Tool is linked to the decline in Google's Webmaster Come Back To haunt?

Back in June, during the height of the Penguin update freakout, Google’s Matt Cutts hinted that Google will launch “deny the link” tool, so that the webmaster can tell Google backlinks they want Google to ignore . This means that links from around the web that could potentially damage the site’s ranking in Google is ignored and not as opposed to the site in question. This is something that many webmasters and SEO wanted for a long time, and especially since the update Penguin launched earlier this year. On Tuesday, Google has made this dream come true to finally launch the tool, after months of anticipation.

Is that what you expect? Want to use it? Let us know in the comments.


This tool tells users, “If you believe your site’s ranking was hurt by low quality links that you control, you can ask Google to not take this into account when assessing your site. “

It should be noted, however, that just because you use this tool, and tell Google to ignore certain links, that does not guarantee that Google will listen. It is more of a suggestion to help. Google is clearly the Q & A section of the blog post announcing the tool.

“This tool allows you to show Google that connects you to decline, and I usually ignore the link,” said Google Webmaster Trends Analyst Jonathan Simon. “Just like there rel = ‘canonical’, it is a strong suggestion than a directive, Google reserves the right to trust our own judgment in the case of a corner for example, but we would normally use implicit when we assessed your link. “He added:

If you ever get stuck in linkspam, you can see the message in Webmaster Tools about “unnatural links” pointing to your site. We send this message when we see evidence of paid links, link exchange, or other link schemes that violate our quality guidelines. If you get this message, we recommend that you remove from the web as a lot of spammy or low-quality links to your site as possible. This is the best approach because it addresses the problem at the root. By removing bad link directly, help prevent Google (and other search engines) to take action again in the future. You are also helping to protect the image of your site, because people will not see spam links pointing to your web site and jumping to conclusions about your website or business.

If you’ve done as much as possible to remove the link to the problem, and there are some links you just can not go down, it is a good time to visit our new links page disavow.

With this tool, you can simply upload a txt file that contains a link that you want Google to ignore .. You add one URL per line. You can block specific URLs or domains throughout. To block a domain, use the format: domain: You can add a comment by inserting a # before them. Google ignores comments. 2MB file size limit.

If you have not seen it yet, watch this video Matt Cutts’ describes a tool. If this is something you are considering using, it is definitely worth ten minutes of your time:

Cutts warned repeatedly that most people do not want to use this tool, and you should really only use this if you are trying hard to get questionable link removed, but was unable to solve it. For more details and minutia how does this tool, with centers help the whole article dedicated to it.

Negative SEO

Negative SEO, a skill which competitors to attack a site with link spam and others, has been debated for a long time, and many people will see this tool as a way to eliminate the effect of the f . Google is particularly responded to it.

“The main purpose of this tool is to help clean up if you accept a bad SEO or mistakes made in your own link-building,” says Simon. “If you know the bad link-building is done on your behalf (eg, paid posts or paid links that pass PageRank), we suggest you contact the website that is linking to you and try to get links taken from the first public web. You are also helping to protect the image of your site, because people do not find a link spam and jump to conclusions about your website or business. If, despite your best efforts, you can get some backlinks, it is time to use this tool to deny the link. ‘

“In general, Google is working hard to prevent other webmasters may harm your rankings,” he added. “However, if you are worried that some backlinks can affect the reputation of your site, you can use the tool to deny the link to display the linked Google should not be ignored. Again, we develop our algorithm with an eye to preventing negative SEO, so most webmasters do not have to worry about negative SEO at all. ‘

Cutts also spoke on the subject at PubCon, which was announced the tool. Search Engine Roundtable liveblogged account of what he said, which reads:

All complaints saw negative SEO, or most, really not negatively impair your SEO. This is a much better use of your time to make your site more efficient compared hurts others. At the same time, we saw it as a case of trouble. Ie buy a new domain and need to clean up the site. There are people who want to go through this process. SEO plus getting new clients who went through a bad SEO.

Warning and overreaction

Again, you do not want to use the tool in some situations. Somewhat later tactic for a positive link to hurt you, and can not be removed otherwise. Google was warned repeatedly about it, because the over-use of this tool can cause webmatsers shot itself in the foot. If you use it willy-nilly, can harm your site by removing links that will really help you in the first place.

