WordPress Plugin Backlinks?
-
I'm considering having a WordPress plugin developed that would provide content from my site for others to display in their sidebar. It would definitely provide value for users and I know people would use it on their sites, but my question is . . .
If I were to add my link below the widget (e.g. "Content provided by Company ABC"), would this be good or bad for SEO? The anchor text wouldn't be anything special, just an exact match of my brand name (my domain name).
I seem to remember Matt Cutts answering something similar a few years ago and I thought he said it was fine as long as the anchor text was the brand name. But maybe things have changed since then.
Keep in mind that this plugin could potentially be used by tens of thousands of sites, so the backlink profile could be huge.
Thoughts? Would this cause my site to get penalized?
-
I do not think you would get much benefit from this. Your link profile would probably get all kinds of messy. And what if a bunch of poor quality sites start using that plugin and you end up having links on malicious, porn, poker, or other bad sites?
Plugin links and template footer links should be avoided now in my opinion
-
It sounds like one of two things will happen given your explanation. Either the links will count because they are relevant. Or Google will decide not to count them because of their nature as an embedded widget link. I don't see this hurting you currently though with the way Google handles these things since its not a necessarily spammy link and its not hidden deep in some code somewhere trying to trick people.
-
Thanks for the video, Mike. After watching it, I'm still a bit confused. He specifically addresses high keyword density anchor text in this video. And he talks more along the lines of themes and such that don't really offer any content value.
I'm thinking that since I'm only using my brand name as the anchor text, and that I'm providing content on other sites that is directly related to what I offer on my own site . . . that should be enough for Google to accept it as white hat. Because in the end, I would be getting targeted clicks from this widget . . . and hasn't that always been Google's philosophy? If it's bringing you targeted traffic, then it's white hat.
Or maybe I'm just trying to convince myself that it's a good idea? In the end, all that matters is whether Google penalizes me for it . . . not how useful I believe it to be.
-
The Matt Cutts video you're thinking of might be this one from Oct 2012.... Wherein he basically says the algorithm won't count those links because they aren't editorially included and aren't truly organic.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Anyone backlinks from hacked FaceBook widgets?
I was going through my backlink profile the other day and started noticing a huge number of new back links, like 100k. Digging through them, I am seeing a lot of links that are inserted in Facebook feed widgets. You will see the link at the bottom of the widget. From what I can see, a lot of these links are all in this format, all on European domains, all running WordPress. Doesn't seem to have anything do to spamminess. Had domains that were on blacklists, some not. Anyone seen anything like this before? The only thing I can think of was maybe an automated hack bot that inserted the link when it was able to get in? E0OMJfi.jpg
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | ShockoeCommerce0 -
Search Console Incorrectly Identifies WordPress Version and Recommends Update
Howdy, Moz fans, Today I received four emails from Google Search Console recommending I update WordPress. The message reads, "Google has detected that your site is currently running WordPress 3.3.1, an older version of WordPress. Outdated or unpatched software can be vulnerable to hacking and malware exploits that harm potential visitors to your site. Therefore, we suggest you update the software on your site as soon as possible." This is incorrect, however, since I've been on 4.3.1 for a while. 3.3.1 was never even installed since this site was created in September, 2015, so the initial WP Engine install was likely 4.3. What's interesting is that it doesn't list the root URL as the problem source. The email states that it found that issue on a URL that is set up via WP Engine to 301 to a different site, which doesn't use WordPress. I also have other redirects set up to different pages on the second site that aren't listed in the Search Console email. Anyone have any ideas as to what's causing this misidentification of WP versions? I am afraid that Google sees this as a vulnerability and is penalizing my site accordingly. Thanks in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | jmorehouse0 -
Ever seen this tactic when trying to get rid of bad backlinks?
I'm trying to get rid of a Google penalty, but one of the URLS is particularly bizarre. Here's the penalized site: http://www.travelexinsurance.com. One of the external links Google cited as not being natural that links to the penalized site is: http://content.onlineagency.com/index.aspx?site=6599&tide=769006&last=3111516 In the backlink profile of the penalized site, there are about 100 different backlinks pointing to www.travelexinsurance.com from content.onlineagency.com/... So when I visit http://content.onlineagency.com/index.aspx?site=6599&tide=769006&last=3111516 it actually is displaying content from http://www.starmandstravel.com/787115_6599.htm, which you can see after clicking the "Home" button. That company is a legit travel agency who I assume knows nothing about content.onlineagency.com and is not involved in whatever is going on. And that's the case for every link from content.onlineagency.com. So I'm just wondering if someone can help me understand what sort of tactic content.onlineagency.com is using. One of my predecessors I fear used some black hat tactics. I'm wondering if this is a remnant of that effort.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Patrick_G0 -
I have plenty of backlinks but the site does not seem to come up on Google`s first page.
My site has been jumping up and down for many months now. but it never stays on Google first page. I have plenty of back-links, shared content on social media. But what could i be doing wrong? any help will be appreciated. Content is legit. I have recently added some internal links is this might be the cause? Please help .
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | samafaq0 -
Is this traffic drop do to cutting backlinks or Penguin 2.0 (Graphs attached)
I've attached both graphs of the traffic drop. Our website rankings have been steadily declining since May of 2013. We have mostly return customers or our drop would have been much more severe. There's never been any warnings in GWT We cut a bunch (but not all) of our paid links in May of 2013. We didn't have a manual penalty or anything, we just wanted to see what happened if we moved towards being white hat. When our rankings plumited, we quit cutting links. We currently have about 30% paid links. Penguin 2.0 was May 22, 2013 In looking at these graphs, was it our cutting links that caused the traffic drop, or was it Penguin 2.0? I'm looking for people who have experience in diagnosing a "Unique Visits" Google analytics graph for Penguin and have experience with what happens when you cut links. It looks like, in viewing the graphs, that May 23 was more the day that the big drop happened, but you guys have more experience with this than me. Thank you. ga.png ga2.png
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BobGW0 -
Custom Wordpress Theme - HTML5 Outline - H1 display: none
We are using a custom wordpress theme for to help us optimize our webpages. We're trying to structure the webpages so that things are as optimized as possible for our clients. I was wondering if we could get some feedback on whether or not we using the correct page structure across the site. We have set a no-display class on the H1 so that the page title wouldn’t mess up the layout and is placed above the logo and have placed other header tags on the different page sections and added in keyword variations to avoid having untitled sections. Is equal to ? Is there a better way to structure this content? Are we not doing something that we should be or overdoing anything? I guess my main question is what would be the best way to use HTML5 to structure this website?http://estheticdentistry.net
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | projectassistant0 -
Am i getting backlink benefits from sites i design and host
I own & host over 300 domains for as many businesses. They all link back to my site from every page. but seomoz shows only hundred. so do other seo tools. why is that?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | nooptee0 -
Backlinks for the same IP address
Hi Everyone I've been doing a backlink clean up as my site has dropped quite a lot in the search engine results over the last 4 months. While doing the backlink clean up I cam e across 20 different domains all based in the Washington/ VA area all with the same IP address. To make matters worse the contents and link to my site are all duplicated. Is this seen as bad practice from Google's perspective i.e. a link network.?? I look forward to hearing you comments Many thanks Jonathan
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | JonnytheB0