7 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
7 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

When using article directories for backlinks, can I just use the same article on my site?

by alienbrayn
5 replies
Hello friends of WF,

I'd like to post a few articles to sites like ehow.com, squidoo.com, hubpages.com, etc for some quality backlinks. I'm not sure if I should write completely original content for an article submission to one of those sites, or if it would be all right to just copy/paste an already made article (still unique) from my site and just post it as-is?

I'm confused because if I just post an already made article to an article directory and if someone goes to my actual site because of finding my submisson on ehow.com, etc then they will see the exact same post!

Am I understanding this correctly? Is the whole point of posting in article directories to bring in traffic by people who find your content interesting, then wanting to go to the site it came from to find other content of yours?

Or is it meant just to rank higher on SERP because links to your page are posted on other sites?

In other words, please help me better understand backlinkng.

best,

alien
#article #backlinks #directories #site
  • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
    Banned
    Hi Alien,

    Originally Posted by alienbrayn View Post

    When using article directories for backlinks, can I just use the same article on my site?
    Yes. Always publish it on your own site first, and wait until it's been indexed there before submitting it to directories (or anywhere else). This is fundamental to any type of article marketing.

    Originally Posted by alienbrayn View Post

    I'd like to post a few articles to sites like ehow.com, squidoo.com, hubpages.com, etc for some quality backlinks.
    None of those is an article directory, and the backlinks you can get from them are only non-context-relevant, PR-0 backlinks anyway.

    Originally Posted by alienbrayn View Post

    I'm not sure if I should write completely original content for an article submission to one of those sites
    Generally, for Web 2.0 sites like the ones you mention, you'd have to because they don't normally accept articles which have been published elsewhere. Article directories are completely different. They don't require previously unpublished content (and it would be a big mistake to give them the initial indexation-rights to any). They have a completely different purpose and function.

    Originally Posted by alienbrayn View Post

    or if it would be all right to just copy/paste an already made article (still unique) from my site and just post it as-is?
    For article directories, yes. It doesn't need to be "unique" (and shouldn't be).

    Originally Posted by alienbrayn View Post

    if I just post an already made article to an article directory and if someone goes to my actual site because of finding my submisson on ehow.com, etc then they will see the exact same post!
    Ehow (not an article directory) doesn't want an article that's on your site anyway.

    But this isn't the problem you think it is.

    No article marketer wants potential customer traffic finding an article in an article directory, for all the reasons explained in this post. That isn't who those copies are there for. That isn't how article directories work.

    Originally Posted by alienbrayn View Post

    Am I understanding this correctly?
    No, not at all.

    Originally Posted by alienbrayn View Post

    Is the whole point of posting in article directories to bring in traffic by people who find your content interesting, then wanting to go to the site it came from to find other content of yours?
    No. An article directory is simply a stepping-stone toward getting your article syndicated from the directory to other people's sites (and ezines) of which exactly that is true.

    Originally Posted by alienbrayn View Post

    Or is it meant just to rank higher on SERP because links to your page are posted on other sites?
    An element of that is true, but unfortunately it isn't true of article directory backlinks (which aren't worth anything measurable at all): it's true of the relevant niche sites on which copies of your article eventually end up by virtue of having been "announced as available for that" when you submit them to an article directory. Relevance determines backlink value.

    Confused? No need to be! Here are two recent threads which (if you have a good read, and follow the links inside them by clicking) will tell you almost everything you need to know to answer in detail your questions above - and more!

    http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5068872

    http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...marketing.html
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6863026].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
    Banned
    Originally Posted by Extreme DoFollow View Post

    No - on your website you should always keep the content entirely unique.
    As "advice" to someone asking a beginner's question about article marketing - someone who isn't quite clear what an article directory is - this is as misguided and mistaken as you can get.

    In short, it's just completely wrong. :rolleyes:

    This forum's full of successful, professional marketers making our livings through article marketing who go to huge lengths, every single day, to explain to people how mistaken and flawed this myth is. If you read the post above, and follow the links in it, you'll have the opportunity to see how article marketing works, rather than repeating these senseless urban myths dressed up as "advice".

    Originally Posted by Extreme DoFollow View Post

    backlinks from syndicated articles (i.e. those that are identical but distributed to multiple sites) do not improve rankings as unique articles do.
    Sorry to sound so outspoken, but not only is this nonsense, but there are at least a couple of hundred "article marketing threads" in this forum (some of them linked to above), contributed to by huge numbers of us making our livings and building our businesses this way, explaining in detail exactly why and how it's nonsense.

    The value of a backlink in any given position on any given page of the web isn't somehow, magically, changed according to whether the content to which it's attached has previously been published somewhere else on the web.

    I don't know which is more perplexing: the fact that some people believe this to be so, or the fact that they offer it as "advice" to beginners in article marketing who are asking a simple question. It's just wrong, wrong, wrong.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6863101].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author alienbrayn
      Alexa - Thank you for your thoughtful insight, I see I have a lot of learning to do! What do you suggest is the most efficient form of ranking higher on SERP? And any addition info about backlinking in general would be great.

      once again thank you very much!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6863166].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
        Banned
        Originally Posted by alienbrayn View Post

        Alexa - Thank you for your thoughtful insight, I see I have a lot of learning to do! What do you suggest is the most efficient form of ranking higher on SERP?
        By far and away, incomparably the best method of getting high SERP's rankings through articles is by having copies of your articles syndicated (after publication on your own site!) to other relevant niche sites. This can be achieved to some extent by "passive syndication" (i.e. by using article directories for their intended purposes) or much better, more quickly and more reliably by "active syndication".

        But note that the connections between article marketing and SEO are tenuous and indirect. SEO isn't the main purpose of article marketing at all. And someone wanting primarily "rankings" maybe wouldn't even be well advised to be doing article marketing at all.

        Several years ago, there was a "thing" called "article directory marketing" which was, briefly, an attempt to use article directories (typically in huge numbers) for their own backlinks. This was never very successful, and there were reasons for that, and now it's stone dead, after Google's algorithm changes of 2010-2012 and continuing. That might have been what you've heard about before. (There are even people who confuse it with "article marketing"). Don't go there!

        If it helps, the last paragraph of this post explains how you can actually get some high rankings from article marketing: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5035794

        Originally Posted by alienbrayn View Post

        And any addition info about backlinking in general would be great.
        For this, you need to look/ask here, rather than in this "Main Marketing Forum": Adsense / PPC / SEO Discussion Forum

        I admit I get large quantities of SEO traffic, indirectly through my article marketing efforts and in some other ways, but it's not much use to me. Not only is it the worst-converting, least-opting-in, least-responsive traffic I've ever had, out of everything I've ever tried, but it isn't even secure: if your business depends on Google for its primary traffic, it can never be more than one potential algorithm-change away from a big accident or even a disaster (as so many Warriors have found out, some to their very great cost, over the past couple of years!). It's a way of making your business outside your own control, really. You're always dependent on search engines, and for what? Really poor quality traffic (compared with other sources) ... However, unlike the stuff above about article marketing, that's personal opinion/experience only - not factual.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6863250].message }}

Trending Topics