Warning from Google Webmaster Tools on Artificial Links

[Fernando Veloso]

Ok,

I know Google has a lot to deal with, and I know they TRY to improve their pages BUT this is not only idiot, but also total ignorance.

This is what I've received in my G Webmasters Tools:

google Webmaster tools notice of detected unnatural links to URL...

we've detected that some of your site's pages may be using techniques that are outside google webmaster guidelines.

specifically,look for possibly artificial or unnatural links pointing
to your site that could be intended to manipulate PageRank. Examples
of unnatural linking could include buying links to pass PageRank or
participating in link schemes.

we encourage you to make changes to your site so that it meets our
quality guidelines.
once you've made these changes,please submit your site for
reconsideration in google's search results.
if you find unnatural links to your site that you are unable to
control or remove,please provide the details in your reconsideration
request.

if you have any questions about how to resolve this issue,please see
our webmaster help forum for support.

sincerely,

google search quality team

What is stupid is they sent this to 4 of my sites of which:

* One was never promoted anywhere except here in my sig.
* Other was dead for 1-2 years and the only backlinks it has are from MY related sites (old links).
* Other one was never EVER promoted anywhere - and that includes social media, or directories, so NO backlinks I created, not ONE.
* And the last one was promoted using everything you can think of: blogrol from my other related sites, directories, social media, Youtube, etc etc BUT NEVER with automated tools.

So, let me recap: I get these warnings, they tell me to FIX MY BACKLINKS (huh, how the **** do I do that?) and then to ask for reconsideration.

They Hit 4 of my cleanest sites EVER. And they expect me to FIX MY BACKLINKS. Are they that ignorant? Does GOOGLE realize every competitor is now going to push 2K backlinks per day to ruin clean sites?

Do Google understands what the **** are they doing? Honestly? How the hell am I supposed to "fix my backlinks" so I can "ask for reconsideration"??



WHY Should I ask for reconsideration from something that is NOT wrong? Arrrgggg!!!!! Is Google web spam team THAT ignorant? Take a look to one of my warned sites: Site Explorer - Search Results Just backlinks from my personal site and from here, WF.

Please, someone independent tell me how this is a backlink profile from someone using, and I quote:

artificial or unnatural links pointing to your site that could be intended to manipulate PageRank

.

? Unless promoting a site in NOW forbidden by Google, all the links are promotion. Mine and in my sig here. But maybe thats it: NOW IT'S FORBIDDEN TO PROMOTE A SITE.

Man, I am telling you: Google is pushing this crap attitude for so long, only to create more bluefarters. I swear to God, this is pushing more and more people into "artificial or unnatural links to manipulate PageRank" cause Google is IGNORANT. A couple weeks ago it was PANDA killing honest and GOOD UNIQUE sites. Now it's this trash?

So let me check, Google tells you to promote your sites so more people can know you're alive. But if you promote your sites, you get "warned" and asked to "fix the backlinks".

Oh my God...

I have to get away from this PC, otherwise I'll hit my desk so hard it breaks in two.

Google, one work for your web spam team: IGNORANTS.

Fernando

[Fernando Veloso]

Forgot to add owners of automated tools will love this approach from Google... Now THEY CAN destroy their competition using tools or Fiverr gigs.

How cool is that Google?

[Davioli]

Did they do anything to your websites? Did your rankings get affected?

[Fernando Veloso]

Originally Posted by Davioli

Did they do anything to your websites? Did your rankings get affected?

Nop. Nada.

[Davioli]

If they have not provided any data on WHICH links are the problem... I doubt you as a webmaster can do anything. They're doing this to weed out backlink buyers... but it won't work unless they give specific link data.

[Fernando Veloso]

Originally Posted by Davioli

If they have not provided any data on WHICH links are the problem... I doubt you as a webmaster can do anything. They're doing this to weed out backlink buyers... but it won't work unless they give specific link data.

Problem is: Imagine a competitor of mine buys 5K links using Senuk or whatever. How in the world am I supposed to be WARNED and possibly PENALIZED for his actions?

[paulgl]

Fernando, you know I never believe much in google knowing "artificial"
or "natural." They can't. But here's what I think they are doing. And
it's something the could do very easily. Don't know it this affects you.

They are looking for anchor text. Specific anchor text that may signal
spam. Any link with a get-rich-quick-scheme attached to it may
get flagged. Also other spammy words, most of which I will not go into
as to offend people. But if you make 1,000 links in crappy places, and
they all have the anchor text, "Easy Online Money." That would, in
effect, be "unnatural." It's not the number of links, but what the links
are. I also suspect that similar links posted in non-moderated places,
like blog comments, is also being looked at. I mentioned that when
google said don't place your adsense on a comment page because
all comments are spam no matter what people say.

Bottom line if you are doing forum profiles and blog comments with
the same old spammy anchor text, that is a tip off.

Mix up the anchor text so as not so spammy, and post links in YOUR
created content only. How many zillions have we seen for "nike shoes"?

I've preached the "build your own link empire," but this is the first
I've got pretty good proof that it's just what the doctor ordered.

