Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi, We're currently reviewing one of our clients backlinks in Google Webmaster Tools, Majestic & OSE as we can see many toxic links. However we cannot find the links on the webpages that are listed on Google WMT. We have searched through the website along with checking through the source code. Should we still disavow the domain? Thanks, Edd

I'm getting there, I can see the light! 🙂 I have covered one complete audit of the link profile and I am now going back over it looking at the links I had 'question marked' - I should have this completed by the end of this week and I will then focus on using DISAVOW for the links that I am really struggling with, the foreign sites that are in Chinese or Russian, the sites that have absolutely no 'contact us' information and have been privately registered (in WhoIs) I have come across this domain which links to our site about 8 times and although I cannot find any contact info I can't quite make my mind up, to be honest I would rather get rid of it BUT I'm trying to avoid taking the easy option of disavowing where I can; http://www.askives.com/ Fo anyone who has gone through what I am currently going through, please help me just this once and tell me 'should it stay or should it go'?! 🙂 Many thanks! Andy

Hi, Currently cleaning up a clients link profile in preparation for disavow file and I have reached the stage where I am undecided on some directories as I don't want to remove all links. Is Page Rank an indication that Google is okay with a particular directory? For example the following domain is questionable, but has a PR of 3. Do I need to consider scrapping all such links in anticipation of future updates? http://www.easyfinddirectory.com/shopping-and-services/clothing http://www.toplocallistings.co.uk/Apparel/West_Midlands/Shropshire/ Thanks in advance Andy

I have had two SEO 'specialists' look at my site after the 2012 Penguin update as I was hit badly for one very important keyword. I took off any bad sites links but I never did anything with inbound links. One says my link profile is fine and do NOT use the disavow tool but I should improve my site (landing pages, content, photos, put blog on site, articles, social media etc etc). This I tried for several months but my site never improved. the second 'expert' said I HAVE to take certain ones off and he identified inbound links from spammy sites. He found links from 65 links from malware/untrusted sites and 267 from spam articles and 124 from link farms plus hundreds more from pages that no longer exist or never provide traffic What would you do? i should point out  the anchor text for these inbound links is the one keyword that is the most important to the site and the one that got hit by the Penguin 2012

Just been looking at some backlinks on a site - a good proportion of them are via Scraped wikipedia links or sites with similar directories to those found on DMOZ (just they have different names). To be honest, many of these sites look pretty dodgy to me, but if they're doing illegal stuff there's absolutely no way I'll be able to get links removed. Should I just sit and watch the backlinks increase from these questionable sources, or report the sites to Google, or do something else? Advice please.

With all the new over opting talk, one of the things mentioned is having the same anchored text linking to a page over and over without variation. Is there a good estimate on how many external linking in keywords should be exact versus how many should be in variation? Also, keeping value of pages links in mind. Would it be best to use [Exact] phrase for the higher PR sites or more relevant higher traffic sites? and save the long tail or keyword variation text for the lesser valued sites. When to use exact phrase and when to long tail is my question/discussion I always stay relevant in my link building, and all my links are liking within context. Because I know that relevancy has been an important factor. After watching this video from Matt Cutt's http://youtu.be/KyCYyoGusqs I assume relevancy is becoming even more of an important factor.