Massive traffic loss after removing sitewide backlink network — was removing them a mistake?

​

• The site ranked top 1–3 for most new articles
• Some pages even appeared in Google AI overviews / feedback
• Overall performance was very strong

• Stopped paying
• Requested removal of the links

• ~70% loss of Google traffic
• Continued decline for ~3 months
• In the last week alone, the drop deepened to ~80%

• Backlinks are still being gradually removed (some still appear in GSC)
• No manual action in GSC
• I attempted damage control by acquiring guest posts and links from large authority sites / newspapers, but there’s been no recovery so far

My questions:​

• Was removing those sitewide/link-farm backlinks the right move, even though the collapse followed?
• Is this a case of losing artificial support vs an actual penalty?
• At this point, would it make sense to:
  
  • Leave things as-is and rebuild naturally?
  • Or try to regain similar links (not necessarily the same network)?

s2657658 said:

Later, I learned that these types of backlink networks are considered harmful. So I:

Click to expand...

s2657658 said:

At this point, would it make sense to:

• Leave things as-is and rebuild naturally?
• Or try to regain similar links (not necessarily the same network)?

Click to expand...

s2657658 said:

​

I want to share a real case and get experienced opinions.


For about a year, I had purchased backlinks from service providers. These were sitewide links (sidebar/footer) coming from what are essentially link farm sites — each site had links to ~100 other sites.


In Google Search Console, around 10 referring domains were counted, but they resulted in roughly 80,000 backlinks due to being sitewide.


During that period:

• The site ranked top 1–3 for most new articles
• Some pages even appeared in Google AI overviews / feedback
• Overall performance was very strong

Later, I learned that these types of backlink networks are considered harmful. So I:

• Stopped paying
• Requested removal of the links

About 1 week after the removals started (mid-November), the site experienced a massive collapse:

• ~70% loss of Google traffic
• Continued decline for ~3 months
• In the last week alone, the drop deepened to ~80%

Important details:

• Backlinks are still being gradually removed (some still appear in GSC)
• No manual action in GSC
• I attempted damage control by acquiring guest posts and links from large authority sites / newspapers, but there’s been no recovery so far

My questions:​

• Was removing those sitewide/link-farm backlinks the right move, even though the collapse followed?
• Is this a case of losing artificial support vs an actual penalty?
• At this point, would it make sense to:
  • Leave things as-is and rebuild naturally?
  • Or try to regain similar links (not necessarily the same network)?

I’m trying to understand whether this is a link equity cliff, an algorithmic trust reset, or something else entirely.


Would really appreciate insights from anyone who’s seen similar recoveries or failures.

Click to expand...

s2657658 said:

​

I want to share a real case and get experienced opinions.


For about a year, I had purchased backlinks from service providers. These were sitewide links (sidebar/footer) coming from what are essentially link farm sites — each site had links to ~100 other sites.


In Google Search Console, around 10 referring domains were counted, but they resulted in roughly 80,000 backlinks due to being sitewide.


During that period:

• The site ranked top 1–3 for most new articles
• Some pages even appeared in Google AI overviews / feedback
• Overall performance was very strong

Later, I learned that these types of backlink networks are considered harmful. So I:

• Stopped paying
• Requested removal of the links

About 1 week after the removals started (mid-November), the site experienced a massive collapse:

• ~70% loss of Google traffic
• Continued decline for ~3 months
• In the last week alone, the drop deepened to ~80%

Important details:

• Backlinks are still being gradually removed (some still appear in GSC)
• No manual action in GSC
• I attempted damage control by acquiring guest posts and links from large authority sites / newspapers, but there’s been no recovery so far

My questions:​

• Was removing those sitewide/link-farm backlinks the right move, even though the collapse followed?
• Is this a case of losing artificial support vs an actual penalty?
• At this point, would it make sense to:
  • Leave things as-is and rebuild naturally?
  • Or try to regain similar links (not necessarily the same network)?

I’m trying to understand whether this is a link equity cliff, an algorithmic trust reset, or something else entirely.


Would really appreciate insights from anyone who’s seen similar recoveries or failures.

Click to expand...

ads studio said:

It looks like the site lost all of its fake link support at once, not like a penalty. It was still the proper long-term choice to take down the linkages, but it normally takes time to get better. Instead of trying to replace the existing network with something similar, I would focus on keeping the links clean, relevant, and powerful.

Click to expand...

Steptoe said:

How did you come to this conclusion if you already had evidence of the contrary (ie. your ranking at the time)? Just because a chatbot or 'SEO guru' tells you this, it does not mean it is true. Trust your own data.

If those 80k backlinks amounted for the majority of your links then of course you're seeing a collapse, just like if you removed the majority of the foundation of a house.


Because your rankings before were certainly not caused by 'natural' sources, and because it seems like most of your traffic has now gone, I see no reason why you shouldn't go back to what you were doing before. And next time you are ranking well, don't listen to anyone saying 'you're doing it wrong'.

Click to expand...

s2657658 said:

So just to clarify — is your advice that I should go back to the old backlinks? Or do you mean I should get a new network instead of relying on the same sites I had before?

Click to expand...