Article Resource Box?

by wm820
13 replies
Hello:

I have a question maybe someone could answer. I know about posting the article on my website first to get it indexed and then submit the article to an article directory to get it syndicated. My question is when I get to the point of submitting the article and filling in the "Resource Box", do I put a link back to the page I originally posted the article on my website or to my HOME page? Would Google look at the link pointing to the same article as SPAM? I've read about getting links pointing to your internal pages for good SEO. Thank you for any help..

Bill
#article #box #link #marketing #resource
  • Profile picture of the author Gsdlady
    From what I read you put a link back to your website for additional articles.
    Signature

    Dog Journals
    Baby books for your dog. Document your dog's life as it happens.

    Baby First Year Books
    Baby memory books baby keepsakes for new mothers.
    GSD Lady

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6815838].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
    Banned
    Originally Posted by wm820 View Post

    when I get to the point of submitting the article and filling in the "Resource Box", do I put a link back to the page I originally posted the article on my website or to my HOME page?
    You link to your landing page.

    If your landing page is also your home page (mine is, on all my niche sites), then yes: you'll be linking to your home page. But the page to which you're linking is whichever is the page on which you want your article-traffic to "land" by clicking the resource-box link.

    If you used a squeeze page (I'm guessing from the wording of your post that you don't? I don't, either ...), then it would almost always be your squeeze page that you decide is going to be your "landing page".

    Personal opinion only, but I think it's almost never right to link from one article to another. (And especially not to the same one they've just read!). People who have read your article and got as far as clicking the link are typically interested in "following up" rather than in reading another article?

    (This kind of question depends a little on what you want your traffic to do, when it gets to your website. Personally, I'm an affiliate marketer, so the primary purpose of all my websites is to get people to "opt in" and be on my list, because that's how I make 95%+ of my sales, so I send the traffic to the home page of a content-rich site, which displays a prominently incentivized opt-in at the top.)

    Originally Posted by wm820 View Post

    I've read about getting links pointing to your internal pages for good SEO.
    Yes, there's something in that as well, and in some of my articles in which I give two links in the resource-box, I'll always give one to my landing page but the other sometimes to some other, internal page where I also don't mind getting some direct traffic, bypassing my home page, and for which I don't mind doing some off-page SEO as well. But it will always be a page with an opt-in box on it, because there's little point in attracting a flood of targeted traffic and not trying to opt in the visitors.

    Most importantly, don't make your resource-box sound "salesy". Articles with those are rarely syndicated to any sites that have the traffic you want and need. More details here: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post3188316

    Good luck!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6816122].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
      Alexa gave you the reasons why, so I'll just add my own practices...

      Single link - landing page.

      Two links - One to landing page, one to related article or perhaps a category or tag page. All have my opt-in in the sidebar. I'm testing adding a short version of my landing page/semi-squeeze page at the top of my category and tag pages. Too early to comment on results...
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6816607].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Becky Rogers
    As said above, landing page, with single link.
    Signature
    New! Simple, Proven Money Making Formula
    Revealed...No Selling, No Cold Calling,

    Plug In And Profit --->CLICK HERE!<---
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6816953].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author wm820
      Thank you all for the good answers. It is much appreciated.
      Signature
      Junk Car Removal | Cash For Junk Cars | We Buy Junk Cars | Sell Junk Cars
      www.LongIslandRecyclers.com
      www.NewYorkJunkCar.com
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6816997].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author howinfo
        You can link to any page that is relevant and good addition to the article, it also can be landing page or even YouTube video. But as said above, do not link back to same article because when user reads your article and clicks on the link and then finds the same article again then they are most likely to leave straight away.
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6817278].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dswconsulting
    I'm sure you know this but just in case.... be sure to spin the article to 60+% if using the same article.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6817472].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by dswconsulting View Post

      be sure to spin the article to 60+% if using the same article.
      This is "second-best" advice.

      Not only would that have no benefits at all, but it can even do you some real harm.

      It's actually a deeply flawed approach. What you're doing, if you do that, is giving article directories (and/or other sites) initial indexation-rights to content not previously published. In the long run, that gives significant SEO disadvantages to your own site, compared with the alternative.

      When you have time to read through this thread, you'll find in it a whole succession of experienced, successful article marketers explaining at length and in detail all their shared reasons for not doing that: Article on site or EZA first ?

      Spinning is absolute nonsense, devoid of benefits and based only a fundamental misunderstanding (in spite of all Google's lengths to clarify it!) about the difference between duplicate content and syndicated content (explained here). Its only remaining advocates are those with a financial interest in the promotion of spinning software/services and the graduates of the Urban Myth School of Internet Marketing.

