Backlinks from different web 2.0 platforms are they worth it ?

[Shakabutt]

Hy all,i found a great resource on the web about some custom footprints to find platoforms like Drupal blogs,wikis,OneSite platforms,Elgg,wordpress blogs etc...

Are they worth it ?

Curently im making profiles for them (platforms like onesite and insoshi) and making users for Wikis that are relevant to my niche.

Are these worth pursuing ?

Thank you

 

[Chrisss]

Yes - just get working on getting those links.

 

[sttiger]

Web 2.0 properties are definitely good for link building. Write an article and spin it with 70%+ uniqueness and submit to various web 2.0 properties and then start building links to those web 2.0 properties.

Don't just expect those web 2.0 sites to boost your rankings if you haven't done any link building to them. Build some profile links to those web 2.0 sites and bookmark them in order to see improvements in SERPs. If possible, submit articles to article directories pointing the links to your web 2.0 sites in order to even provide more backlink power to your web 2.0 properties.

Always treat web 2.0 properties as if they were your MAIN sites. Post articles on them on weekly basis to maintain a good position in SERPs.

 

[tommgerry]

link building on web 2.0 is good for your site.but with unique content no copy article.web 2.0 is like a booster for your site..its increase traffic and divert traffic to your site.

 

[the_demon]

Yes, link diversity is crucial to successful rankings.

 

[jerzydawg]

For web 2.0, does it make a big difference If I spin a unique article (one written by myself) compared to one I steal from Ezinearticles (Assuming I will spin either article and submit it via Senuke)?

 

[sttiger]

@jerzydawg - I would write a unique article and spin before I submit to web 2.0 properties. The reason is simple; I want accuracy and decent uniqueness in my spun article too. I haven't tried spinning articles off of content that is already in article directories and submit them to web 2.0 properties. Perhaps someone could elaborate it better.

Writing a unique article makes it more easier for me to spin the shit out of it.

 

[jerzydawg]

Web 2.0 properties are definitely good for link building. Write an article and spin it with 70%+ uniqueness and submit to various web 2.0 properties and then start building links to those web 2.0 properties.

Don't just expect those web 2.0 sites to boost your rankings if you haven't done any link building to them. Build some profile links to those web 2.0 sites and bookmark them in order to see improvements in SERPs. If possible, submit articles to article directories pointing the links to your web 2.0 sites in order to even provide more backlink power to your web 2.0 properties.

Always treat web 2.0 properties as if they were your MAIN sites. Post articles on them on weekly basis to maintain a good position in SERPs.

Is it better to make 15-20 of those properties and build links to them or make hundreds but make very little to no backlinks to them?

 

[qu4rk]

How many words minimum should each property be?

 

[sttiger]

Is it better to make 15-20 of those properties and build links to them or make hundreds but make very little to no backlinks to them?

15-20 web 2.0 properties with diversified backlinks.

How many words minimum should each property be?

I would say 450-500 words minimum.

 

[qu4rk]

1) Ok, should they be submitted by different users? Meaning, if I create an article on soap with user 1 and am going to create a different article on red pepper from the same property, should I create user 2 to post the new article on red pepper with?

2) And what if that new article is pointing to a different site?

 

[sttiger]

1) Ok, should they be submitted by different users? Meaning, if I create an article on soap with user 1 and am going to create a different article on red pepper from the same property, should I create user 2 to post the new article on red pepper with?

2) And what if that new article is pointing to a different site?

1) I really don't understand your question.

2) If you're talking about links in your web 2.0 properties, then it's fine to link to your money site or other web 2.0 properties.

 

[SahL]

Web 2.0 backlinks are always Good, ive always got a Boost in Rankings after linking them to my site and blasting them with scrapebox.

 

[SEOfarmer]

I am trying to build a linkwheel here, and was wondering if I should make a new account for each linkwheel? (treating each linkwheel as a seperate campaign, but same money site?)

 

[sttiger]

I am trying to build a linkwheel here, and was wondering if I should make a new account for each linkwheel? (treating each linkwheel as a seperate campaign, but same money site?)