It seems like common sense, but since the update Penguin, we’ve seen many examples of webmasters frantically trying to get the link removed even though they admit that they want to maintain, if not for the fear that Google might frown when it (when in fact, it is unlikely they will).

Aaron Wall of SEOBook made some other interesting points in front of the memorial. He writes:

Tool gun decline.

If you get the wrong format errors, you can getting important links for long time period. I suggest that if this happens, you can still get your link back, but not easy.

You can use seen as an admission of guilt? Matt gives the example of “bad” webmasters, who came a bit like “webmaster confess their sins”. This is equivalent to putting your hands and say “yep, I buy links that I think even ingenious!”? Might as well paint targeting your back.

Google would depend More On Social And the author

If overreaction is a problem, and it seems quite likely that, despite the warning Google, this tool can really mess with how Google treats links, history is the backbone of the algorithm.

“Link is one of the most prominent signal that we use to order the search results,” says Simon. “By looking at the links between pages, we can get an idea of ​​the pages of leading and important, and therefore more likely to be relevant to our users. This is the basis of PageRank, which is one of over 200 signals that we expect to determine the rankings. Since PageRank is thus known, it is also a target for spammers, and we constantly fight with linkspam algorithm and by taking manual action. ‘

It will be interesting to see how Google treats links send webmasters ignore, that does not really hurt it in the first place. I was surprised to see some of the Google test industry.

Google does not like it when people manipulated to calculate links, but they only provided the webmaster tools to do it, even if it is rather straightforward black hat approach Google is always trying to get rid of (schema links, paid links, etc..). Now (and we have seen it before with a tool), potentially with a webmaster trying to get rid of the link with the actual value, even in the eyes of Google. I mean, honestly, what is the opportunity to use this tool is 100% how you intend to use, in rare cases?

Google seems to care the other signal to play a larger role in the algorithm. While they are not there yet, by any comments the company made, social signals is almost certainly a play becomes serious. CEO Larry Page asked about it at the conference this week.

He replied, “I think really important to know, again, who you are, what people are – it’s really important to share things. It is essential to know the identity of the person so that you can share stuff and comment on things and improve the ecosystem of the search, you know, as you – as a real person … I think all the things that really matter “.

“That is why we worked hard for Google+, to make [it] is an important part of the search,” she continued. “Again, like Maps, we do not see it as something like the separate dimensions would never play search. If you are looking for something, you want to know the things that your friends saw, or recommended, or write about or share. I’m just kind of an obvious thing. ‘

“I think in general, if the internet is working fine, the available information distributed to many different people and different companies and become work well for everyone,” he said . “You know, I’ve succeeded where it to find all the information in the world, not just a little, right? And in general, I think people are motivated to get the information sought, because then we give the people the user with information. ‘

“So in general, I think the right way to run the internet as a healthy ecosystem,” said Page. “I think the social data is clearly important and useful here. Did we take advantage of that in any way we can. ‘

Google says, the link is a direct target for manipulation, and social may be more difficult to fake (even with specific business, and have many other).

Another signal is hard to fake a writer, which is why Google really push for it now. In a recent Google+ Hangouts, Matt Cutts says the author, “Sometimes you have a higher click through, and people will say, so ‘Oh, that looks like a reliable source.” There is a way to you can participate and get ready for the kind of long-term trends not only know something is said, but who says it and how reputable they are. ‘

“I think if you look further into the future and see what we call social signals or writer or whatever you want to call it, in ten years, I think I know someone really well – if Dan wrote an article, if the comments on the forum or the blog – I still want to see it. So the long-term trend, “he said.

“The idea is you want something that everyone can participate in and just make some classification of the link, and then periodically, as we start to learn more about the writer of high quality, You might think that started to affect the ratings, “he pointed out.

So here you have a Google (Matt Cutts specifically) I stated more important, and you may not have to even use the link associated with the tool that the company recently launched.

Danny Sullivan asked Cutts, the PubCon, why Google is not just bad start discount link, not “consider some of them as potentially negative vote.”

“After all, while it is a fantastic new tool, it is better to not need it at all,” he wrote. Cutts does not really answer the question.

Why did not I think as Danny suggested, and just ignore the bad link to begin with? Do you think social signals and the author is more important than the link? Share your thoughts about Google ranking strategy and a new tool in the comments.

Leading image: The Shining (Warner Bros.)