Backlinks Explained?

[Karen Connell]

Hi all,

Now, to begin - please no laughing at my ignorance!

I know this a very basic question but can someone explain how you get organic backlinks?

Everyone talks about how inportant it is to have backlinks but can someone please define the method.

I've done the search thingy, but it only comes up with 'the importance of' or 'buy some backlinks' etc. Nothing to explain what a backlink is.

What legitimate ways are there to get a link to your site?

Is there an ebook I could buy to explain the fundamentals?

There - I've exposed my weakness (well, one of them!)

Thanks

Karen

[internetmarketer99]

Karen,

A backlink is simply a link to your site that is on another site. For instance, the "swiftarticles" link in your signature is a backlink. It's on warriorforum.com, and points to swiftarticles.com.

One of the things that determines where a webpage ranks is the number and 'strength' of the backlinks that are out on the web. In fact, it's one of the most important factors.

Now all backlinks are not created equal. The 'stronger' the site that the backlink sits on, the more ranking value your site gets.

I did a thread that may help you understand it further: Some Truths About Ranking And Backlinks

"Legitimate" ways to get backlinks are article submission (you put your link in the 'resource box', much like a forum signature), adding your links to social bookmarking sites like Blinklist, Mixx, Folkd, etc., adding comments on other people's blogs (with your link).

Backlinks are at the heart of building rankings for your pages, and warrants learning and understanding it thoroughly - fortunately, you'll find that very easy.

Mark

[Karen Connell]

Hi Mark,

Thanks for that.

I did have some idea that it really was that simple - but some of the threads I've read make it sound so much more complicated.

Thanks for the link - I'll check it out.

Regards

Karen

[pakidesigner]

these days backlinks are not that important. coz i tested this..instead of back links. you must keep your attention to each and every page meta tags....

[RatherBeInCabo]

Originally Posted by pakidesigner

these days backlinks are not that important. coz i tested this..instead of back links. you must keep your attention to each and every page meta tags....

What data do you have to support this theory?

[4morereferrals]

If oneis wise, they will completely disregard the following nonsense from PAKIDesigner

Originally Posted by pakidesigner

these days backlinks are not that important. coz i tested this..instead of back links. you must keep your attention to each and every page meta tags....

[dburk]

Originally Posted by internetmarketer99

One of the things that determines where a webpage ranks is the number and 'strength' of the backlinks that are out on the web. In fact, it's one of the most important factors.

Now all backlinks are not created equal. The 'stronger' the site that the backlink sits on, the more ranking value your site gets.

Mark

Hi Mark,

I find your assertion only partially valid and in the interest of provoking insight on this topic I will state my argument.

I will assert that the number of backlinks is unimportant while the collective "strength" of your backlinks is all that matters regarding this as a factor in ranking SERPs. If you have only one or two really great backlinks you can easily outrank pages with hundreds or even thousands of backlinks. This is obvious by simply observing the SERPs.

So this begs the question "what is meant by strength"?

The word "strength" is a relative term, so it is completely ambiguous without providing context. What makes one backlink stronger than another? Is it PageRank? Clearly PageRank is not the deciding factor all on it's own, if it were we would see SERPs sorted roughly by PR.

It seems clear to me that search engines sort their results based on relevance and sub-sorts pages with equal relevance on other factors often referred to as "Authority" and "Importance". Assuming this is true we should focus first and foremost on factors that influence relevance.

Backlinks clearly influence SERP ranking, but only when there is some relevance present in either the anchor text or other on-page relevance factors.

What is less clear to me is exactly how backlinks influence relevance. It appears that the relevance of anchor text plays a strong role, but what about other factors? The PR of an IBL seems to be a factor. I have seen data that "suggests" this is true, but how do we isolate the cause from the effect? Perhaps the key factors that influence the "strength" of a backlink are more prevelant on pages that have higher PR. I haven't seen much data or heard of testing done to isolate the cause from the effect.