Notice my throw-away link in my sig?

Hey, I live, I learn. Change my mind.

Again, not saying this is what happened to your links.

I also have never set up google analytics. Heeded the warning years
ago.

Paul

[Davioli]

They will WARN you with this sort of email... but how in the world are you expected to collect data on ALL the links pointing to your website and send it to them for reconsideration?
Even if you can collect all that data, how are you going to differentiate from the good links and the "unnatural links" ..
This seems totally weird from Google.

[Fernando Veloso]

Paul, take the example above from my Press Release site. It has a link to sitexplorer with backlink profile. Please check it, takes 15 seconds.

Do you really see any backlinks from profiles, blog comments, or anything similar? NO. You'll see backlinks from my personal site and from my sig in here.

I tell you: Google Web Spam Team just lost it, completely.

Will YOUR COMPETITORS be able hurt your rankings using this FLAW?

All this lack of response to this thread is not a good signal either, cause people are NOT listening to what is going on, and this is a MAJOR shift.

Again:

Will YOUR COMPETITORS be able hurt your rankings using this FLAW?

This is the really important issue here. My sites are fine, thank you, but if one of them drops suddenly next days/weeks, I'll know this is the cause. And I'll know HOW TO DESTROY my competitors.

Fiverr is just 5$ away.

[paulgl]

Well, Fernando, how many times have I said fiverr is junk and just for
spammers? I detest fiverr. Just promotes the myth of lousy things to
do. But who cares, right? I've got better things to do with 5 bucks.

And there's nothing on any of my sites, link wise, that would be worth
a lousy 5 bucks.

The lack of responses is due to a lot of reasons. I would not read
much into that.

People here are more interested in junk science, and not a decent
conversation about links.

I would probably stop link building with anchor text using:
free, money, reviews, and any other spammy words.

Paul

[XIIIzen]

Well the problem is that everyone wants shortcuts, that's why most people won't want to have a decent backlink conversation. You say you don't use analytics or the webmasters tools, that seems very interesting to me, which alternatives do you use?... It would be very interesting to learn a bit more from someone who doesn't believe in the shortcut backlink strategies that fly all around here.

Your case Fernando is very interesting indeed and I would like to see the real reason behind it (of course Google won't say a thing). But it is indeed a reason to stay on guard or at least to be on the lookout for the changes that Google is making. I do hope your sites stay safe tho.

[paulgl]

I hardly ever check my rankings. I check for the bottom line: Money.

I do check my PR, but that only changes a little.

I do check out cpanel stats frequently. Gives me a whole lot
of neat info. Having never used analytics, I don't know if they
are comparable. I like cpanel to tell me where my last 100
visitors came from, and, what words and phrases were searched
for to find my site. I tweak to my advantage. That means, I think
it's crazy when people say they rank #1 for such and such keyword.
I go to to cpanel, and notice 200 visits came from google using
50 different words and phrases. I don't give a rat's hat that I
rank #1 for X-keyword.

What do I really need analytics for? It won't tell me how to make
more money.

July has started off better than June, and June was my best adsense
month ever. So I must be doing something right.

My backlinking is done mostly via my own content: blog posts, internal
linking, new content, squidoo, and, 4 other forums that I am active in.

I have never seen the need to get masses of backlinks from useless places.
I've got better things to do.

Paul

[XIIIzen]

Originally Posted by paulgl

I hardly ever check my rankings. I check for the bottom line: Money.

I do check my PR, but that only changes a little.

I do check out cpanel stats frequently. Gives me a whole lot
of neat info. Having never used analytics, I don't know if they
are comparable. I like cpanel to tell me where my last 100
visitors came from, and, what words and phrases were searched
for to find my site. I tweak to my advantage. That means, I think
it's crazy when people say they rank #1 for such and such keyword.
I go to to cpanel, and notice 200 visits came from google using
50 different words and phrases. I don't give a rat's hat that I
rank #1 for X-keyword.

What do I really need analytics for? It won't tell me how to make
more money.

July has started off better than June, and June was my best adsense
month ever. So I must be doing something right.

My backlinking is done mostly via my own content: blog posts, internal
linking, new content, squidoo, and, 4 other forums that I am active in.

I have never seen the need to get masses of backlinks from useless places.
I've got better things to do.

Paul

Wow, this is one of the best responses I have ever had, thank you very much.

I will start looking a bit closer to my cpanel stats, it is worth the shot since as you say there is no need for anything special there, just to log in.

I see you focus a lot on quality content, even for my "crappy" sites I try to offer the best info I have available. So far I have seen that is the only constant in the world of SEO, write good content and backlinks will come naturally.

[Fernando Veloso]

Did you guys noticed I mentioned the 4 sites I got warned are completly CLEAN? Heck, I even included a link to the backlink profile of one of them in OP...

Sheshhh... This is not a "oh I got caught doing bad things" - instead is a "Google, what did I do wrong to get warning that can possibly kill my sites?"