I would recommend unique web 2.0 properties for each linkwheel you want to build. For example: If you want to make 2 linkwheels for your website then linkwheel 1 should have web 2.0 properties such as Livejournal, Blogger, Wordpress and etc whereas, Linkwheel 2 would contain different web 2.0 properties such as Xanga, Posterous, Onsugar and etc.

It's better to create 1 linkwheel than multiple linkwheels. The work involved in multiple linkwheels is tedious. Make sure that your linkwheel is an 'Open Linkwheel'.

 

[SEOfarmer]

I would recommend unique web 2.0 properties for each linkwheel you want to build. For example: If you want to make 2 linkwheels for your website then linkwheel 1 should have web 2.0 properties such as Livejournal, Blogger, Wordpress and etc whereas, Linkwheel 2 would contain different web 2.0 properties such as Xanga, Posterous, Onsugar and etc.

It's better to create 1 linkwheel than multiple linkwheels. The work involved in multiple linkwheels is tedious. Make sure that your linkwheel is an 'Open Linkwheel'.

Thanks.
How many web2.0 properties do i usually need to involve in the wheel?
Most diagram/charts/examples I see are 6-8?

 

[jerzydawg]

If I create 2 social networks and 2 social bookmarks and I scrapebox the social bookmarks and submit AMR directories linking to bookmarks, how is my strategy any different and better than a complex one such as this one? Is it necessary to go that far?

Isnt creating 15-20 social networks then bookmarking it good enough for backlinks?

 

[proximate]

Don't waste your $$$ on the wrong kind of backlinks - They won't work.

Since the Google "Panda" update a lot has changed.

Google has moved the playing field and simple text links are almost counter productive, Pyramid linkbuilding is no longer worth the effort but Contextural Links will get you an almost immediate SERPS improvement.

Most of the backlinks you will be offered today will be either, simple text on blog profiles or blog comments.

Tens of thousands of both can be done in 24hrs using Scrapebox, and because of that Google is now giving simple text links less weight in SERPS.

If you watch the latest video by Matt Cutts, Google's own guru, you will learn that contextural backlinks now have the most value.

Contextural backlinks are links placed inside an article or blog post that are in the context of their surrounding text, so they look natural.

For example an article on firefighting might have links to a firestation URL. These are quite time consuming to create and invariably need an image to get maximum Google juice.

For anyone planning to create backlinks I recommend you to take 3 minutes to watch the Matt Cutts video on http://autoseosystem.com

If you recognise the change he speaks about. then afterwards use their FREE software to create some contextural articles embedded with your own URL.

 

[SEOfarmer]

Don't waste your $$$ on the wrong kind of backlinks - They won't work.

Since the Google "Panda" update a lot has changed.

Google has moved the playing field and simple text links are almost counter productive, Pyramid linkbuilding is no longer worth the effort but Contextural Links will get you an almost immediate SERPS improvement.

Most of the backlinks you will be offered today will be either, simple text on blog profiles or blog comments.

Tens of thousands of both can be done in 24hrs using Scrapebox, and because of that Google is now giving simple text links less weight in SERPS.

If you watch the latest video by Matt Cutts, Google's own guru, you will learn that contextural backlinks now have the most value.

Contextural backlinks are links placed inside an article or blog post that are in the context of their surrounding text, so they look natural.

For example an article on firefighting might have links to a firestation URL. These are quite time consuming to create and invariably need an image to get maximum Google juice.

For anyone planning to create backlinks I recommend you to take 3 minutes to watch the Matt Cutts video on http://autoseosystem.com

If you recognise the change he speaks about. then afterwards use their FREE software to create some contextural articles embedded with your own URL.

Ahh, that will be quite hard to implement then?
Since most article directories only allow 'links' in the about the author section. (well, we can still surround it with context, but it will be very limited).

As for blog commenting, most of the blogs are nofollow. How will we benefit from this?

 

[mcgoohan6]

Ahh, that will be quite hard to implement then?
Since most article directories only allow 'links' in the about the author section. (well, we can still surround it with context, but it will be very limited).

As for blog commenting, most of the blogs are nofollow. How will we benefit from this?

If you are using AMR for article directories, insert a contextual link in the body of your article for your first pass. It will get accepted by some directories. Then remove your link for your second run.