In my own experience I have seen anecdotal evidence that suggests that the PR and anchor text of your backlinks alone may not make up the complete formula in determining the strength of your backlinks.

If anyone has done any testing to isolate the factors that influence the relative strength of a backlink I would love to review the data and testing methods.

[internetmarketer99]

Originally Posted by dburk

I will assert that the number of backlinks is unimportant while the collective "strength" of your backlinks is all that matters regarding this as a factor in ranking SERPs. If you have only one or two really great backlinks you can easily outrank pages with hundreds or even thousands of backlinks. This is obvious by simply observing the SERPs.

Hey Don,

We're in complete agreement. I use the phrase "Total Backlink Value".

As I wrote in that thread, on-page factors aside, your ranking is a direct function of your Total Backlink Value.

Overall ranking:

('Page Value' and On-page Optimization) + (# of Backlinks x Strength of Backlinks)

I'm guilty of using the phrase "number of backlinks" as a 'shorthand', but as you point out it is both misleading and incorrect.

Mark

[internetmarketer99]

Originally Posted by dburk

Backlinks clearly influence SERP ranking, but only when there is some relevance present in either the anchor text or other on-page relevance factors.

...

In my own experience I have seen anecdotal evidence that suggests that the PR and anchor text of your backlinks alone may not make up the complete formula in determining the strength of your backlinks.

I agree with that as well, though I also only have intuition and anecdotal evidence to go on.

My own thinking is that while the anchor text provides the majority of the 'relevance' component, there is some portion of it derived from the rest of the page.

In other words, I believe that a link using "dog training" as it's anchor text will have a slightly higher 'Total Backlink Value' for that phrase if it appears on a page that is semantically relevant, versus that same link on a completely unrelated page.

There are some who sharply disagree - one of whom I'm betting will chime in

Mark

[Gringo]

Hopefully I get my point across on this question.

When we say backlinks like my sig and everyone else's. Does it help or is it prefured to use your keyword for the Text?

What I mean is if I am trying to rank my widgetdotcom page and my sig says wigetdotcom is that the prefured method?

Or if we want to rank for redcirclewidgets do we put the ancor as redcirclewidgets that point to widgetsdotcom?

Would it be advised to have diff. ancor txtx on other forums so you get the best bang for your buck?

What i mean is have redcirclewidgets on 1 sig and bluecirclewidgest on another.

Am I in the right ballpark?

Thanks.

[kkchoon]

Originally Posted by dburk

Hi Mark,

I find your assertion only partially valid and in the interest of provoking insight on this topic I will state my argument.

I will assert that the number of backlinks is unimportant while the collective "strength" of your backlinks is all that matters regarding this as a factor in ranking SERPs. If you have only one or two really great backlinks you can easily outrank pages with hundreds or even thousands of backlinks. This is obvious by simply observing the SERPs.

Hey Don, how are you lately?

Looking forwards to our test next month.

Do you think the Domain Pagerank give a lot influence (link juice) to a site for ranking a keyword? I found it extremely powerful to have 10 DPR 9 rather than 500 DPR 2 links...

Figure are not accurate, just the sense from experience.

Do you think that a DPR 2 link with related content and same keyword would give more power than and DPR9 link with unrelated content, but same keyword?

Originally Posted by dburk

So this begs the question "what is meant by strength"?

The word "strength" is a relative term, so it is completely ambiguous without providing context. What makes one backlink stronger than another? Is it PageRank? Clearly PageRank is not the deciding factor all on it's own, if it were we would see SERPs sorted roughly by PR.

It seems clear to me that search engines sort their results based on relevance and sub-sorts pages with equal relevance on other factors often referred to as "Authority" and "Importance". Assuming this is true we should focus first and foremost on factors that influence relevance.

I think search engine sort their result based on links + on page factor, but they seems to give weight more towards link, even those links are from different niche or sites.

You may argue about those sites being relevant, but they are not in the same niche, or some even from totally opposite forums.... because you can put whatever keywords in the signature.