And again, most people aren't realizing the implications of this. But in the end, what was I thinking? Posting this in WF is like posting a serious question about Cars in a weight loss forum...

lol

[shaneparksons]

Originally Posted by Fernando Veloso

* And the last one was promoted using everything you can think of: blogrol from my other related sites, directories, social media, Youtube, etc etc BUT NEVER with automated tools.

Your sites may have been identified circling around a common network (your network of sites), especially when you said "blogrol from my other related sites". Google suspects the sidebar corner since it's a common area for link buying/selling schemes, which they believe manipulating their PR and SERP. You might want to start getting contextual links, more of it, from now on and see where this stupid thing (you said it) goes.

[XIIIzen]

Originally Posted by Fernando Veloso

Did you guys noticed I mentioned the 4 sites I got warned are completly CLEAN? Heck, I even included a link to the backlink profile of one of them in OP...

Sheshhh... This is not a "oh I got caught doing bad things" - instead is a "Google, what did I do wrong to get warning that can possibly kill my sites?"

And again, most people aren't realizing the implications of this. But in the end, what was I thinking? Posting this in WF is like posting a serious question about Cars in a weight loss forum...

lol

If your theory is correct and now Google will penalize seriously for a bunch of links that seems bad, the best thing to do is to actually hit your competition now. Dishonest? Perhaps, but then again that is how Google would want it according to your theory.

I did read all your comments here, and yes it seems like a very weird case, and I don't think you are doing any blasts or whatever most do here. I think Google screwed up real bad, or maybe someone is scrapping your content. I dunno.

I don't think you are lying, but I have found that most of the s**t that happens to my sites has a reasonable explanation, perhaps it's something that it is way beyond our sight, but there should be. Once we have no other theories I would assume yours is right and now Google is doing really weird things.

[MikeFriedman]

It's all mind control...

I'm joking, but I have seen quite a few posts like this around on forums.

Is it possible Google is taking no action against these websites (I haven't heard of any losing rankings), but they are just trying to scare webmasters into doing what they want and spreading panic among others so they fall in line too?

Just a thought.

[packerfan]

Pretty bizarre if you ask me. It's odd that they're targeting 4 clean sites. What's even more weird is that they haven't done anything regarding your rankings.

In fact, the message talks about page rank, not search engine rank, so who knows. Maybe they'll take away your page rank.

[Fernando Veloso]

Originally Posted by shaneparksons

Your sites may have been identified circling around a common network (your network of sites), especially when you said "blogrol from my other related sites". Google suspects the sidebar corner since it's a common area for link buying/selling schemes, which they believe manipulating their PR and SERP. You might want to start getting contextual links, more of it, from now on and see where this stupid thing (you said it) goes.

Do you even realize what you're saying? If the sites are mine (same analytics code) HOW THE HELL would I be selling links to myself?

Wake the **** up!

So, let me recap AGAIN. I own 4 sites with a CLEAN backlink profile:

NO profile links
NO comment links
NO high PR links
etc etc etc

My sites get targeted and you tell to do stop promoting my sites with internal linking and my internal promotion?

Ok, guess you have to read AGAIN my OP, where I clearly stated one Press Release site of mine (only one in Portugal, for that matter, used by major companies) with ONLY 2 backlink sources:

1 - My personal site
2 - WF

This site was targeted as "artificial links bla bla bla".

So please, unless you read the damn thread properly, stop posting irrelevant content.

As I said before, this is definitely NOT the best place to have a proper discussion about this issue. Most of you folks simply don't understand what was written and what COULD be happening to YOUR sites.

I'll personally ask a MOD to delete this entire thread.

Fernando

[Mike Anthony]

yeah I covered this a few days back here

Can you be hurt by the Links pointing to your site? Maybe after all??

I even asked if anyone had received one of the notices. Sorry its now hit closer to home

But guys lets hold of on claiming to know what Google is aiming at on fernando's sites. this is relatively new and reports of this kind of notice only started surfacing a month ago. Way too early to see what is happening with any amount of certainty.

[Mike Anthony]

And the last one was promoted using everything you can think of: blogrol from my other related sites, directories, social media, Youtube, etc etc BUT NEVER with automated tools.

These are all under the same account at Webmaster's though right? If so then the notice could be chiefly about that one. Have you seen any change in your results?

[paulgl]

I heard everything you said Fernando.

My point was more about allowing google to track you. Let
them track you, and what are they going to come up with?
It won't always be pretty or accurate.

Google does this stuff 99.999% by automation.

It might just be a form letter sent by automation when
something triggers it. That trigger may not even exist in
the real world. They are just hell-bent on cleaning up junk
and spam that good stuff will get caught up. They just dumped
all free domains. That alone was a little scary. Not getting rid
of junk, but with one fell swoop they swept away the baby
with the bathwater.

Mike Anthony, your post led me to do a little digging. That's where
I came up with the spamming anchor text links thing.

Paul

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by paulgl

Mike Anthony, your post led me to do a little digging. That's where
I came up with the spamming anchor text links thing.

