I'm creating dofollow backlinks at web 2.0 websites, but I believe I'm doing something wrong. Here is what I'm doing:

  • Have only one anchor text method, for example, right in the beginning of the article I insert:

In this article, written by anchortext1, a website about x-anchortext2 and y-anchortext3, you'll learn the importance of anchortext4building an online strategyanchortext4.

All links are pointing to the homepage.

So should I use the same anchor texts always? Is there any problem if I point all the backlinks to the website's homepage?

So running across the web I found two resources:

The moving man strategy http://backlinko.com/high-quality-backlinks

Multiple strategies http://hitreach.co.uk/blog/build-links-by-helping

Can I use those methods? Are they guaranteed? Are there other proven strategies to build links?


3 Answers 3


Oh absolutely not!

Creating web 2.0 links are limited in value these days with the preference being squarely in the corner of organic links. If you are making web 2.0 links, then they should be more organic in appearance. Link tactics these days revolve around conversational links within content if possible. It is okay to create a "by line" link and any other similar link of course. However, links should not follow a pattern and be so identical in link text as to become suspicious to any search engine. Any link, with the exception of standards within the publishing trade such as the by line mentioned above, should appear as if someone other than yourself wrote them when possible. The best links are the ones you did not create of course. If you follow a pattern, you may be running a risk that will be hard to correct later on. Also keep in mind that a carp load (think fishing vessel) of links to your home page does you little and is highly suspicious. Deep links to pages are the best links you can have.

As well, I am a firm believer natural writings and creating content for humans. This is highly preferred by search engines especially Google. If you creating titles with links in them, this may be suspicious and not a normal course. A title can be a link of course when creating a snippet and linking to the article. In fact, this is recommended. However, think of keeping the page or site simple and create it as if you were not looking for credit or trying to manipulate any search engine. From there, you can do your on-page and off-page SEO work. But keep it simple and traditional. Do not get cute with any SEO B.S. (bachelor of science not the other stuff). Do not follow the SEO silliness on many of the sites you see. It is just plain garbage. Do not over-think the process. You will be rewarded for it. Really.

  • Hm... Here is what I'm doing: - Create an account on a web 2.0 website, like blogger.com, then write an article, but in the second line of the article I insert something like that text from before. The article is always unique, but I always insert those same 3 backlinks after the second line. Got it? By the way, I don't link the title. So is my method still bad? Commented Oct 3, 2014 at 3:38
  • Except that the links are the same or similar and point to the same location. These links get automatically discounted when discovered as being unnatural and too many of them will actually get you a penalty that is extremely difficult to remove. Think Average Joe not SEO.
    – closetnoc
    Commented Oct 3, 2014 at 3:47
  • I wrote 5 articles already, all of them have the same links.... Commented Oct 3, 2014 at 3:49
  • 5 won't get you into any trouble. Just find more traditional ways of creating links. BTW- if you are busy writing articles on blogs, it would be best to create an about author page on your site and sign up for Google+ with your name as you use it in any by line. This is a good way of being able to create similar links that DO count. Just link your Google+ account to your about author page and create your by line links to the same page. This works wonders for SEO if you are looking for a boost.
    – closetnoc
    Commented Oct 3, 2014 at 3:56

Links need to look natural and using the same anchor text, over and over again, will be treated as over-optimization. Look back on any organic backlinks that you've attained in the past and you'll see the following:

Anchor text contains your website name / brand name. For example:

Something something something, as 
explained on <a href="http://stackoverflow.com/page.html">StackOverflow.com</a>.

Stop words and phrases such as "this", "click here", "this post" and "here". Example:

Do not do X and Y, as explained <a href="http://example.com">here</a>.

Anchor text contains the link itself (common on forums, etc, where people just copy and past links, which are automatically parsed):

<a href="http://test.com/post.php?id=2">http://test.com/post.php?id=2</a>


In case you didn't know, it is a 
<a href="http://test.com/test.html">bad idea to use the mysql_* extension</a>

Another thing about most natural backlinks is that they are related to the subject that is being discussed. i.e. Why would a regular blog author link to something about "Ant Killer Products" on a blog post that is about football?

PS: Guest blogging is going the way of the Dodo. A lot of websites have been penalized for this in the past.

  • 2
    Guest blogging does not get you penalized. Doing stupid stuff like unnatural linking and duplicate content gets you penalized. Blogging is still very much fine certainly because it is well within the confines of normal web stuff. I would not recommend it however, unless you too are running a blog yourself. With caveats of course. I prefer to recommend creating content that bloggers like to link to.
    – closetnoc
    Commented Oct 3, 2014 at 13:19
  • Wexford, guest blogging can penalize you only if the website where you're creating it gets penalized for Links Farm, also, your links need to be dofollow. Commented Oct 3, 2014 at 13:33
  • @randomguy523 I know, but it's a pretty risky thing to do. Plenty of people get penalized months (or years) down the line. Those sites might be OK now - But what's to say that they will still be OK in 12 months time?
    – Wexford
    Commented Oct 3, 2014 at 14:39
  • Yeah, you're right. Commented Oct 3, 2014 at 15:02

The real question is, what anchor text are you using? If you are using branded phrases and their variations as anchor text, you are safe. If you're using money keywords, then be cautious as there have been thousands of websites penalized under the wrath of Google'e Penguin update, most of them because of "anchor text over-optimization", using same anchor text (money phrases) for a large number of times.

A few things to consider here while you're building these web 2.0 links:

  1. A newly created blogger.com property with one unique article wouldn't have much link juice to pass on to your money site, unless that unique piece of content goes viral and you get sh&t load of links pointing to your blogger.com site. Oh, and in case you're really writing content that can go viral and drive links, you should actually be posting it on your money site, not on any 3rd party site.
  2. Initially, when you link to your money site from this not so highly authoritative site, you are doing nothing but creating a bunch of links from sites that have little to no authority. Easy to identify it as a link network, post penguin.
  3. Instead, you might want to create some authority on these sites, and then link to your money site, passing some link value.

In general when you're building links, look at the complete link profile, not individual links. Google will consider your complete link profile while giving you credibility, authority, rankings, etc. Building a few links here and there with whatever anchor text wouldn't matter much. What really matters is what % of your overall links that have the exact anchor text or close variations.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.