Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
Digitalghost #:3432696 [webmasterworld.com...]>>does google eventually forgive for aggressive link building?
Certainly. I've helped people recover from bad linking strategies. You'd be surprised at what a few good links can do.
Tedster #:3434986 .... a lot depends on what "aggressive" really means in each case. If there's any shady link building that you can undo, then do that. And more importantly, do what you can to encourage very healthy, quality, backlinks. Rather than forgiving your past sins, Google may begin to reward your present virtues.
I'm delighted to hear rich42's opening report. I know that some "infractions" can be recovered from, even if on a graduated basis. The recoveries that I've worked on required a direct reconsideration request after a clean-up, accompanied by a rather full confession.
Can just a few good authority links recover a site from a lot of bad links ? or is it harder than that ?
Do authority links have to have PR? [ A while ago Vanessa Fox spoke about forum entries from places like Yahoo and DMOZ helping a site's profile. Many/some of those are grey/white bar PR. ]
What are the further guidelines to recovery, 1 year on ?
And no, good backlinks don't necessarily need to show green pixie dust on the toolbar. But Google needs to see that you've given up trying to manipulate backlinks - and the best way to do that is not to manipulate backlinks, especially after you've been smacked for it.
I have always found that quality links using non-keyword phrases (ie just the business name in some cases) can really help.
Ultimately getting some links after that type of penalty for the business name alone can only help. And do not rule out getting url anchor text links - so that the keyword anchor is the actual website url.
promise to sin no more ...... and the best way to do that is not to manipulate backlinks
i think everybody out there does to some extent in areas of competitive search Y/N ? Isn't the objective not to cross the line of tolerance with G ?
especially after you've been smacked for it
How can you be sure ? Some campaigns are more obvious than others ? Some admissions to Google may be unecessary and potentially raise a flag from an editor who is acting on personal "borderline" discretion. - I really wonder if editors have any public accountability in the reinclusion process.
I have always found that quality links using non-keyword phrases (ie just the business name in some cases) can really help.
What numbers of links are you talking about that will make a difference - i don't mean the obvious answer of the more the merrier, just will 2 / 3 / 4 links start to kick back in a large site ?
[edited by: Whitey at 5:10 am (utc) on Aug. 18, 2008]
There is no finite number of deep links needed, as all penalties and websites are different. But if you think about what helps Google establish trust for websites, certainly a natural and diverse link profile would be in the top of the list.
One suggestion is to start by targeting supporting or 'pillar' pages. These are generally categories within the site at level 2.
I would still work on building links to the homepage, but would work on allowing them to be more natural and not so keyword targeting, for the time being. Stopping those altogether would also raise red flags.
As you being to notice rankings improve, then spot a few at the homepage, but all of this should be done with care and of course in a natural profile.
One suggestion is to start by targeting supporting or 'pillar' pages. These are generally categories within the site at level 2.I would still work on building links to the homepage, but would work on allowing them to be more natural and not so keyword targeting, for the time being. Stopping those altogether would also raise red flags.
..... does this assume an algorithmic revision , editor revision or both. What if you can't remove those links that you might suspect as not being previously diverse enough. Do you still live with some confidence and hope ?
