Negative SEO attack - what should I do?

[addz123]

Hey,

Me and a partner are about to launch a new site on a pretty premium domain, however someone seems to be running a negative SEO attack against us.

I don't want to disclose the domain, but so far I can see 500+ spam comments pointing at our site with the anchor text "cheap viagra pills" "malware warning" and "penis enlargement site" - this has all started in October/Novemeber.

What should my route of action be? 95%+ of the negative SEO links are no-follow comments. Should I disavow all of these as they come up?

Also should I disavow the links now or should I wait a while to see if anything happens with the site (also there seems to be new incoming links every day I check so I was thinking of waiting a while to see when/if it stops - otherwise I'll have to keep adding new links to the disavow file every few days).

Finally, will these no-follow comment links penalise my site and would it be a manual or algorithmic penalty? If it's manual then it's pretty easy to explain the situation, however if it's algorithmic than there's little I can do.

The site itself is 2+ years old I think and has the most authoritative content on the topic with solid user metrics, although zero SEO work has been done so it has no "link authority" at the moment. We were about to re-launch the new site with content/SEO strategy next week.

Adam

 

[khalid]

Use Google's disavow tool to ban them all.

Do a reconsideration request if your site gets binned or a warning has appeared stating, with proof, that you are the victim of a negative seo attack and that you are using Google's tool to remove them form your incoming links.

 

[addz123]

Use Google's disavow tool to ban them all.

Do a reconsideration request if your site gets binned or a warning has appeared stating, with proof, that you are the victim of a negative seo attack and that you are using Google's tool to remove them form your incoming links.

Thanks. The only problem I see if that I think if you make changes to your link disavow form then it puts it to the back of the pile.

This means I might be better of waiting for the full negative seo attack before I submit the form which will then need editing as more links are found. If I have to keep editing the disavow form then it keeps getting sent to the back of the que and google will never process it. Could anyone confirm if I'm correct?

 

[khalid]

Thanks. The only problem I see if that I think if you make changes to your link disavow form then it puts it to the back of the pile.

This means I might be better of waiting for the full negative seo attack before I submit the form which will then need editing as more links are found. If I have to keep editing the disavow form then it keeps getting sent to the back of the que and google will never process it. Could anyone confirm if I'm correct?

If you do it on a continual basis then, in my opinion, it shows you are being pro-active as a webmaster.

If you do it as a one-off then leave it for months to build up again it shows you don't really give two hoots.

That's just my thoughts.

 

[AuthorityDomain]

Disavow them as soon as possible. The spam comments will most likely cause a algorithmic penalty due to too many links with same anchor text (penguin).

Not much more you can do unfortunately. I had the same thing happen to me except the disavow tool didn't exist. My site dropped after penguin kicked in!!

Goodluck

 

[Murray]

If they are from comments, aren't most NoFollow? if so they will cause no problem with penalties, google doesn't put nofollow links in the link graph, nofollow is the same as not existing at all.

 

[addz123]

Yes, as mentioned 95%+ of them are no-follow.

I actually checked webmasters tools recent links and see there's actually 6,000+ no-follow links with those 3 spammy anchors all built in the last month or so.

 

[Murray]

Yes, as mentioned 95%+ of them are no-follow.

I actually checked webmasters tools recent links and see there's actually 6,000+ no-follow links with those 3 spammy anchors all built in the last month or so.

Oh sorry.

Well don't worry about the NoFollow ones, JohnMu (google employee on googles webmaster forum) has said a couple of times what I said above, Nofollowing links is the same as them not existing.

 

[khalid]

Oh sorry.

Well don't worry about the NoFollow ones, JohnMu (google employee on googles webmaster forum) has said a couple of times what I said above, Nofollowing links is the same as them not existing.

I'd disagree, even if you are sitting in the fence disavow them anyway.

 

[Murray]

I'd disagree, even if you are sitting in the fence disavow them anyway.

http://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/webmasters/BNs_AOVr3M0

I'd like to back up what others said -- having links (even a large number of them) with rel=nofollow pointing to your site does not negatively affect your site. We take these links out of our PageRank calculations, and out of our algorithms when they use links.

Disavowing nofollow links would be a waste of time imo, but if he wants to go the route of better safe than sorry, then it's his time so I can't really argue against that.

 

[dashu1]

I wouldn't pay too much attention to what any Google employee says re no-follow or anything else for that matter.

If the links exist there is a chance that they could damage the sites ranking. If they are disavowed then there is no chance.

So disavow them all.

Your problem though is that it's just so easy for someone using xrumer or other automated tools to create thousands of links per day for months, so it'll become a never ending job.

Google are great taking the step to allow links to have a negative effect aren't they.

 

[Murray]

I wouldn't pay too much attention to what any Google employee says re no-follow or anything else for that matter.

If the links exist there is a chance that they could damage the sites ranking. If they are disavowed then there is no chance.

So disavow them all.

Your problem though is that it's just so easy for someone using xrumer or other automated tools to create thousands of links per day for months, so it'll become a never ending job.

Google are great taking the step to allow links to have a negative effect aren't they.

If you don't trust what a google employee says, why do you trust their tool.

 

[seemly]

If you don't trust what a google employee says, why do you trust their tool.

This is a great and very valid point.
Interested to hear responses to this from those who suggest using the Google disavow tool.

 

[cc976a]

I'd use it, if I knew which links to my site have caused a penalty I have for a specific keyword. I haven't done any link spam, or tried to artificially spread links with anchor text. So one of my legitimate links has created a penalty - and I'm none the wiser as to which one!

Is this Google employee any part to do with the disavow tool? If not just because he's an employee doesn't mean he understands, knows or has any influence over what the disavow tool does or doesn't.

As much as I'd want to trust disavow, I'm seeing evidence (although extraordinarily limited from own experience) that my sites with Analytics seen to have the penalties, whereas the sites I don't, haven't.

Could be co-incidence or Google using more detailed knowledge about my site to use against me (?)

 

[dashu1]

If you don't trust what a google employee says, why do you trust their tool.

What other option do you have, and what possible harm can it do.

Even if you think that they're going to look at the data provided and use it as an admission of guilt in some cases, if you've already been hit then there's nothing to lose.