Monday, July 23, 2012

Artificial or Unnatural links Webmaster tool messages - Do it for Google as did in past

Artificial or Unnatural links Webmaster tool messages - Do it for Google as did in past.

I love Google a lot, but remember the thin line between confidence and over-confidence.

Now Google being smart again. They are using people for something they should do from their end. They are not sharing any data with webmaster about the source of the errors or all other backlinks list that they think is unnatural and must be deleted. They are not transparent on the source of the errors but want the entire world should do it because they need it. They must simply do something from their end instead of asking the entire world to do it for them.

People please do not support them all the time for what they want to do. They already have huge data with them, they doing great research and analysis using that, They have control in millions of websites now and there are so many other things as well. And the credit for this goes to all the WEBMASTERS using Google Analytics, Webmaster Tools, Google Drive and many other Google software without knowing the fact that how does Google uses that data.

Webmasters from across the globe are helping them a lot (knowingly or unknowingly), yet they want them to scan millions of websites for them and get the bad backlinks removed for their website, and that too when they are not sharing any list of unnatural links in the WMT. Its weird. The final thoughts and decision lies with you 'the readers' and 'users'.

Again I love Google since starting but my love and likeliness for them may change if they keep moving the same way.

One other user opinion on the same topic:


 7:13 pm on Mar 29, 2012 (gmt 0)

My issue with this - this is a Google created mess, why should I clean it up? The content on other sites shouldn't be my business one way or the other and I shouldn't have to waste time and resources if the content is not mine to begin with. If anything my issue is with Google for my being unfairly ranked poorly, if/when it happens.

So the question is: What is google going to do about this? If it's not happening then all is well, if it IS happening I'd expect Google to fix it... not send me messages to fix what's not on my site, ya know? 


 8:48 pm on Mar 29, 2012 (gmt 0)

fathom wrote:
I didn't read the thread so no idea what others have posted but you didn't plant yourself as a competitor you planted yourself as the website owner... huge difference... how did you advised Google that you where "a competitor" and not the "webpage owner"?

He purchased the links. He didn't simply place them on other, unrelated sites under his control. There's nothing connecting those purchased links to the person doing the purchasing, so no way for Google to know if the links were the result of a site owner with poor judgement, a third party with poor judgement, or a third party engaging in some attempted sabotage.


Never testing the exact premise of your theory (on a real competitor) is proof your theory can not stand up to scrutiny. 

 9:34 pm on Mar 29, 2012 (gmt 0)

A big reason why this idea of negative SEO has gained so much traction in recent times is the absolute FLOOD of messages about unnatural backlinks sent out through Webmaster Tools. That's where Google's big error is, IMO - in those indiscriminate, automated messages.

I seldom see a link profile that doesn't have that kind of spammy junk, and in at least some cases I know that the website itself did not have anything to do with placing those spam links. In other cases, after a little poking and prodding, I do find that in fact they DID have responsibility, but never thought much about it because there were no immediate repercussions, so they forgot all about it. (Oh yes, one of our workers did run xrumer a few times, but nothing recently.)

My feeling right now is that Google sent out that barrage of messages without much forethought, and indeed, may have sent them to any webmaster whose profile shows bad links beyond a certain level - without much thought given to how legitimate the criticism is in each case.

In some cases, it seems like ignoring the message has so far caused no problem. In other cases, rankings did take a dive within a week to ten days.

The biggest problem for me is that Webmaster Tools data has been notoriously undependable. That makes it very difficult for me to buy into these warnings.

Does negative SEO exist? In some markets, yes... it's like a gang war! And that's nothing new at all. The funny thing about those markets is that the businesses involved also use all kinds of black hat ranking tactics anyway.

If these recent messages from Google are an attempt to clean up the "sewer" that Eric Schmidt complained about, they are a dud and a public relations nightmare. 


 8:56 am on Mar 29, 2012 (gmt 0)

I have a solution for all these problems. I simply do not log into Webmaster Tools at all. I do just the right stuff to promote the site, no shortcuts, etc. Life's easier that way. 


 10:04 pm on Apr 5, 2012 (gmt 0)

Instead of reaching out to everyone to change links which I am not sure if G even thinks is a problem, what if we simple 404 the page? Would that in effect be "removing the backlinks" ?


No comments:

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Twitter / deepakrajput