Paul

Yeah but we can't say that like its fact (entirely agree with you with the tracking stuff. I always shied away from webmasters). In fact I don't think its that at al. I'd have to dig through all the reports that are showing up of this notice.

Examplesof unnatural linking could include buying links to pass PageRank orparticipating in link schemes. - Google Search

And its clear from the letter that its not just the anchor text of the links but the so called unnaturalness of these links. Google CAN determine unnatural links to a degree. Footprints etc plus some bought links just SCREAM that they are bought especially since a number of them only use wordpress and have like 50 different topics on the one page.

I just want to know what penalties people are actually seeing in the serps. Without serp changes then its just a warning kind of thing (reports are that sites have dropped but it s unclear if they were ranking with those links and they were just removed).

Still as I said before - reconsideration in the past used to be more than a discounting fo the links.

[Ben Armstrong]

This has pretty big ramifications for some of us.

I'm more than willing to adapt, as I'm sure Fernando is, but it must be infuriating to get this crap from google when you've done nothing wrong. Especially when they're not exactly known for their excellent customer service or detailed explanations.

After the Panda update I made the decision that I'd be future proofing my sites with my SEO efforts. The only links I'll be using from now on are guest posts, forum posting and the odd article for syndication purposes. Linking to every page and varying the anchor text.

[LiamP]

This much I know (or assume):

1. Google love to test, test, test, and get as much real world data as possible. e.g. Finbding the blue colour for their links.

2. Google haven't rolled out this warning 100%, otherwise this forum would be full of people who had received warnings. It just looks like a small sample to date.

3. Rankings don't seem to have been affected (yet)

Based on this, my hunch is that you are part of some kind of test sample. That Google is throwing some stuff out there to gauge the reaction.
What exactly they hope to learn or accomplish, I don't know.

[BlakeM]

I'm 99% sure it's a scam. Google wouldn't send an automated message with so many grammar mistakes. Plus, didn't you say your rankings remained unchanged?

Originally Posted by Fernando Veloso

Ok,

I know Google has a lot to deal with, and I know they TRY to improve their pages BUT this is not only idiot, but also total ignorance.

This is what I've received in my G Webmasters Tools:

What is stupid is they sent this to 4 of my sites of which:

* One was never promoted anywhere except here in my sig.
* Other was dead for 1-2 years and the only backlinks it has are from MY related sites (old links).
* Other one was never EVER promoted anywhere - and that includes social media, or directories, so NO backlinks I created, not ONE.
* And the last one was promoted using everything you can think of: blogrol from my other related sites, directories, social media, Youtube, etc etc BUT NEVER with automated tools.

So, let me recap: I get these warnings, they tell me to FIX MY BACKLINKS (huh, how the **** do I do that?) and then to ask for reconsideration.

They Hit 4 of my cleanest sites EVER. And they expect me to FIX MY BACKLINKS. Are they that ignorant? Does GOOGLE realize every competitor is now going to push 2K backlinks per day to ruin clean sites?

Do Google understands what the **** are they doing? Honestly? How the hell am I supposed to "fix my backlinks" so I can "ask for reconsideration"??



WHY Should I ask for reconsideration from something that is NOT wrong? Arrrgggg!!!!! Is Google web spam team THAT ignorant? Take a look to one of my warned sites: Site Explorer - Search Results Just backlinks from my personal site and from here, WF.

Please, someone independent tell me how this is a backlink profile from someone using, and I quote: .

? Unless promoting a site in NOW forbidden by Google, all the links are promotion. Mine and in my sig here. But maybe thats it: NOW IT'S FORBIDDEN TO PROMOTE A SITE.

Man, I am telling you: Google is pushing this crap attitude for so long, only to create more bluefarters. I swear to God, this is pushing more and more people into "artificial or unnatural links to manipulate PageRank" cause Google is IGNORANT. A couple weeks ago it was PANDA killing honest and GOOD UNIQUE sites. Now it's this trash?

So let me check, Google tells you to promote your sites so more people can know you're alive. But if you promote your sites, you get "warned" and asked to "fix the backlinks".

Oh my God...

I have to get away from this PC, otherwise I'll hit my desk so hard it breaks in two.

Google, one work for your web spam team: IGNORANTS.

Fernando

[RevSEO]

More often than not, when this happens it is as a result of paid links.

Paid links are extremely evident, so take a look around and see if any of your blogroll links exist between things like "Buy viagra" or "Casinos Online"

Take a look at your backlinks and check for those types of links, Google hates anything that could appear to look like paid links!

[furryCuds1z]

This is sort of odd. Their email as usual is vague but it almost seems like they admit that people build links to their own site by saying you can somehow fix it.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by RevSEO

More often than not, when this happens it is as a result of paid links.

Paid links are extremely evident, so take a look around and see if any of your blogroll links exist between things like "Buy viagra" or "Casinos Online"

AGAIN

people need to stop acting like they know what is happening with site owners receiving this notice. If you do a search for a sentence from the notice you will see that people have received it who bought links AND by people who had other kinds of links. On other forums some have even reported just having done a link blast. some have reported merely linking to their own other sites

We CANNOT say "when this happens" this or that. This is a new notice that Google never sent out before until the last few weeks. There is at this point ZERO indication that only certain niches are targeted.

