Is it OK to disavow directory submissions?

[Gavo]

I'm currently working on a website that has had a load of spammy links built in the past.

From what I can see, it would be most efficient and effective to disavow everything that's there as all work performed previously is low quality, except for some local directory submissions.

These local directory submissions are likely "no follow" and therefore, I'm wondering is it OK to disavow everything including these local directory submissions, seeing they are no follow anyway?

[GPainter]

Hiya Gavo,

When you disavow you're essentially turning any links into no follow links so there isn't much point in disavowing no following links as it just makes more effort. You can however disavow as much or as little as you want but if you've not had a penalty it's best not to get too merry with that disavow list as you may find your position will drop (unless you counter it as you disavow).

Remember Directories are not all evil sometime they are okay, e.g yahoo & yell etc. if your niche finds you through a directory then in fact its good. Its the spammy directories Google's not keen on, so bare that in mind if people are finding you through the local listing.

So the things you want to ask your self is:

Do I have a penalty?

If I do what's caused it?

If I don't can I prevent one by removing links?

Am I getting referrals from these links, would be be better to keep the links and no-follow them ?

Best of Luck.

[Andy.Drinkwater]

Unless you know you have had a penalty, or suspect you have, then I would be tempted not to disavow.

You say a lot of the links are low quality - what are you using to determine what quality the links are? As Chris said, directories aren't all bad, and some can be a real plus, so evaluate what you have before just removing them via disavow.

Tread a little carefully as I have seen sites get disavow-happy and kill all links, with a resulting drop from the SERPs.

-Andy

[SamuelScott]

To stay ahead of any future Google algorithm changes, I would disavow any links now that could seem questionable and hurt you in the future. But what is "questionable" is a complicated question. I would ask yourself these questions for every directory link you have gained:

1. Would I want this link if Google did not exist? (i.e., would the link send me valuable referred traffic anyway?)

2. Is this link curated by a human who is an expert in the field and who does not accept each and every submission?

3. If this link is being paid for, does it not pass PageRank (i.e., is it a no-follow link that adheres to Google's guidelines as such)?

If the answer is "yes" to all three questions, the link is usually safe. Since this is not the case with nearly all generic directories, I would likely want to disavow nearly all of them.

Note: You say that the links are no-follow, but that tag is still under the control of the directory websites and could change in the future (though likely it won't). I'd still disavow them just to be safe because you have no control over those links or what those sites may do in the future. However, this is a low priority since the links are no-follow -- I'd focus first on disavowing worse backlinks or doing your own positive online-marketing work to build your site further.

[MarieHaynes]

There is no need to disavow nofollowed links as they are not passing pagerank.  However, there is no harm in doing this if you want to be sure.  It is in theory possible that a site has nofollowed links on one page and followed on another.  Or, in some cases, they could decide to change their structure and follow their links.  But, in general I ignore nofollowed links when it comes to doing an audit.

[ShaMenz]

Hi,

As everyone else has mentioned, nofollowed links are not passing PageRank and therefore should not be influencing search visibility as assessed by the Google Algorithm. If there is no manual action in place then there should be no reason to disavow them.

However, I look very differently at nofollowed links in the backlink profile of a site that has a manual action in place. In that case I ask two questions:

1. Is the site one that is in any way undesirable?

2. Are the nofollowed links part of an obvious large-scale manipulative effort?

If the answer to either or both of these questions is yes, then I choose to both attempt to get the links removed and also disavow. The reason for this: of course I don't want links from dubious sites which even though not passing PageRank could be doing damage to my brand and reputation  and; when asking for reconsideration (judged by a real human being conducting a manual review) I believe that ignoring links that were obviously placed with the intention of manipulating search rankings simply because it didn't work, hardly shows a commitment to the "good faith effort" expected by the Webspam team. So, I go to the extra effort to try to remove and also disavow.

Marie is quite correct in suggesting that there are cases where links on some pages are followed and on other pages nofollowed - in fact we see instances at rmoov where URLs that contain multiple links to a site are actually a mix of followed and nofollowed links as well. As suggested ...you have no control over those links at all, so once you have decided which ones really need to be dealt with disavowing is the safest option available unless you can actually get them removed.

Again, I think the point has been fairly well made above ...Local directories are not all bad. Check for compliance with the Webmaster Quality Guidelines (which for paid directories includes a clear statement in their terms of service which indicates that you are paying for a site review and not for inclusion). The most relevant Guideline is the one about what Google views as "Link Schemes"

Hope that helps,

Sha