Skip to content

Unusual Verified Links in GSA SER—Google and Facebook Domains Appearing?

APOBLowerAPOBLower
edited May 4 in GSA Search Engine Ranker
Hey everyone,


I've run into a bit of an odd situation with my GSA SER Verified folder. Recently, while sifting through my global verified list, I stumbled upon verified links with root domains pointing back to major sites like Google and Facebook. This was a surprise since these aren't typical targets for link building.

Has anyone else encountered this? Could this be a result of some settings in GSA SER, I'm curious to hear if this is a common issue or if I might be facing a unique glitch.


Thanks in advance for your insights!

PS : I don't even care whether its exist or not... its from 2 domains but i am curious to know :D
Tagged:

Comments

  • backlinkaddictbacklinkaddict
    That's odd...

    Some of scripts say !*facebook* !*google* so it should be parsing those out even before it tries to post I would assume.

  • 0captchafix0captchafix 0captchafix@proton.me
    backlinkaddict said:
    That's odd...

    Some of scripts say !*facebook* !*google* so it should be parsing those out even before it tries to post I would assume.


    its odd but OP saying is truth. I found those on my own global verified folder as well.I guess GSA leaking some links from here and there from those user text files. but it really doesn't bother me. Who cares few more invalid links out of tons of verifieds.

  • backlinkaddictbacklinkaddict
    It doesnt matter, but point was maybe if you see this happening to say something or better yet open up the script and add some "page must have=!" parameters. If it fixes issue let sven know so he can adjust a bit better and add to next update.

    I agree there will always be some "leakage" trying to manage millions of urls in any software.

    I dont sweat it much...
  • backlinkaddictbacklinkaddict
    I also think some issues arise when people buy "identified lists" and load them into there "verified" folder.
  • 0captchafix0captchafix 0captchafix@proton.me
    backlinkaddict said:
    It doesnt matter, but point was maybe if you see this happening to say something or better yet open up the script and add some "page must have=!" parameters. If it fixes issue let sven know so he can adjust a bit better and add to next update.

    I agree there will always be some "leakage" trying to manage millions of urls in any software.

    I dont sweat it much...

    what do you mean by script ? can you more go detail.  Although it must be there today also i see.  No i don't import any list to verified as i writing my own verifieds by checking it.  I don't even import link list to default folder. Instead i dedupe - remove root and import directly to the project. This is a bug and i guess @sven has the answer.


  • backlinkaddictbacklinkaddict

    you can double click on the engine in engine pain and the "script" the runs and is the engine code will pop up in notepad. Maybe see if you can add . . .

    "page must have!= url you dont want" parameters in the script.

    Maybe this could help filter them out?

    Just suggestion. Some newer scripts have these while some older ones might not.

  • 9tRider9tRider New wark
    Same happens to me.   Eager to find out what it cause. Did you find the fix OP @APOBLower ?

    @backlinkaddict I wonder how it helps? Why would we have add that token to it. I have edited few .inis myself and never put something like that. Curious to know.

  • SvenSven www.GSA-Online.de
    IT would help to see the sample URLs. Can you past them in private message?
  • backlinkaddictbacklinkaddict
    9tRider  it should help because it will filter out urls you dont want from the get go.

    Try using the FP studio and visit search engine manually with footprints an you may see a ton of authority sites that keep popping up but are not really engines you want. For example, a paypal, google, youtube, or even the .demo in url for the cms you are parsing for. These can be filtered out before they are identified by using some url must not have params and other params from script manual.

    This is just an example, but im assuming if you dont parse out the crap, then can become identifieds and maybe even try posting to. This is just waste or resources and captchas. Another problem is the selling of Identifieds as verifieds and mixing them together which can burn your DB if you have a good verified list already.


    I would look at some related scripts and the the script manual and macro guide and learn how to adjust  some of these files with fresh spintax noone else is using and more related to your project. Since SER caters to the entire world it has a lot of default stuff that may not be helpful for your specific project.

    Support does great job with this but should still get familiar with extending file examples to your needs and delete whats not needed

    Just my take...




  • 9tRider9tRider New wark
    backlinkaddict said:
    9tRider  it should help because it will filter out urls you dont want from the get go.

    Try using the FP studio and visit search engine manually with footprints an you may see a ton of authority sites that keep popping up but are not really engines you want. For example, a paypal, google, youtube, or even the .demo in url for the cms you are parsing for. These can be filtered out before they are identified by using some url must not have params and other params from script manual.

    This is just an example, but im assuming if you dont parse out the crap, then can become identifieds and maybe even try posting to. This is just waste or resources and captchas. Another problem is the selling of Identifieds as verifieds and mixing them together which can burn your DB if you have a good verified list already.


    I would look at some related scripts and the the script manual and macro guide and learn how to adjust  some of these files with fresh spintax noone else is using and more related to your project. Since SER caters to the entire world it has a lot of default stuff that may not be helpful for your specific project.

    Support does great job with this but should still get familiar with extending file examples to your needs and delete whats not needed

    Just my take...





    It makes sense for parsing, and GSA has to skip those; it's quite normal behavior.

    But I guess what you are saying here just doesn't make sense, at least for me. After all, it's not about scraping or identifying; we are talking about verifieds.

    The question is, how did those invalid links end up in the verified folder? Even if GSA detected those links as identified, how are they transferring to the verified folder that we are writing to?

    Yeah, sellers might have mixed verifieds with identifieds to make the lists look more substantial. I totally understand that, but the r eal question is how those ended up in the verified folder that we are writing to.