      Everyone who actually makes a living from article marketing (rather than from supplying spinning software or services) will tell you the same thing about this subject. For people open-minded enough to read them and learn something, these five items explain much more, at greater length and in greater detail.
      • this post explains the benefits of spinning
      • the first half (or so) of this thread contains a good discussion of what you can gain from spinning articles
      • the advice on this subject given by so many people throughout most of this thread has been really helpful to many people here
      • this little article is also a very useful and accurate explanation of the subject
      • this post, and its links, explain in detail the closely related subject of how article directories really work and why they exist
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6818894].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dswconsulting
    Thank you for the very informative post. It really did open my eyes to a few things I was unaware of. And for the record I post my content first!
    I can certainly understand this approach if you are an article marketer. In this example you want a united front- one face & one word. Contrarily, what if you are a niche marketer? Your objective is to develop back links (with good content). If I understand correctly, in this case you are only credited one back link for the various submissions. Sure your not penalized for duplicate content however not awarded for a multitude of backlinks. Wouldn't you say 20 articles from 20 authors pointing to 1 site is more valuable than 1 article by 1 author pointed to 1 site?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6825763].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      Originally Posted by dswconsulting View Post

      Thank you for the very informative post.
      Not at all - your politeness here has put me to shame, and I've changed a word or two in my post above and I apologise for strong wording originally. Occasionally I look back at a post from the day before and think "Wow, did I really phrase it quite like that?" Thank you very much for taking it as I intended it rather than as I actually worded it. :rolleyes:

      Originally Posted by dswconsulting View Post

      Contrarily, what if you are a niche marketer?
      Well, I am a niche marketer.

      Originally Posted by dswconsulting View Post

      Your objective is to develop back links (with good content).
      Well ... not so much, in my case, because I don't like SEO traffic and it doesn't convert well for me. I do get plenty of Google traffic, though. Article marketing by syndication produces high quality SEO, funnily enough, even though that isn't its primary objective. In the way explained in the last paragraph of this post: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5035794

      Originally Posted by dswconsulting View Post

      If I understand correctly, in this case you are only credited one back link for the various submissions.
      I'm not quite with you, here.

      Every syndicated copy of every article I write credits me with a backlink (unless I ever get one syndicated to an unindexed site, I suppose? But I'm not going to know about those, anyway?).

      The good thing about article syndication backlinks is that they're all on relevant sites (because nobody else would want the article anyway). And linkjuice is determined primarily by relevance.

      Originally Posted by dswconsulting View Post

      Sure your not penalized for duplicate content however not awarded for a multitude of backlinks.
      No ... all the backlinks count.

      Even if an article is indexed for my keywords only in Google's supplemental index rather than in the main index (which often happens, of course) that doesn't affect the value of its backlink.

      Originally Posted by dswconsulting View Post

      Wouldn't you say 20 articles from 20 authors pointing to 1 site is more valuable than 1 article by 1 author pointed to 1 site?
      Sure ... 20 backlinks on relevant sites are worth far more than 1 backlink on a relevant site.

      But 20 backlinks from relevant sites attached to articles in the supplemental index aren't worth any less than 20 backlinks from relevant sites attached to article in the main index.

      20 backlinks attached to 20 copies of the same article in 20 different places aren't worth any less than 20 copies of "unique" articles in the same 20 places.

      The value of any backlink attached to any article on any given page of the web isn't worth any more, or less, because the content it follows has previously been published somewhere else: http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ml#post5867601

      (But they have to be relevant sites, of course. Even before all the Panda updates, according to standard SEO textbook authors, one decent backlink from a relevant authority site was worth 50,000+ article directory backlinks: they have no real value at all).
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6825872].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dswconsulting
    Wow your quick! Don't be ashamed, I can understand how my initial post would have indicated I was some ignorant Joe Schmoe buying PLR and running it through a spinner. Not that I'm any less ignorant but I'm certainly not taking that approach to my business.

    Until now- I had misunderstood some of the specifics of back links and duplicate content. So thank you! I was lead to believe through many sources that you could not submit the same article to different directories if you wanted to get back links from each submission.

    Sooo- that's where my thoughts on spinning were developed. I was informed to spin your article very thoroughly then submit the different versions to different directories using different profiles. (Which is a very difficult task) So the theory was, in utilizing what I just described- 1 author could be perceived as 20 authors, submitting 20 different articles to 20 different directories and achieving an exponential effect on their back link campaign. Wheeew Does this make sense? (although false?)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6825979].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Randall Magwood
    Link to the home page where you want your visitors to take an action. If it's a squeeze page, cool. If it's a sales letter page, cool.

    If it's the same article that you've already submitted to the article directories... don't do it.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6826001].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
      Originally Posted by dswconsulting View Post

      Sooo- that's where my thoughts on spinning were developed. I was informed to spin your article very thoroughly then submit the different versions to different directories using different profiles. (Which is a very difficult task) So the theory was, in utilizing what I just described- 1 author could be perceived as 20 authors, submitting 20 different articles to 20 different directories and achieving an exponential effect on their back link campaign. Wheeew Does this make sense? (although false?)
      Don't feel bad. There are some very good marketers with a vested interest in making the process as difficult as possible. If it were too easy, they'd have a much harder time selling spinners, submission bots and other tools for spreading spun nonsense as widely as possible.

      Since the backlinks are equivalent either way, I much prefer to see one author show up on a multitude of relevant sites. It builds a lot more authority into what that author has to say. If someone sees the same article on several different sites (much less common that the spin and scatter types would have you believe), what does that tacit endorsement from relevant, trusted publishers say about the value of that author's information?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6826093].message }}

Trending Topics