Odd Links to my website found in google webmaster tools

[JoshuaMackens]

@Josh - What's the logic here? Google shows maybe 5-10% of all the backlinks you actually have.

Really? In my experience they pick up 100% of the backlinks out there. I'm not sure if there has ever been a backlink that I've built that I haven't seen show up in GSC at some point?

Now, are they going to show you the backlinks that are out there from 2 years ago? I have no idea. But I check my clients' backlinks every month.

I use Majestic for competitor research and their "lost link" feature so the next few times I'll see if Google has picked up all the links Majestic has picked up as well.

 

[JoshuaMackens]

Accidentally made a 2nd post on accident. If mods see this, delete it please

 

[bhartzer]

they pick up 100% of the backlinks out there

Yes, the ones YOU built, maybe. But what about the links (sometimes thousands of links) of the links built to your site what you didn't build?

I've been doing this a long time, and I can tell you that GSC only shows you a percentage of the links they know about.

 

[JoshuaMackens]

Yes, the ones YOU built, maybe. But what about the links (sometimes thousands of links) of the links built to your site what you didn't build?

I've been doing this a long time, and I can tell you that GSC only shows you a percentage of the links they know about.

Whether I built the link or someone else did doesn't matter. Google doesn't discriminate. Nor could they even if they wanted to since they can't tell who built what link.

The reason I even mentioned that I built the links is because I would be looking for those links. And in those cases, 100% of the time I've found my links. Which is my verified sample. I can't verify the other backlinks because I didn't built them and therefore, have no way to know if they exist or not. So that sample is not verifiable or accessible to me.

Now, am I correct in assuming that GSC shows 100% of the links they know about based on my sample? It is very possible that I am not because my sample size is small. But there's no evidence presented in this thread yet that is the case.

I value the truth over being correct. So if you have evidence, I'd love to see it so I can adjust my knowledge and understanding.

Also, just so people understand, I don't check "Download this table" or "Download more sample links" in GSC. Those will not be exhaustive. GSC says as much. What I look at is "Download latest links" and I have a running total month after month. So far, that has been exhaustive and encompassed my sample size of links.

However, if you are making the point that he can't see his full history of backlinks from just GSC, now that I think about it, that must be true as his "Download latest links" will only be exhaustive for, what I would guess to be, 2-3 months at most. So yes, he should probably use Majestic or Ahrefs for historical links. That's a good point. GSC will be more exhaustive though between those three tools in my experience. I also only have experience really with Majestic by the way as I chose that service over ahrefs when I tested them out around 3 years ago.

 

[heckler]

GSC is typically the last place I check for backlink data due to it being partial; especially when you start getting into the 100's of 1000's of backlinks area. For me it's typically a combo of Majestic + Ahrefs & then GSC.

Just thought you might know something I didn't. Google is pretty renown at sampling data we care about :\

 

[bhartzer]

But there's no evidence presented in this thread yet that is the case.

Well, let's start with this (Google themselves):

https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/55281?hl=en

They start off that page by saying this:

To see a sampling of links to your Search Console site, open the Links to Your Site Report....

A sampling of links. Not all the links to your website, but a "sampling of links" to your site.

 

[JoshuaMackens]

GSC is typically the last place I check for backlink data due to it being partial; especially when you start getting into the 100's of 1000's of backlinks area. For me it's typically a combo of Majestic + Ahrefs & then GSC.

Just thought you might know something I didn't. Google is pretty renown at sampling data we care about :\

Interesting. I've always found all of my links in GSC. Not in the two sections I mentioned, but in the 3rd "Latest links".

I'll do a little more research via majestic, etc.

Well, let's start with this (Google themselves):

https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/55281?hl=en

They start off that page by saying this:



A sampling of links. Not all the links to your website, but a "sampling of links" to your site.

I already addressed this in my previous post.

 

[heckler]

The 'Latest Links' section on a few of the accounts I looked through this morning have a lot more links reported than I recall it ever having (more than the live majestic index & ahrefs for the last 60 days).

Most of my BL work is typically around historical links, but I'll have to pay more attention to GSC moving forward for BL-building campaigns.

Thanks Josh

EDIT: The larger sites I work with (50,000,000+ backlinks), majestic shows significantly more fresh links. So maybe GSC is more accurate for small local based sites. ?\_(ツ)_/?

 

[JoshuaMackens]

The 'Latest Links' section on a few of the accounts I looked through this morning have a lot more links reported than I recall it ever having (more than the live majestic index & ahrefs for the last 60 days).

Most of my BL work is typically around historical links, but I'll have to pay more attention to GSC moving forward for BL-building campaigns.

Thanks Josh

EDIT: The larger sites I work with (50,000,000+ backlinks), majestic shows significantly more fresh links. So maybe GSC is more accurate for small local based sites. ?\_(ツ)_/?

Yeah, I just use it for local sites. We're purely a Local SEO company. So that also factors into my conclusion as well of course probably should have mentioned that.