![]() | | ||||||||
| | #1 |
| Advanced Warrior Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: England
Posts: 916
Thanks: 187
Thanked 165 Times in 106 Posts
|
Imagine I have a 600 word post on my site, can I backlink to it by submitting the same article to leading directories referencing my original source? I daresay I'll get various answers to this - but is it effective? Does it still work? Is it a BAD thing? Thanks |
|
Nothing to see here
| |
| | |
| | #2 |
| Senior Warrior Member Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,337
Thanks: 73
Thanked 132 Times in 121 Posts
|
It's cool, effective, and highly recommended. Do it now.
|
| | |
| | |
| | #3 |
| Advanced Warrior Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: England
Posts: 916
Thanks: 187
Thanked 165 Times in 106 Posts
|
does it DEVALUE my content though? after this panda thing, nobody seems to know for sure...
|
|
Nothing to see here
| |
| | |
| | #4 |
| Semi-Active Warrior Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 77
Thanks: 2
Thanked 16 Times in 15 Posts
|
You were right! You are going to hear differing opinions on this ![]() I say it's not a great idea - just swing by alexa and take a look at ezinearticles.com. Their traffic has dropped substantially since "farmer/panda" because their business model revolves around providing article content to be reused on other websites. The farmer update essentially cracks down on duplicate article content favoring the most authoritative version of the article (however that's determined!) and all but eliminating duplicates. In short - I recommend using unique and different articles to link back with. |
| | |
| | #5 |
| Advanced Warrior Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: England
Posts: 916
Thanks: 187
Thanked 165 Times in 106 Posts
|
Thanks I have noticed many of my articles have been syndicated i.e. somebody has taken them, published onto a crappy blog and then linked to the source. Effectively this is exactly the same as what would happen if I did it myself with EZA. On one hand I think "I only want unique content on my site", and on the other I think "a backlink is a backlink..." Confused? yes. |
|
Nothing to see here
| |
| | |
| | #6 | |
| Wordsmith (& Skepchick) War Room Member Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 15,297
Thanks: 8,672
Thanked 11,419 Times in 5,809 Posts
| Quote:
In my opinion, absolutely dreadful. There's no great benefit for you in linking back to another copy of the same article that people have just read in an article directory. I'd expect to lose a lot of the traffic, that way. They'll get there and think "Hold on ... what's going on here? I've just read this" and click away. The articles go on my site first and get indexed there for all the obvious reasons, but when they subsequently get submitted to article directories, the links in the resource-boxes are to my landing page, not to another copy of the same article. But all this is, to some extent, "beside the point". The question is: when a potential customer finds one of your articles by putting one of its keywords into a search engine as his search terms, what do you want him to find - an article directory copy (I don't know about you, but I lose most of that traffic because article directories are full of AdSense and other distraction and many people won't "click through") or the copy on your own site ("job done")? Surely you want them coming straight to your website, not veering off to an article directory? Like many successful article marketers here, I use article directories regularly, but not so much for traffic! You see what I mean, perhaps? It's easy to imagine that you're getting traffic from article directories when what you're really doing is sending your traffic to article directories. That isn't article marketing: it's just "article directory marketing", and it can be done at the expense of your own site. | |
| Alexa Smith ... ... writes stuff that snaps, crackles and pops, even if it's only about cauliflowers. | ||
| | |
| | #7 | |
| Senior Warrior Member Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,053
Thanks: 617
Thanked 605 Times in 374 Posts
| Quote:
When people click on the link in your resource box, they want more. They want something new. They liked what you gave them, and they want to see what else you've got. By linking to a page on your site that has the same exact content, there's no reason for them to stay on your website. If the post on your website centers around an important topic, then rewrite it (manually please, no spinners ). If you've already got 600 words, you can even cut some stuff out and still meet the length guidelines on the article directories. That way, when you link back to it, people won't feel like they've just read the same exact thing. Instead, they'll feel like you're giving them more information on the same subject.Or, skip the rewriting altogether, and link the article back to a page on your website that has totally different content. | |
| Nicole Beckett can get you out of the content "rat race"... You don't have to settle for junk... For SEO content writing that stands above the rest, visit the team of professional journalists at Premier Content Source! | ||
| | |
| | #8 |
| Warrior Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: CO,USA
Posts: 18
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
What I suggest is that you use a trial version(7$ for 7 days then 77$/year) of TheBestSpinner and create some spinned versions of your article, then submit those to different directories. Because they are spinned versions of each other ,google gets it! and it ranks it higher... But if they are exactly the same then the effect is lower
|
| | |
| | #9 |
| HyperActive Warrior War Room Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: My Computer
Posts: 189
Thanks: 57
Thanked 47 Times in 39 Posts
|
You could probably turn one 600 word article into several smaller articles that you can post with a link back to the original however it would be best of each smaller article was completely re-written before posting.
|
|
I'm saving 50% to 90% off all marketing tools & software tools at The Daily Gangster! Real people. Trusted Warriors, Making real money online, now reveal their Best Online Business Blueprint! Click here to learn more . . . | |
| | |
![]() |
|
| Tags |
| cool |
| Thread Tools | |
| |
![]() |