Backlinks from Web 2.0 Sites?

by 52 replies
60
I'm observing something that further leads me to question the validity of the linkwheel idea and the usefulness of web 2.0 sites to build backlinks.

On a few of my websites I have created very basic networks of dofollow web 2.0 sites with articles and links back to my main site. When I look at backlinks to my site from either Yahoo Site Explorer or my Google Webmaster page I do not see a single link from any of the sites. These sites have been stewing for two months with little or no activity on my part. I would think that this would be plenty of time for the frequent indexing of these high PR sites to have yielded a link or two.

It leads me to wonder if the effort a person might put into building these sorts of links would be better spent writing articles, contributing to forums and exchanging blog posts.
#search engine optimization #backlinks #sites #web
  • Hi,

    the links from Web 2.0 sites work perfectly for the main purpose: Getting high rankings.

    I can tell you from a lot of experience they work great.

    Don't trust the Yahoo site explorer because it won't show you ALL links to a site. In fact, it misses a lot of links.

    I would say that if ypu see 2K backlinks in the Y! Site Explorer, the site you are looking at may probable have 4K.

    I build about 200-250 backlinks per month to my sites and MANY of them show only 150, 190 backlinks in the Y! Site Explorer.

    Cheers!

    Alex Kei.
    • [2] replies
    • I agree here. But why not do more? (Not that Alex doesn't.) But as the OP suggests, there is a balance here. Do more than build backlinks via social media. Write articles, exchange links with reputable partners (or ask for a one-way link), seek out your own backlinks (comments, forums, etc.).

      One tactic that is rarely mentioned is guest blogging. Ask blog owners if they want a high-quality article/post in return for a link back to your own site. This offers many benefits (targeted and immediate traffic, a high-value one-way backlink, and higher perceived expertise in your field, to name a few).
    • I appreciate the reply Alex, but it really does not alleviate my concerns. If Google Webmaster Tools and Yahoo Site explorer don't show links back to a web site... how do you know they have them indexed? How do you know from experience that they are giving you high PR if you can't even validate that your links on those sites are indexed? What concrete data do you have that validates the numbers above?

      I'm sorry, but if I were the owner of a large business hiring someone to do marketing for my product, I would ask for more than hand waving and touchy feely ideas about how things work. If I don't see links that I have created on Squidoo, Hubpages or any other site appearing in search results or as links in Yahoo Site Explorer or Google Webmaster tools, then why would I assume that they are being considered in any ranking algorithm?

      This is the problem that I have with those that promote "link wheels" involving high PR web 2.0 properties. 1. They never provide any statistical or verifiable evidence that this actually works. In addition, you put yourself at the mercy of these properties who, on any given day, can decide to make links no-follow or otherwise cloak the links (like I've observed on Squidoo).

      This is a fact... I generate backlinks by exchanging blog posts, adding useful commentary to relevant blogs, and adding useful posts to relevent forums. In every case I can go to either Google Webmaster Tools or Yahoo Site Explorer and see the results after a reasonable amount of time has passed to index. (I actually asked a question on Google's Webmaster Forums one day and included a link to my site... it was in Google's search results in 10 minutes). So if I am not seeing links from high PR web 2.0 sites (that supposedly get indexed rather frequently) appear in my site links in Yahoo or Google Webmaster, I can only assume that these sites are not providing much, if any, benefit to my ranking.
      • [1] reply
  • Hello

    i am new to SEO, what is Web 2.0? any one have a list of web 2.0?
    • [3] replies
  • Web 2.0 properties have a great link juice, you just have to know how to use it.

    But web 2.0 is definitely better than a simple website backlink
    • [1] reply
    • I'm all ears. Please explain with verifiable evidence how they provide great link juice and why a link from Squidoo is better than a link from a directly related PR 6 blog/forum/website.
  • Web 2.0s are being heavily discounted by google. To get them to count I would....

    Fill the Web 2.0 sites with content, not just 4 or five articles, more like 30-40 articles and then.........

    build backlinks to your Web2.0 props.

    persoanlly, for me............I don't use many of them that much anymore, but when I do I, use, wordpress.com. typepad.com, and blobspost.com, and build backlinks to them.

    Of course you could just build backlinks straight to your money site and achieve the same outcome.

    Just my opinion..........
    • [2] replies
    • From my earlier example... I think I would much rather fill my own web site with 30 - 40 articles to add credibility to my own site.

      Think about the logic of this. Proponents of this suggest that folks spend a bunch of time building several separate web pages pointed at their money page for the sole purpose of hoping that Google sees the link and somehow magically rates your money site higher because the link exists on a site that contains massive amounts of completely unrelated content.

      Again... if I was to create a site in the iPod niche... I would much rather have some links from content on Apple's web site, or a high PR Apple forum than put a bunch of time and effort into creating five separate web pages on a site full of unrelated content.
    • How did we test that google is ... "discounting" anything?