The only relevant is keyword in the link, not the content.

Originally Posted by dburk

Backlinks clearly influence SERP ranking, but only when there is some relevance present in either the anchor text or other on-page relevance factors.

What is less clear to me is exactly how backlinks influence relevance. It appears that the relevance of anchor text plays a strong role, but what about other factors? The PR of an IBL seems to be a factor. I have seen data that "suggests" this is true, but how do we isolate the cause from the effect? Perhaps the key factors that influence the "strength" of a backlink are more prevelant on pages that have higher PR. I haven't seen much data or heard of testing done to isolate the cause from the effect.

In my own experience I have seen anecdotal evidence that suggests that the PR and anchor text of your backlinks alone may not make up the complete formula in determining the strength of your backlinks.

If anyone has done any testing to isolate the factors that influence the relative strength of a backlink I would love to review the data and testing methods.

Are you saying if I had 100 DPR 6 - 9 links, I won't be able to outrank your site with 100 DPR2 but with relevant content?

or

We all had 100 DPR 6 - 9 links, and your relevant content link would out rank my unrelevant content link?


Kok Choon

[dburk]

Hi Kok Choon,

I think you and I approach this topic from completely different perspectives. I'm not sure I buy into the concept of DPR (Domain PageRank). I don't believe that Google assigns PR to domains, only to pages. I believe this is a fundamental concept that is essential to understanding how search engines like Google rank SERP indexes.

It seems other folks have recognized and refer to what you call DPR as Domain Authority. The perception is that if the homepage of the domain has a very high PR, it will pass this Domain authority power to all the pages of the website. Those who have promulgated this theory have often noted that the further away from the home page (in links) the less power that is passed to the page. Also that the power is less if there are more OBL emanating from the homepage.

For the sake of discussion, let us say that we accept that this is true. How does this "Domain Authority", or DPR as you call it, differ from just plain old PageRank. It seems to have all of the same characteristics as PR, it passes value the same way PR does and it seems to have all of the same influence of PR. Why do we need to distinguish it in any way from just regular PR?

It's fine with me if you choose to call the ranking power of PR as DPR or Domain Authority, I understand what you mean by it. For me, it serves no purpose to create a separate name and it may confuse some folks because it implies that the domain itself has a PR.

I do believe that there are factors related to a particular domain, such as domain age and length of registration that have an influence on ranking. I think it is useful to make a distinction of what I call "TrustRank" factors from PageRank factors. For example, does a 10 year old domain with a home page of PR1 yield the same "TrustRank" as a 10 year old domain with a PR7 home page? I have seen evidence that suggest this might be true. Has anyone done any testing on this?

[kkchoon]

Hey Don, know you'll be back !

I'm a lot clear about what in your mind now, will get into the test by next month, let's set some parameters then, and we will have a fair test.

I also believe in trust rank, but from experience, I think both trust rank and domain authority plays a big part, but how big is it - we need to test...

Anyone had similar experience?

Kok Choon

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by 4morereferrals

If oneis wise, they will completely disregard the following nonsense from PAKIDesigner

LOL! Your directness game me my Friday afternoon laugh. Thanks

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by kkchoon

Hey Don, know you'll be back !

To this thread.......perhaps. Anyway before we get into alot of back and forth lets remember Karen asked a simple and very legitmate question. Lets not confuse people with alot of debating especially since once again people are throwing around things they are not in a position to prove (or they would have already).

[kkchoon]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

To this thread.......perhaps. Anyway before we get into alot of back and forth lets remember Karen asked a simple and very legitmate question. Lets not confuse people with alot of debating especially since once again people are throwing around things they are not in a position to prove (or they would have already).

Although there are many Warriors and SEO people says that relevant content doesn't really helps (including me), still would like to test it thoroughly to prove myself wrong, and this would affect all my current strategy of link building.

Let's see how it turn out later...