On something so new we should be in information gathering mode not drawing conclusions mode.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by LiamP

3. Rankings don't seem to have been affected (yet)

.

there have been ranking changes reported by those who got the notice. Is it as a result of those links being discounted or an additional penalty is at this point unknown.

[yukon]

Lol, why are people so paranoid about Google Analytics?

Anyone running Adsense, you do realize they track every single thing on your pages, right? I'm sure Adsense tracks a lot more than what Google allows us to see inside our Analytics accounts.

I don't think Fernando is running Adsense, just saying...

[paulgl]

Originally Posted by yukon

Lol, why are people so paranoid about Google Analytics?

Anyone running Adsense, you do realize they track every single thing on your pages, right? I'm sure Adsense tracks a lot more than what Google allows us to see inside our Analytics accounts.

I assume that adsense and analytics are looking at different things.
Adsense would be zeroing in on only certain things.

I'm not afraid of anylitics. But why give them more tracking than
they need?

Since the message was about google webmaster tools, what conclusion
about tracking can one take from that? It's "detecting" unnatural links.
I'll politely pass on that.

Paul

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by yukon

Anyone running Adsense, you do realize they track every single thing on your pages, right? I'm sure Adsense tracks a lot more than what Google allows us to see inside our Analytics accounts.

I wouldn' t know. I don't touch adsense with a ten foot pole. There are much better ways of monetizing your sites

[XIIIzen]

As I said earlier, there must be a reason, but it may just be out of sight. If you ask me SEO is not exactly a science, it is more like an luck game with Google.

Until we have very detailed info (which almost never happens) we are just filling this with ideas... nothing said can make sense without actual data. My suggestion would be, let us find what happens but not worry until we have precise information about this new problem...

[futuremills]

google better fix this junk soon or else everyone else will just buy links and trash sites into oblivion

[Ducksauce]

Thanks for the topic, it has been useful for me at least.
Looking tat he Yahoo Site explorer link above, there are many inbound links from your WF sig, is it possible that, in it's own right has raised red flags, many inbound links form one forum, and a forum that Google must despise at that, as it is an area of people getting together to disguise how to beat Google.

Note, I don't know much, just a newbies suggestion looking form a different angle.

Paul, what is the actual warnings? maybe telling G they are all your sites?
I also have never set up google analytics. Heeded the warning years
ago.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by terrapurus

You are not exactly building a lot of credibility here by linking two blogs in the same server and then bitching when Google sends you 'ahem, we don't like this emails'.

And you aren't doing your credibility here any good would that daft attacking analysis.

A) it is VERY common for European sites (you do know where Portugal is right?) to host out of the UK

B) If Google is bitching about a site owner linking to its other sites then we can wait for Adobe.com to drop out of the ranking for linking to it's adobelabs and adobe.tvsites . Microsoft should soon tank for linking to Silverlight.net and MSN.com and on and on.

So you can get yourself off the floor with your ROFL because staying down there just looks silly

Are they best on different IPs? yes but it is hardly uncommon for sites to link to other of their sister sites and it would be stupid to have to tag them with a nofollow link.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by Ducksauce

and a forum that Google must despise at that, as it is an area of people getting together to disguise how to beat Google.

Note, I don't know much, just a newbies suggestion looking form a different angle..

Right now that guess is as good as any in this thread

[terrapurus]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

If Google is bitching about a site owner linking to its other sites then we can wait for Adobe.com to drop out of the ranking for linking to it's adobelabs and adobe.tvsites . Microsoft should soon tank for linking to Silverlight.net and MSN.com and on and on.

So you can get yourself off the floor with your ROFL because staying down there just looks silly

Are they best on different IPs? yes but it is hardly uncommon for sites to link to other of their sister sites and it would be stupid to have to tag them with a nofollow link.

Ok .. sorry about that. As you are an SEO guy though, are you advising your clients that is perfectly acceptable under the Google webmaster guidelines for Fernando Verloso to register one site through Namecheap, another site through WebHS, host them on the same server then provide a do follow link to a site that has commercial intent? And do you openly recommend that they then set up a link circle by providing a signature link on a forum to those sites and then linking back to that forum on the blog site?

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by terrapurus

Ok .. sorry about that. As you are an SEO guy though, are you advising your clients that is perfectly acceptable under the Google webmaster guidelines for Fernando Verloso to register one site through Namecheap, another site through WebHS, host them on the same server then provide a do follow link to a site that has commercial intent?

The vast majority of sites ranking in the most competitive fields all have commercial intent. I don't know where you are getting this no commercial intent guideline from. If he was selling links from his site he would get another kind of email. Would I put them on the same IP address.? No but in fact thats frankly because I would not want them to know the relationship so as to game the system (from their point of view). Do you have any idea how prevalent it is for a site belonging to one entity linking to another site owned by the same entity? Some of the biggests sites representing some of the biggest companies do that without a nofollow tag. Further with most shared host having hundreds of sites sitting on the same IP we would be seeing far more of these notices than we have been. Google will discount the links on the same IP but put a notice? Anything is possible but that would be a sea change and not anything scuzzy. So if a blogger tells his regular audience - hey check out my new site here - boom he gets a notice??