      Where can I read more about this "discount" factor to backlinks that google can arbitrarily apply?
      • [1] reply
  • I wondered a similar thing. I used senuke to set up a bunch of web 2.0 properties and almost none of them showed up in link checkers and this was after waiting quite a while.

    I know link checkers don't show all the backlinks, but almost none of the very many I set up showed up.
  • Webmaster tools reports web 2.0 sites
    Yahoo reports web 2.0 sites

    This is across 4 different sites I have. Get your links indexed, but not all links are going to be reported.
  • Do you think the search engines care if the link is on a static HTML site (web 1.0), or a database driven asp or php site (web 2.0)?

    That is like saying your car drives better on the interstate highway better then it does a state highway - a road is a road. Who cares if the highway goes east to west, or north to south?

    Please stop throwing the web 2.0 buzz word around, it was outdated 5+ years ago.

    This is absurd - I have never seen google say that the link is from a web 2.0 site, or a static html site.

    A link is a link - regardless of what kind of site its on.
  • What is absurd about it? Do you speak english and by any chance did you completely misunderstand what I said? Context please

    Backlinks from content created in web 2.0 websites are indexed and being reported on by Google Webmaster Tools and the various services that use Yahoo for reporting for my websites. Which means links created in those websites count just like any other.

    Ill be sure to bring out the crayons for you next time
    • [1] reply
    • Please take a screen shot of your google webmaster tools and yahoo site explorer, and please point out where it says whether the link is from a web 2.0 website or not.

      Google does not care if the link is on a static html site, or a database drive interactive site.

      You make it sound like google tells the difference between different types of sites.

      The "web 2.0" buzz word was outdated 5+ years ago. There is no need in even using it unless your talking about design - do you want a static site, or a dynamic site.
  • Well I use web 2.0 sites all the time. I'm always building them, so I don't care if some go down. I love them. I don't use them as link wheels though and I damn sure don't give them original content. I use them as extensions of my money site that are on different ip's. I just make sure to get them indexed and pump them full of backlinks. IMO, if you don't think they're effective then either you don't understand how to use them or you're not using them right.
  • link wheels works but you have to make sure that on the first stage those blogs are indexed by google. than you need to build few links to those blogs.

    they key is to promote the link wheels a bit and not only your money site
  • Jesus, Im not making it sound like anything mate. You misunderstood what I was saying and you are jumping up onto a soapbox and making yourself look like a right fool here. My God.Are you always this aggro when you get confused?

    But OK, Ill bring out the crayons for you because clearly this is way too complicated for you.

    Here, look what he don typed in his computer masheen

    Now, the response I gave him was a simple one. Google reports the links I have created that are on Web2.0 websites without any problems. Now here is the the clever part and where you are getting yourself all confused:

    I never said that it reports the link as a web2.0 site. I merely said that links from web2.0 websites are being indexed and reported in webmaster tools and the tools which use yahoo to drive them

    Comprende? Regardless of it being web2.0 or a "traditional" site, they are indexed and they are going to be reported. I never suggested that its going to label it web2.0 did I? I did not feel I had to because the OP never asked that as a question in the first place because it would be pretty ****ing retarded wouldnt it?

    Will Google and Yahoo index and report backlinks from web2.0 websites? YES IT WILL
    Will Google and Yahoo label those backlinks web2.0? NO, THEY WONT, BECAUSE IT DOES NOT MATTER

    I must say though, it is amusing that you have managed to outwit yourself to this degree.
    • [1] reply
    • Why even use the buzz word "web 2.0" at all? If you can post a link on a site, its a given that its going to be an interactive site.

      While your on the topic about the types of sites that google indexes links on, did you know that google indexes links on sites about cars, blue cars, red cars, yellow cars, race cars, sites about cheese, sites about cheese burgers, red sites, green sites, yellow sites, big sites, and even small sites.

      ---------------

      Bocephus - something you may not be taking into consideration is the age of the link. From my experiments with old domain names that have 10+ year old backlinks - google seems to give more respect to older backlinks.

      New backlink - search engine sees it and says, "hey, this might be a spam link and might get removed, so I'am just going to ignore it for a little while"

      Old backlink on high ranking site - search engine sees the same link for 10 years ago and says "this link is like a wine, its well aged and on a respected site"

      I bought an expired domain name that had backlinks dating to 1998 and 1999. Once the site was setup, it never floated in the results pages like a lot of sites do. It appears to me that the older the site, and the older the backlinks, the more respect it will get from the search engines.

      Onsite VS offsite - To answer your question about putting too much effort into link building - yes - I think people put too much effort into off site projects, and not enough effort into onsite.

      If you create your content, natural backlinks will come in time. But on the same hand, I do not think it hurts to submit a few links to social bookmarking sites.

      I see people that spend a massive amount of time creating pages on sites like hubpages and squidoo. While that same amount of time could have been invested into their own site. And I have to ask myself, why? Why take that time you could have invested into your own site, and put it towards a site that belongs to someone else?
  • I agree with alexkei in both what he said about profile backlinks value and yahoo site explorer result....So build as much as good profile links and feel the difference in short time...
  • with 2.0 sites I use them 2 ways...