[carmelito]

Originally Posted by dburk

Hi Mark,

I find your assertion only partially valid and in the interest of provoking insight on this topic I will state my argument.

I will assert that the number of backlinks is unimportant while the collective "strength" of your backlinks is all that matters regarding this as a factor in ranking SERPs. If you have only one or two really great backlinks you can easily outrank pages with hundreds or even thousands of backlinks. This is obvious by simply observing the SERPs.

So this begs the question "what is meant by strength"?

The word "strength" is a relative term, so it is completely ambiguous without providing context. What makes one backlink stronger than another? Is it PageRank? Clearly PageRank is not the deciding factor all on it's own, if it were we would see SERPs sorted roughly by PR.

It seems clear to me that search engines sort their results based on relevance and sub-sorts pages with equal relevance on other factors often referred to as "Authority" and "Importance". Assuming this is true we should focus first and foremost on factors that influence relevance.

Backlinks clearly influence SERP ranking, but only when there is some relevance present in either the anchor text or other on-page relevance factors.

What is less clear to me is exactly how backlinks influence relevance. It appears that the relevance of anchor text plays a strong role, but what about other factors? The PR of an IBL seems to be a factor. I have seen data that "suggests" this is true, but how do we isolate the cause from the effect? Perhaps the key factors that influence the "strength" of a backlink are more prevelant on pages that have higher PR. I haven't seen much data or heard of testing done to isolate the cause from the effect.

In my own experience I have seen anecdotal evidence that suggests that the PR and anchor text of your backlinks alone may not make up the complete formula in determining the strength of your backlinks.

If anyone has done any testing to isolate the factors that influence the relative strength of a backlink I would love to review the data and testing methods.

Hello, can you explain and rank to me what is the seven (7) most important factors to be considered in order to gain the strong backlink (from most important to least important factors.

[carmelito]

Originally Posted by dburk

Hi Kok Choon,

I think you and I approach this topic from completely different perspectives. I'm not sure I buy into the concept of DPR (Domain PageRank). I don't believe that Google assigns PR to domains, only to pages. I believe this is a fundamental concept that is essential to understanding how search engines like Google rank SERP indexes.

It seems other folks have recognized and refer to what you call DPR as Domain Authority. The perception is that if the homepage of the domain has a very high PR, it will pass this Domain authority power to all the pages of the website. Those who have promulgated this theory have often noted that the further away from the home page (in links) the less power that is passed to the page. Also that the power is less if there are more OBL emanating from the homepage.

For the sake of discussion, let us say that we accept that this is true. How does this "Domain Authority", or DPR as you call it, differ from just plain old PageRank. It seems to have all of the same characteristics as PR, it passes value the same way PR does and it seems to have all of the same influence of PR. Why do we need to distinguish it in any way from just regular PR?

It's fine with me if you choose to call the ranking power of PR as DPR or Domain Authority, I understand what you mean by it. For me, it serves no purpose to create a separate name and it may confuse some folks because it implies that the domain itself has a PR.

I do believe that there are factors related to a particular domain, such as domain age and length of registration that have an influence on ranking. I think it is useful to make a distinction of what I call "TrustRank" factors from PageRank factors. For example, does a 10 year old domain with a home page of PR1 yield the same "TrustRank" as a 10 year old domain with a PR7 home page? I have seen evidence that suggest this might be true. Has anyone done any testing on this?

Hello,
Can you tell me the seven (7)most important thing/factors be considered in order to gain strong backlinks, rank them from most important to least important.

[jack jastin]

Do more and more Forum postings for getting more and backlinks.

[mygold]

I don't know about "organic backlinks" still now. Can someone tell me about this.

[kkchoon]

I think Organic Backlinks mean natural backlinks, not done by human link builder?

[ddBoom]

Is there a difference in ranking based on 'domain links' verses 'page links'?

When using SEO for FireFox, it offers stats on links to the domain AND links to the actual page.

I'm curious which of these two plays the most important role in ranking?