I read a post somewhere on DP few days back, that Google considers sitewides as a single link. I have noticed recently that sites that had been pushed up by signatures on forums etc are losing their positions in search results (Google). Do SEs (especially) Google discount signatures, sitewides and mulitple links from the same domain as a single links (or gives less weight) ? If it is true, is it a recent phenomenon or has been so for a long time? (In case of MSN , the absolute number of links seems to be the only factor).
It makes sense that Google would lessen the significance of sitewide or signature links as they are less likely to indicate that a site is "casting a vote" (in a PR sense) for the target site than links that are incorporated into the primary content of a page. A link that is persistent on all pages (ie. footer links) tend to be there purely for ranking purposes and Google knows it. Conversely, links that are embedded in the primary content on a page and make a contribution to the meaning of the page are likely given more weight. The same logic applies to signature links. Typically, a signature link is just out there on an island. It doesn't have much supporting content around it and it doesn't necessarily fit with the subject of the page. Naturally, Google doesn't want to give as much weight to a link like this as it is once again not a quality vote for the target site.
This will ruine some people plans of link building i'm so glad that i build links only in the "natural" way
isnt the 'natural' way where links build themselves? therefore no link building campaign at all could be considered 'natural'.