    1. Is just the straight baclink it produces for my niche. I can generally find any 2.0 site I use (bookmark, sqiudoo etc) on the first or second page of my niche.

    2. I use profile links pointing to those web 2.0 links and it helps push them up. For certain keywords my site comes up in all first 5 pages and within those 5 pages are a number of web 2.0 sites with my article or bookmark.

    This helps me keep the position as I keep updating the site with content to stay on top and soon start to rank for other keywords
  • Kev, you are an idiot. The OP's question was specific to Web2.0 sites and the entire point you are making is so frikken irrelevant now its not funny.

    Im not going to participate in a pissing contest with you.

    You have a nice day
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
  • Backlink form web 2.0 still the good "tool" if you how to make it work for money.

  • Also, it always is very easy to hide among the millions of pages generated from the Web 2.0 sites..
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
    • [1] reply
    • This strategy works, but its always better to get natural links. Try to find some time to post on forums like you said, blog commenting, social bookmarking..etc
  • I don't like Web 2.0 anymore for SEO purposes. Take too long to create and not enough effect on rankings.
  • Care to share these web 2.0 sites with the Warriors, that allow dofollow links?
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
    • [1] reply
    • How do you know what google sees? Does google use link checker?

      It's pretty well-known that google doesn't give you the entire picture on what is linking back to you.
  • Link Wheels are often the problem if not utilized effectively, The more random the better, but you need to create a siloed link pyramid in combination with other more elaborate frameworks. They do work if done properly, if done in a blatent spammy fashion your asking for problems....
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
  • web 2.0 sites helps me much...im looking for more of em
  • plentiful people are relying upon Web 2.0 sites in order to create more incoming links. They think that Google gets startled with this practice.
  • If you ask my point BTW do you be familiar with what measure they use for the top web2.0? I notice the first one in the articles fragment is 365articles a PR0 with just a few thousand links.
  • Firstly you should make link wheels from known websites to be sure that they are getting indexed. And secondly, by doing link wheel, you are making only some direct backlinks for your website and many of other backlinks are not pointing to your website directly. So consider it too. How many of your backlinks pointing to your website directly?
    • [1] reply
    • This is the one process by which you can get traffic on your site very fast and it also gives you more useful backlinks then the other process.
  • Do people feel that you need to create these web 2.0 sites using unique accounts and that you should use a proxy when creating all of these accounts? How different accounts for 1 web 2.0 site do many of you have?
  • Web 2.0 sites are quite reliable for getting backlinks. It is a good source in order to gain more incoming links attached to your website.
    • [1] reply
  • I think it depends on the web 2.0 platform if the links are no follow, then chances are they will not show up
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
  • every source of backlink that you could use is important, remember this, we need to look that our link building system looks normal so for that we need to get links from different type of websites, forum, web 2.0 , bookmarking rssfeed.

    Also we need to have backlinks from different Page rank Website, Lots of backlinks from page rank 0 and a few high rank is the best way because is easier to find backlinks from low rank website.
    even the nofollow backlinks count , a link is a link, ok they add different value to our backlink system but for me the first goal it to try that my linkbuilding looks normal.
  • With blog commenting or forum profiles, you don't know if those links are going to stick around. With Web 2.0 they probably will stick around. And you can build backlinks to those sites without risk of having your efforts go down the toilet when some forum owner decides to delete you from the forum.

    The advantage of Web 2.0 is the keyword authority. You are not ranking for a hubpage related long tail on any site other than hubpages. You also get a bonus for any keywords in the web 2.0 url or any of the categories(this is great for niches like games which have long tails featuring the category name not so good for the health niche where the long tails don't feature the category keyword: how do I get better health?).

    If you can find new c-class ip's or are willing to buy several new domains that can work as well. But you might as well sign up for some just to get an easy do-follow backlink on the profile page.
  • Web 2.0 sites are reliable enough to get backlinks. It is a good source to get more inbound links to your site online.
  • Banned
    [DELETED]
  • Hy

    Newbie question:

    Can I set a link to my own website in hubpage and how I do it?
    Is there an sidebar or so in hubpage where I can set the link to my site similiar like squidoo or blogger.com?

    best wishes
    marco005
Join the discussion

Next Topics on Trending Feed

  • 60

    Backlinks from Web 2.0 Sites?

    I'm observing something that further leads me to question the validity of the linkwheel idea and the usefulness of web 2.0 sites to build backlinks. On a few of my websites I have created very basic networks of dofollow web 2.0 sites with articles and links back to my main site. When I look at backlinks to my site from either Yahoo Site Explorer or my Google Webmaster page I do not see a single link from any of the sites. These sites have been stewing for two months with little or no activity on my part. I would think that this would be plenty of time for the frequent indexing of these high PR sites to have yielded a link or two.