When is a backlink not natural?

14 replies
  • SEO
  • |
I'm having great trouble trying to decipher what constitutes an unnatural backlink..

For example.. You use a link building firm who advertise manual white hat building techniques. They already have a relationship with many existing blogs, site etc of a fairly decent domain authority. Because of this relationship, they can build links to new clients from these sites.

Google obviously has tools which recognise link building patterns, so will they not pick up on this and see that if site:

A, B, C, D, E, F, G, etc.. all links to sites 1,2,3,4,5,6 etc. that something is un-natural?

Where do you draw the line between a practice such as this and a link farm?
#backlink #natural
  • Profile picture of the author Darlinton Omeh
    A link is considered unnatural IMO if a page is discussion dog bite and suddenly there is a link to a bed furniture website.

    In the end, its only Google that has the power to determine what link is natural and which link is not. The complexity of the subject is the reason I don't engage in link building
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10894186].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jeymate
    In my opinion the sum of backlinks are not natural when:

    the number of backlinks increase at once in a very short period of time to your website
    the anchor text has always the same keywords over and over again
    you have only dofollow and no follow backlinks
    you have a massive amount of links of low quality websites and directories

    would stay away from linkfarms - they will hurt your website
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10894190].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KulaShaker1
    ok, but what about the example I have given?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10894216].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author DABK
      It's unnatural.

      Natural links are links you get from random sites without you doing anything to get them but publish a page or two or paying for ads to spread the word about you (Google likes the ads to be on Adwords, but any ads will work; of course, getting people who own sites to link to your sites because of an ad is a lot of hoping and not much else).

      Everything else, according to Google, is unnatural.

      Question is: why the hell do you care? You should be caring about stupid vs smart ways of getting backlinks.

      For instance, you could have a real estate blog in Paris, France, in the 14th arrondissment, and you could get some guy who has a home insurance blog in Paris, in the 16th, to link to you by paying him a monthly fee.

      Or you could get him to link to you buy emailing him and telling him it's good for his visitors, and he links.

      Or he happens to have insomnia and, one night, on page 47 of Google, he sees a page on your site, likes it, links to it.

      Or you could pay an SEO company to pay the guy to link to you.

      How would Google know which happened?

      If the guy links to tons and tons of other pages, Google might figure something fishy is happening, no matter how you the link came to exist.

      If they guy's blog has tons of links from porn sites, no matter how the link came to exist, Google's not going to be happy about it.

      Originally Posted by KulaShaker1 View Post

      ok, but what about the example I have given?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10894436].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author cbpayne
    An unnatural link is one that you created.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10894647].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    Originally Posted by KulaShaker1 View Post

    I'm having great trouble trying to decipher what constitutes an unnatural backlink..

    For example.. You use a link building firm who advertise manual white hat building techniques. They already have a relationship with many existing blogs, site etc of a fairly decent domain authority. Because of this relationship, they can build links to new clients from these sites.


    You're describing a paid link.

    Organic links are built by traffic without asking them to build the links.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10894659].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author justicejr
    If you build backlinks, there 're not natural link. The natural backlinks was created by other such as social share, advice link or referral link.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10894667].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author luciesmazanska
    I suggest getting links only from niche related sites, you will not get penalized by google
    Signature
    ★★★★★
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10894715].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author cbpayne
      Originally Posted by luciesmazanska View Post

      I suggest getting links only from niche related sites, you will not get penalized by google
      What a load of horse manure! You do not get penalized for links from outside your niche!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10894924].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Ellen Chedid
    You make a really interesting point here. I think an unnatural backlinks, like what other have said is if it is totally unrelated.. you paid for them. I think it is naturally when it slowly develops overtime with not much effort on your half.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10894985].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SilenceMedia
    Line between that of course when you get caught, even white hat linkbuilding technique using outreach resource of blog would end on sandbox for eternal amount of times if they caught leave any footprint, bad neighborhood or massively forcing keyword then they cannot called white anymore, maybe grey thought. Either you wait forever to get someone copied your content and backlinked for your site as rewards or rent a sidebar homepage spot at same niches with high DA moz, it confirmed works and less risky blackhat method when you targeting only your brand anchortext or naked url. Footprint can be found at IP's, template or design and whois record even google employee eyes cannot prove it unnatural when you sly like a weasel.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10895078].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author EugeneWHZ
    I have a thought. Let me explain that on one example.
    You have site about cars and you have links from medical site. I Think in this case such link is not natural and moreover irrelevant one.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10895086].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author DABK
      Allow me to show you the conclusions you draw from your example are wrong.

      You have a site about cars. I have a site about heart transplant procedures. I find your site one day and link to it from my brand new post.

      I've just given you a natural link.

      What makes it natural? You didn't pay for it, you didn't create it yourself. Instead, a reader of your content found it worth linking to.

      Yes, not a related niche, but still a natural link. Again, because, I a person influenced only by the quality of the content on the page, linked to the page.

      Originally Posted by EugeneWHZ View Post

      I have a thought. Let me explain that on one example.
      You have site about cars and you have links from medical site. I Think in this case such link is not natural and moreover irrelevant one.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10895659].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author vantagewebtech
    It's unnatural.
    When you have done bulk submissions.
    When you use anchor text some fashion or anything else, related and link open some other page
    Low quality link is Unnatural
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[10895362].message }}

Trending Topics