    GSA is supposed to write the link in the verified folder if it's really verified. So what makes sense about adding and skipping those URLs?
  • 9tRider9tRider New wark
    @sven, what do you want us to submit, just verified links? If so, those would be like m.facebook.com inside one of the article folders. Let's say it's in the Drupal text folder where GSA writes the verified folder.

    I feel I am hijacking the thread. If so, sorry. I am having a similar issue like @APOBLower and am just curious to find out what is causing it.
  • backlinkaddictbacklinkaddict
    9tRider  Yes, those are more parsing related params, but still they should be parsed out to begin, which yes is quite normal behavior. But no not in every script. The other question is yes how are these links getting there to begin with?

    This has been brought up before in another thread. You can find if if you want. I don't want to bump it

    Some of issues is selling identifieds as verifieds, apparently they mean VERY different things to different people, so sometimes it happens people are calling identifieds verifieds and it confuses the whole thread as well as new users in the forum.


  • 9tRider9tRider New wark
    backlinkaddict said:
    9tRider  Yes, those are more parsing related params, but still they should be parsed out to begin, which yes is quite normal behavior. But no not in every script. The other question is yes how are these links getting there to begin with?

    This has been brought up before in another thread. You can find if if you want. I don't want to bump it

    Some of issues is selling identifieds as verifieds, apparently they mean VERY different things to different people, so sometimes it happens people are calling identifieds verifieds and it confuses the whole thread as well as new users in the forum.


    Sorry, but I still don't understand the point of adding that parameter to the engine and how it is going to fix it with writing verified.

    If I understand correctly, GSA SER is supposed to write only verifieds when it is allowed to write to the verified folder.

    Ok, let's say I import a scraped link list—nothing fancy or even I let to scrape gsa it self, just a raw link list scraped by Hrefer etc.

    Then GSA has to identify and submit, and finally, if verified, it is supposed to write to the verified folder. What you are saying makes no sense to me.

    I tried to direct message you with data, but it says your profile is private and locked.
    Between, it's just my text folder which has m.facebook.com and a few invalid links written by the GSA verified folder by GSA SER. Nothing important. 

    I am not new to workarounds and very open to listen but what your saying just makesno sense.
  • backlinkaddictbacklinkaddict
    The point is these URLs should have been filtered out of the "verified list" long before customer got it, never giving them a chance to end up in verified folder in the first place.

    If you want to use href like you say or even scrapebox then use footprints and some filters to get SER friendly list without a bunch of garbage. (step 1)

    I thought that was point of buying verified list, all non related and non working engines are filtered out. Or should be...

    Why is "m.facebook.com" in your "verified list" folder is  issue right? Whether you use SER, or ScrapeBox I just don't see how as someone trying to parse a good SER list would not have some basic filters like in SER such as url must not have *facebook* which would cut the problem from the start no? Having even a simple set of SER list filters and used in scrapebox/href should be added to find good list right?

    I mean obviously what your saying about folder operation is true, but point for me is it should never end up there if your running a "verified list" it should never have even made its way to identified. Or trying to post to it. Isnt this just a total waste of your resources? Likely, its even costing the user money for nothing. For sites that SER cant post to...But somehow ended up being bought as a "verified list".

    For me, I just rather not waste my resources on tasks that will never be successful.

    This....
    Sorry, but I still don't understand the point of adding that parameter to the engine and how it is going to fix it with writing verified.
    If you are buying a list then adding to parsing part of script no, it wont do anything since you bought and are using and already parsed list(not scraping new with ser which includes filters). I guess point is why they are there, and part of solution is using filters to not get them indentified in the first place no matter who or how or what software/script the list was made by. "They" should not been in list from the start is all. AM I wrong?

  • APOBLowerAPOBLower
    Thank you guys!
    I'm facing an issue with the email notifications from the forum. I didn't  receive any, and I was unaware you guys replied here.

    As for the verified folder, it's a bit of a puzzle. It's a fresh one that I've been using for the past few weeks. I'm wondering why someone would import a link list into a verified folder when there are plenty of other folders available for that purpose.

    After some investigation, I suspect that the issue might be related to my habit of trimming URLs. It seems that some links come with %google% parameters, and this could be causing the problem. However, I'm not entirely certain.






  • backlinkaddictbacklinkaddict
    @APOBLower right the notifications dont always work
    As for the verified folder, it's a bit of a puzzle. It's a fresh one that I've been using for the past few weeks. I'm wondering why someone would import a link list into a verified folder when there are plenty of other folders available for that purpose.

    I hear ya, wondering why someone would even suggest adding a sold as verified list but really just identified list into the verified folder. Only reason I can think of is someone sold someone a shit list and they want user to mix them together before they realize that these are not ser verified links they bought? No purchased list really should ever be "added" to your verified DB if you have good one. Why not throw new list into indentifieds and see how many make it to verifieds, comparing before and after so you actually know what you bought? There's plenty of ways to use lists also which can lead to confusion I think even for advanced users even.

    After some investigation, I suspect that the issue might be related to my habit of trimming URLs. It seems that some links come with %google% parameters, and this could be causing the problem. However, I'm not entirely certain.
    I also do this trim urls down to root or reg page. I do it with one engine as a "control" to see how things are working since I know what to expect. It works much faster I think since rather then SER finding a url then trying to identify it and then find a specific form on specific url, you are feeding it urls it can work with much faster. In theory and in practice this works. I'm not sure at scale though. 

    You original question about the non friendly SER urls showing in you verifieds, are they in the verified list you bought before you ran it? I had same issues and most certainly was list. Then there's monthly and one of lists so grabbing from a server thats constantly scraping and deduping constantly. I guess its harder to check that. I dont buy monthly lists. I have before and was bad experience, and I bought one time list and was even worse. 
Sign In or Register to comment.