I am trying to comprehend how relevant backlinks improve page rank compared to "non relevant" In my case I have been a contributor to a number of music forums for many years and some less ,so I understand they can give exposure to others and help with traffic but what is the tehcnical reason that a signature link for example would work better on a relevant forum/article than a link on site called.. i.e. all the w's makemillionsofpoundsdoingthingsforum.com (PS it's not a real URL) lol
well its releative to the search engines and differs between them. In general google is constantly usiin data and formulas to decide how important a site is and what its relevant too. links from important sites help you, links from important + relevant sites help you more. not sure how they do it but they proport it
Relevant, merit based links are better, end of story really. If you do things correctly, or from a brand based perspective, you will do much better. If done correctly you can do with 5 links what dimwits from the services section of DP do with 1000 of them. Not kidding either. Note: You want to contact folks or build links with sites in what are called vertical or complimentary markets. Folks get this wrong all the time. You don't contact you competitors to swap links. Although I suspect 99.9 percent of digital point users do so lol.. hope that helps. Nigel
I have some research in my possession that answers this question pretty definitively. However, I'm interested in knowing why prev posters think relevancy is irrelevant -)
For me, If I have a blog for making money then I try to getting from the same theme. I don't like to getting link from game website. Because there are no relationship between my and in game site.
A link is just a link. What is important is the anchor text you use and how long your link stays in place and remains indexed. Relevancy has more to do with traffic than serp's