you don't believe they are?" - Gary
I dealt with one situation where many link farms and a particularly spammy domain were pointed at the site overnight. That tripped the Googles BS detector. When I dug into it, I found so much more had happened throughout the years. The initial disavow I proposed would have cut about 50K links if memory serves. The client looked at a few and stated they had paid 'good money' for some of those links and disavowing/removing them would be crazy.
Suffice to say, the process never went through and they kept on 'guest blogging'. (Writing on someone else's site every once in a while and the 'guest blogging' you hear about today are generally two different things.) They kept on 'not recovering'. I check from time to time.
A case of typical manipulation, in my experience, usually involves thousands of links at the least. Your mileage may vary. Without knowing the domain, I can't go into much detail.
-
John Mueller from Google has stated many times that the algorithm must first detect that those links are now either removed or disavowed. then you would need to wait for a Penguin refresh, which is probably going to be in the next 2 weeks and only runs every 6 months.
The fact that it is just one site makes me question if the one site was an old penalized version of the site that they tried to 301 their way out of?
Otherwise bad domains normally would not pass the bad links on to the domain. this was talked about in great detail many times in the past as a negative seo tactic where people would buy bad domains and point them at their competitors. Google put a stop to that very quickly.
So I do wonder if there are more than just that issue. Are some of the other links bad but you don't believe they are?
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
-
Relaunching a site that has had thousands of posts linking to the same 20 articles. How to properly setup internal linking?
I'm in the process of relaunching a music news site (www.prefixmag.com) that once did quite well in search (over a million monthly search visits in its prime). The site got crushed by Panda, etc. and we stopped updating it. I'm starting to do more research but one thing that I noticed was we have modules in the right rail (desktop) that are found on all of our article pages that point to the same posts. (Edit: Added attachment. The links in the right rail under Editor Picks, Features, News, Media, etc. are found on every page of the site). In other words, we have thousands of posts that all link to the same 20 or so articles. Should we not do this if we're not trying to emphasize these posts in Google? Assuming this is the case, what is the proper way to do internal linking? Do we simply setup a sitemap and link to it? I'm hoping to have the thousands of articles we've published over the years have a chance to rank in search again. Also, we have a number of posts that are thin in content should those pages not be submitted in the sitemap? Thanks in advance! 2KmX0
Link Building | | leggo0 -
Should harmful links to your own website be removed?
Upon running a link report on a website, there are often multiple links flagged as bad or suspect that come from a blog that is integrated into the website, which means there are links (set up as article tags) in the site that go to other pages in the same site. They have likely been flagged due to their high frequency. A similar problem is occurring where blogs from a connected site (from an offshoot site of a company that is part of the original) are also tagging their blog posts to link into the original website. Should these links be disavowed? Will these links have an effect on the website if they are disavowed or not?
Link Building | | rachelmanning8880 -
When we use 'link:' for who get the link, how come google show us the same domain as a link.
the search result show the domain of its own. what is is? and is it meaningful as a link?
Link Building | | onedaykorea0 -
Link text
Can anyone give me any advise regarding anchor text in back links on external sites. I have about 8 bloggers reviewing our products on their sites. When they link to our site, they either use the words of our company name or something like “click here” as the words in the link. There are a few key words that we are wanting to improve for so should those words be made as the live link on their site?
Link Building | | Hardley1110 -
Link building
Hello everyone, I am building links for an e-commerce site and I need to increase the value of the links we get by placing them on specific pages in order to pass more juice to inner pages. Which part of the website should I point the links to? Because there is no content section on the site what I can do is either link to the homepage (not an option) or link to inner pages such as category/subcategory/product pages. My doubt is that it wouldn't look natural to link to products pages from a piece of content or from a site where people go with the intention not to buy but to get information. Any opinions on this?
Link Building | | PremioOscar0 -
What is a good ratio of total links to linking root domains?
Is 100 total links for every linking domain too high? I suppose I could also look at ratios of sites that are doing well in the rankings.
Link Building | | ProjectLabs0 -
Confirming unnatural link removed
My SEO firm confirmed on 4/5 that they've removed links from a site www.fantake.com. However, as of today, it still shows on GWM there are 1100 links coming from that site. Questions: where can I find out bad links from root domain listed on GWM? There are some domains showing they have hundreds of links to our site. Between the lag time of GWM crawling, is there a tool that I can use and verify if a link is indded removed?
Link Building | | ypl0 -
Looking at Page Authority of a link to our website... what Page Authority number should we use in deciding the link is junk?
What are the Page Authority ranges? 1. Excellent link 2. Moderate 3. Total junk link Of course you look at the anchor text you can use, how many links are on the site, how often it is cached. Thoughts?
Link Building | | RezStream80