And do you openly recommend that they then set up a link circle by providing a signature link on a forum to those sites and then linking back to that forum on the blog site?

I don't recommend Forum sig or profile links period. simply a warning about reciprocal links? That would be something. Its pretty easy to do and is done everyday innocently. As a SEO I l like and respect SEomoz. I've linked to them and if they linked to me I get a penalty.

Now if you are saying they are watching forum links as unnatural then there you might have a point REGARDLESS of whether his sites are on the same IP address or where he hosts. Google could be ready to wage ware on certain kinds of links entirely. They just squashed a whole domain TLD a few days ago.

Like I said no one knows at this point so we shouldn't be indicting anyone yet. IF I had to guess its Fernando's last site he lists that got him in trouble and then linking to the other sites included that in the alleged manipulation of pagerank but thats a guess.

[dagaul101]

Google Webmaster Tools like any automated software will have some bugs once in a while

[terrapurus]

Mike ... we all know that Google has different levels of penalties they can give out. They have their letters they can send out to your webmaster pages, they have small penalties, the sandbox, larger penalties, deindexing your site and the mother of all penalities, slapping your site and anything you have ever owned or hosted into last century.

So on the scheme on things, what would catch their attention to get their entry level "naughty naughty" item? If you go to their guidelines they discuss in depth paid links. A paid link at its core is an advertisement. If you have a link on one asset you have control over or paid to have control over (and that is what buying ad space is) and it is linking to your site then it is an advertisement. And it does not have to be monetary compensation for it to be an ad - a barter system is just as valid. On this, I noticed you had ...

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

So if a blogger tells his regular audience - hey check out my new site here - boom he gets a notice??

That would be an incontext link. It might attract attention or it might not. However, this is irrelevant. In this case one site is linking to a sister site purely from a blog roll. It is just a link sitting on the page. That link serves no benefit to the readers (ie it is not in content as you mentioned). If you have to give it a label, it is an advertisement.

Google's guidelines on advertisement links are clear - they must be nofollow -

Not all paid links violate our guidelines. Buying and selling links is a normal part of the economy of the web when done for advertising purposes, and not for manipulation of search results. Links purchased for advertising should be designated as such. This can be done in several ways, such as:

• Adding a rel="nofollow" attribute to the <a> tag
• Redirecting the links to an intermediate page that is blocked from search engines with a robots.txt file

Think of it what you will, but this link is shaping page rank. This technique is getting into the realm of grey hat and the user is being given a nudge back in the right direction before any harsher action is taken.

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

I don't recommend Forum sig or profile links period.

Really?

Lets follow yours.

Yours takes me through to a post which then takes me through to Buy Real ON Page PR links

Here is an interesting question. If I bought a link from that service and it is a dofollow link, am I in breach of the Google guidelines? Don't answer that - it is a rhetorical question. I like your rates by the way ... will definitely have to check them out. But I like black and grey hat. My initial point to Fernando is that if you do tread into territory that a) Google does not like and b) leaves not so much as a footprint but a huge gaping trench behind you, then yes, you can expect to experience some sort of wrist slap as a result.

At the end of the day, if you feel you have to adopt these tactics to suceed, then being smart about it is essential. Otherwise your competitor will simply log into their webmaster tools and report the site buying paid links. If they did it to JC Penny who have big scary lawyers, they won't think twice about doing it to you.

And in finishing ..

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Do you have any idea how prevalent it is for a site belonging to one entity linking to another site owned by the same entity? Some of the biggests sites representing some of the biggest companies do that without a nofollow tag. Further with most shared host having hundreds of sites sitting on the same IP we would be seeing far more of these notices than we have been.

And today you learned that most large companies know sh*t about SEO and why you can outrank them.

[Tom Albas]

I think you used the Black Hat SEO that why Google showing errors in your webmaster tool

[terrapurus]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Google could be ready to wage ware on certain kinds of links entirely. They just squashed a whole domain TLD a few days ago.

Forgot this one.

Are you referring to the co.cc expulsion?

In that case your assertion is wrong.

The TLD is .cc which is the country code TLD for the Cocos Keeling Islands (.cc - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

CO.CC - Free Domain name registration + Free DNS service. was a single domain. What the company that owned that was offereing was cheap bulk registration of subdomains eg imaspammer.co.cc The co.cc extension was never officially recognised like a .co.uk

The TLD was not snuffed and any other .cc sites are still happily going on. The Wikipedia article has even been updated to reflect this event.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by terrapurus

So on the scheme on things, what would catch their attention to get their entry level "naughty naughty" item? If you go to their guidelines they discuss in depth paid links. A paid link at its core is an advertisement. If you have a link on one asset you have control over or paid to have control over (and that is what buying ad space is) and it is linking to your site then it is an advertisement. And it does not have to be monetary compensation for it to be an ad - a barter system is just as valid. On this, I noticed you had ...

