Manual Actions for Unnatural Links: Prevention and Recovery

The phrase “Google penalty” gets used loosely for anything from a ranking dip to a full manual action, and the confusion causes people to panic over the wrong thing or ignore the right one. There are genuinely two separate mechanisms at work, they require different responses, and mixing them up wastes time you don’t have if you’re actually under a manual action.

Manual action versus algorithmic effect

Most link spam is handled automatically: Google’s systems identify a manipulative pattern and simply discount those links, with no notice sent and no entry in Search Console. A manual action is different — a human reviewer examined your site specifically, found a clear violation, and applied a visible action.

	Manual action	Algorithmic effect
How you find out	Notice under Security & Manual Actions in Search Console	No notice — you notice a traffic or ranking drop yourself
What caused it	A reviewer confirmed a pattern of unnatural links	Systems discounted certain links or reassessed the site generally
How you fix it	Clean up the links, then file a reconsideration request	Improve the site and links over time; there’s no request to file

The two relevant manual actions are “Unnatural links to your site” (links pointing at you were manipulative) and “Unnatural links from your site” (links you sold or placed broke the rules). They’re handled the same way, just from opposite ends.

Preventing one in the first place

• Choose placements on genuinely relevant sites with real audiences rather than networks of interlinked domains — see the risks of PBNs.
• Keep anchor text natural and varied rather than repeating exact-match keyword phrases across dozens of links — anchor text strategy covers the ratios worth aiming for.
• Build at a pace that matches your site’s size and history; a sudden spike in links is one of the patterns reviewers look for — link velocity.
• Balance paid placements with content and PR that earns links on its own merit, so your profile doesn’t look purely transactional.
• Follow current guidance on marking paid or sponsored links correctly — see link attributes explained.

Recovery, step by step

1. Export every backlink you can find

Use the Links report in Search Console as your baseline, and add at least one third-party backlink tool, because no single source captures every link pointing at you.

2. Classify what you find

Sort links into fine, questionable and clearly manipulative. Look for patterns rather than judging links one at a time: interlinked networks, paid links with exact-match keyword anchors, mass low-quality directories, and links from sites with no topical connection to yours.

3. Attempt removal on the worst offenders

Email site owners and ask for the link to be removed, or failing that, marked nofollow or sponsored. Keep a dated record of every request sent and every reply received — reviewers want to see genuine effort, not just a finished disavow file.

4. Disavow what you genuinely can’t remove

Add the remaining manipulative domains to a disavow file rather than every link that looks slightly odd — see how to build one properly so you don’t disavow links that were never a problem.

5. File a clear, honest reconsideration request

Explain what happened, what steps you took, and what you’ll do differently going forward. Attach or reference your removal-request log as evidence. Vague or defensive requests tend to bounce back for another round.

After recovery

Rankings don’t always snap back to their previous position once a manual action is lifted, because part of what was propping them up is exactly what you just removed. The durable fix is a profile you’d be comfortable with a reviewer examining at any time: relevant sites, real audiences, natural anchor text, and a meaningful share of links you earned rather than bought.

What reviewers actually look for

It helps to think like the person reading your reconsideration request. They’re checking whether the pattern that caused the action has genuinely stopped, not just whether a handful of links were removed. A request that disavows fifty domains but keeps building new links the same way, at the same pace, from the same kind of sites, tends to get rejected even if the specific flagged links are gone. Reviewers have seen every version of a superficial cleanup, and a request that reads as a genuine change in approach — not just damage control — moves through faster.

Who tends to receive these actions

Manual actions cluster around a few recognisable situations: sites that bought large volumes of links quickly after a funding round or a new marketing hire, affiliate sites that leaned entirely on a single network of interlinked domains, and businesses that outsourced link building to an agency without ever reviewing what was actually being placed on their behalf. None of that is a reason to panic if it describes your history — it’s a reason to be thorough rather than defensive when you address it.

Where to go next

Read when to use the disavow tool before you touch it, and if you’re rebuilding your strategy from scratch, our link building checklist and guide to digital PR cover how to build a profile that doesn’t attract reviewer attention in the first place. When you’re ready to place new links, choose relevant, vetted sites through the marketplace rather than the kind of network that caused the problem.

Frequently asked questions