Which kind of inbound link do you prefer?

[cangoou]

Imagin you have the offer to get links from another domain which has another theme then your domain. You are free to set the link(s) where you like. What kind of link would you choose? Would you prefer a simple text-link on every page? Or would you write text for a whole new subpage with a link in it? What about a small paragrah on every page with the link in it? And what about a combination? Any other ideas?

[nizlernet]

Anytime you can get links throughout content its always better.

[cangoou]

Thanks for your reply. I thought that it was so, but what about one link on a whole page with the same topic compared to a side-wide link in a small paragraph with the same topic for example?

[nizlernet]

A single link on a page is good especially if the site is 100% clean from spammy stuff, the domain is aged, the dns history hasnt been changed much. Yahoo likes sitewide links, google doesnt mind and MSN also likes sitewide.

[Pico_Train]

Google does mind sitewides.

[nizlernet]

Not sure what ye mean buddy, blogrolls are a great way to generate free links... Try it for yourself.

[pageoneresults]

What kind of link would you choose?

The one that I don't have to ask for. :)

Or would you write text for a whole new subpage with a link in it?

I like that one.

And then, combine natural internal linking to your subpage which then links out to your site conservatively.

[Pico_Train]

Anytime you can get links throughout content its always better.

A blogroll link is not a content link.

If your "colleague"'s site has a link to your site, on every page of his site, using the same anchor text, that's not good. That's what I mean.

A blogroll is one thing, a sitewide is a different story.

Links can do 2 things, give you a boost in results or give you traffic. Both is great, traffic is great, a boost in results is great but when they do neither, get rid of 'em!

I had a sitewide pointing to me, asked the guy to remove it and rankings improved. It was a not a bad neighbourhood...

[edited by: Pico_Train at 6:55 pm (utc) on Jan. 31, 2008]

[nizlernet]

Still dont know what ye mean any link is a good link if someone is willing to drop a link to your site I would accept it and take it as a compliment. Depending on the size of your site, if its a small site with not much trust in the serps and there is a link pointing to you from a very spammy domain with tons of outgoing links than i might be a little worried and email the girl/guy, but for the most part more links the better.

[nizlernet]

A blog roll link isnt inside content but its still considered sitewide, and we had a client once and the only link was from a sidewide blog. The anchor text from that blog was what they were ranking for in yahoo. Google doesnt favor blogroll links but they also dont dislike them and they wont ban you or punish you for blogroll.

[steveb]

"that's not good."

Of course it is. A sitewide link is far superior to a single link. All a sitewide link on 1000 pages is, is not 1000x greater than the single link.

Dmoz links to Wikipedia from every page. Matt Cutts links to Wordpress from every page. The idea that this is "not good" is absurd.

"A blogroll is one thing, a sitewide is a different story."

Not sure where you are getting your definitions, but they are exactly the same thing.

[Pico_Train]

A sitewide is not necessarily better than a single link, I know from experience as quoted above.

A sitewide could be in the content, a blogroll is in the nav, two different things, indeed.

[CainIV]

A blogroll is one thing, a sitewide is a different story.

Same thing

I've gotten lots of site wide links from websites, and have never seen it hurt any of my rankings. Perhaps the important part is developing Trust first. I can't say with any certainly that there was substantial extra value, but it might stand to reason that the extra spidering and pagerank associated would help with rankings.