Sorry kid you are not teaching me anything about SEO. You are entirely missing the point. This is not just a notice that has been sent out over the years. Most SEOs who have been doing this for awhile like myself will tell you these notices are the first of their kind. So you can kid yourself that you know this or that and make accusations against the Op but you are only showing how new you are to all this. If this relates to having blog roll links to your site not bought links then its the first time that people have received notices or penalties (as it implies). Previously the links were just ignored. Bottom line is we do not know yet no matter how you claim to know everything and no linking to your partners site is NOT a bought link.

That would be an incontext link. It might attract attention or it might not. However, this is irrelevant. In this case one site is linking to a sister site purely from a blog roll. It is just a link sitting on the page. That link serves no benefit to the readers (ie it is not in content as you mentioned). If you have to give it a label, it is an advertisement.

tsk tsk. Do you even know what a blogroll was originally used for? you think Wordpress just slapped it in there for spammers? You put there sites that are related to your blog or to your subject matter. PLENTY blogs still use it for just that - particularly nonprofit and charity related blogs . For goodness sake go do some research first before trying to take on the OP and me. Yes my example would have been an incontext link but it is far from the only example I could give. I know webmasters who point to their blogrolls and actively promote you visiting the sites there and besides if you don't know THOUSANDS of business link to their partner/sister sites without incontext links on partner pages and link pages. Are they all receiving notices? funny I still see those links in their backlinks and they aren't dropping in the serp ranks

See This thread is not about all the various things that Google has in their guidelines that you suppose we are all ignorant of and you have to inform us on - its about figuring out what this PARTICULAR notice refers to

So just quit it. You don't know what you are talking about when you attacked the OP. Seeing how these notices started to be sent out only in the last 6-8 weeks its just drivel to claim you know what caused them. No one is denying that there are a number of things this could be but its foolish to claim you know what the notice directly relates to on his site.

and seriously do you really think you are the only one that understands that buying or selling links is a violation of the guidelines? LOL

Here is an interesting question. If I bought a link from that service and it is a dofollow link, am I in breach of the Google guidelines? Don't answer that - it is a rhetorical question.

Its actually a boring to tears question. Why would it be rhetorical when everyone here knows it is a violation. Now are there any links of mine that fernando has to his site now from me. nope so whats the point?

At the end of the day, if you feel you have to adopt these tactics to suceed, then being smart about it is essential. Otherwise your competitor will simply log into their webmaster tools and report the site buying paid links.

and of course having never seen any of my sites you know that Google can in fact identify them as bought? and I am not being smart?

And today you learned that most large companies know sh*t about SEO and why you can outrank them.

No today I learned that some other people don't know what they are talking about but still want to talk like they do. IF they did know what they were talking about then they would be able to show all the companies that have links to their other sites falling out of rank.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by terrapurus

Forgot this one.

Are you referring to the co.cc expulsion?

In that case your assertion is wrong.

Really so co.cc was not used like an extension regardless of who owns it and how it was being used? You are a sheer genius. So because I wrote Tld instead o f extension/subdomain you want to run a victory lap? Sure man. Knock yourself out .LOL

CO.CC - Free Domain name registration + Free DNS service. was a single domain. What the company that owned that was offereing was cheap bulk registration of subdomains eg imaspammer.co.cc The co.cc extension was never officially recognised like a .co.uk

Never said it was and all of us know that the .cc extension is not included. SOME OF US ACTUALLY OWN SOME.

It doesn't change the fact that Google snuffed out everyone using that extension/sub domain since you once again entirely missed the point being made. Was everyone a spammer using that? hardly . Can google snuff out all forum links ? Perhaps but the difference is I am not saying it like fact like some people we know.

[terrapurus]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

Sorry kid you are not teaching me anything about SEO. You are entirely missing the point. This is not just a notice that has been sent out over the years. Most SEOs who have been doing this for awhile like myself will tell you these notices are the first of their kind.

Subtlety is being lost here so I shall be brief. The notice that the OP received was first referenced by Matt Cutts in his PubCon Keynote last year. For non SEO professionals who missed this notification, here is his twitter post from the 13 th of November giving his summary - Twitter

The outspoken media link gives the clearest indication they were going to be sending more webmaster notices -

More help for webmasters: Engineers are also working to help webmasters affected by spam. They’re giving more and better penalty notifications. Some new messages are being sent today. There’s an improved reconsideration process.

Mike, I simply fail to comprehend why would say something like 'This is not just a notice that has been sent out over the years' when it was introduced'. I shall however ignore this, avoid the boring tête à tête and move back to the OP. He has received this notice which means either he or someone else created a set of links that triggered the spam filter. Logic dictates that this is the softest penalty in the google arsenal with the harsher penalties mentioned prior. To figure out the cause of the penalty, it is prudent to look for any issues caused by the OP (Occam's razor, and these are also in the OP's control before re-submission is requested). It is purely an assumption that the sites in the footer are the sites being discusssed. And given that I can see over 2000 historical banklinks to the Portugal SEO site, it is a poor assumption at best.

