Back Links?

I have ready so many different opinions on all of the different aspects of SEO that my head sometimes spins for days. The basics are always the same however: content, site architecture, backlinks. If you have all of those in place, you'll be good.

As for which links are good: all of them. Every link you can get to your site is a good link. The more the merrier.

Where should you get them from: everywhere you can. From blogs, to forums, social media sites, competitor's websites, other pages of your sites, directories, article sites, etc. They are all good.

Some are better than others (like if you could get yourself mentioned in a news article or somehow get a link from a .edu or .gov site), but they are all valuable.

If it were me, I'd focus on making the content on your site good and making sure you're getting as many different links from as many different types of websites as possible.
 
I have heard mixed comments about links from .edu sites. Mr. Cutts says they aren't worth any more than a .com site. Of course, many .edu sites are quite authoritative and respected which I suppose makes them quite attractive.

AVD knows. I guess I should ask them. They are huge!
 
Sometimes I wonder how much he (Matt Cutts) says is actually meant to help and how much is meant to make us run around in circles second guessing everything...

I have also heard that he said that about .edu sites... though I would still take a link from one of those over a .com site with similar pagerank anyday
 
I think the quality of your backlinks is very important.
True

and always find dofollow backlinks
In contrast with the above, this is not too true.

A nofollowed link from an relevant authority site is much more important that a dofollow link from a linkfarm.

Val.
 
How are the ezine back links? Or the other article publishing sites? I haven't spent much time on any of them, mostly working on content for my site.

Also, a friend of mine mentioned adding comments to blogs and websites.

This is all foreign to me!
 
Back
Top