The assumption however is not without merit. We can see an obvious footprint between 2 related sites (as well as a linkwheel). The root of my statement is that if you get a google notification like this and feel you are innocent, look for things that might trigger their interest before asking for reconsideration. What might be innocent to you can be a clear violation to them. I would suggest setting this as a nofollow in the short term atleast (if it fails to resolve the issue then it can removed as a likely candidate).

The flow on from my statement is that if you are deliberately linking between assets, minimize your footprints. A minor footprint is a blogroll link. The jury is out on whether it would be penalized, counted or ignored. Having the sites hosted on the same IP would not help your cause. Another case of a footprint is Mike's signature link and this is a more overt case. Signature links can be useful but you have to use them wisely. This forum post has already been indexed. The Google bot has read what has been said here previously and no doubt followed that signature link to a post all about selling links. Furthermore, he indicates that he is using Paypal as the payment provider. This is an overt notice that will trigger algorithms. In this instance Google may leave him alone. Or Mike may wake up to finding his Paypal account terminated with all funds frozen and sites deindexed. Both are possible outcomes, neither of which really interests me that much (his business, his choice and I am sure he evaluated the risks before setting up that sales path). It is however not risk free - a more safer route if you do want to follow this marketing model for these product types would be to put a PM request for more information there instead of a link. A bot won't have access to your private messages. That is what they are there for

[WealthWithin]

This email is true - Google’s Sending Webmaster Notifications About Bad Links Pointing At Their Sites

I guess we'll be seeing a ton of these messages from WF members this month.

OP: Send a reconsideration request with a link to this thread.


So they want you to remove backlinks, right?
Then what's the sense of this -> "we encourage you to make changes to your site so that it meets our quality guidelines."

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by terrapurus

Subtlety is being lost here so I shall be brief. The notice that the OP received was first referenced by Matt Cutts in his PubCon Keynote last year. For non SEO professionals who missed this notification, here is his twitter post from the 13 th of November giving his summary - Twitter

Don't be ridiculous to try and save your point and attack on the Op. the fact that Google said they were going to send out more notices in NO WAY changes that this particular notification is new. The fact is that webmasters did not as any habit receive notifications about penalties based on links INCOMING into their site. Thats why everyone and his dog always said that you could not tank your competition because of bad links. Now there was anecdotal that you could cause the site to "dance" but there never was any notification from google like you are pretending about iNCOMING links.

Mike, I simply fail to comprehend why would say something like 'This is not just a notice that has been sent out over the years' [

And I can't understand why you would be so obtuse as to not get what EVERY SEO looking at this and EVERY SEO blog recognizes - that getting a notice for INCOMING links is a new event over the last few weeks. For goodness sakes read

Google Sending Notifications Of Unnatural Links Pointing To Your Site

The assumption however is not without merit. We can see an obvious footprint between 2 related sites (as well as a linkwheel). The root of my statement is that if you get a google notification like this and feel you are innocent, look for things that might trigger their interest before asking for reconsideration.

He has said absolutely nothing about making a request for a reconsideration at this point. Look I've pointed out to you where countless websites some that Google holds with the utmost respect giving them PR 10 and PR9s link to their other sites. You didn't come into this thread trying to help (that post has magically disappeared) you came in laughing at the Op and claiming to know definitively what he got the notice for even making the totally ridiculous claim that hosting a European site in the UK was a factor.

Another case of a footprint is Mike's signature link and this is a more overt case. Signature links can be useful but you have to use them wisely.

Sorry I am not going to follow you into another subject - not getting into that in this thread and why I made the decisions I made. You have no idea what I am up to (hint selling links is not even near the ultimate goal). All will be revealed in time (less than you think) grasshopper. So thanks for your concern but this thread has nothing to do with that and you are just trying to shift to another subject. You can go to the WSO section and claim that all the SEOs offering links over the years have had their Paypal shut down because they don't have hundreds of people PMing but clicking purchase links. Here that is not the subject. However you must be right about being deindexed because clearly all these sites have been deindexed by the algo instead of being ranked on the first page

Google

and many have been ranked for as far back as I can remember. ...........This section of WF has certainly gone down hill.

Bottom line is we are talking about a notice sent to Fernando and you have offered nothing of any usefulness to the subject of this thread or the OP. He does not sell links. There is nothing wrong with a host in Portugal using a UK host as you alleged and your claim that linking to your own site from one of your other properties is a standard reason for Google to send out notices is also false. I've shown where countless well respected sites and companies link to their other properties and you have no answer.

Time is limited. No more time to waste on those theories. the intelligent thing to do with this notice and Fernando's plight would be to sit back and go through everything and learn from it. Instead people acted like they were out to impress their teacher raising hands with the alleged right answer and now he doesn't even want to discuss it further here.

[Heidi White]

Fascinating thread.

Does signing up for Google Webmaster Tools change the risk factor on whether or not you'll get an email like this?