How to get backlink from Signature link?

I have seen that we participate in forums and give the link in signature. There is any method to get maximum back links from forum signature?

Not really, because forum sig links are worth diddley squat in the search engines.

Might just put that in my sig :smiley:

The only effect that sig links have on SEO is indirect.

  1. Your sig link must be relevant to the forum you are posting on.
  2. The answers you are providing on the forum must be useful.
  3. Then and only then will some of the people whose questions you answered follow the sig link.
  4. The site you link to must be useful to them.
  5. Then and only then will some of them create a backlink to your site that actually does have value for SEO.

If you do, I guarantee plenty of people will read Hooperman’s quote and in their heads they’ll replace “diddley squat” with “page rank”.

I disagree, I’ve seen a number of websites rank very well, for some quite hard to rank for keywords, purely from a single forum sig, they did have a high number of posts, but being able to get a website ranking on the first page for a keyword with 80,400,000 results is quite impressive.

Prove it. Please show us an example of where a site has no links to it whatsoever apart from sig links from a forum where the sig links have affected the ranking of that page.

Seriously people, if you’re only posting for the links, I don’t want you here.
Add value to the forums or don’t bother posting.

Adding value to the forumis the ONLY way of getting any value at all from the signature links. Only when a real person sees how useful a post you have made is are they at all likely to be interested in following any link in your signature.

The best way to get SEO forums work for you is to select the right forums and keep posting relevant info in them. Unless you contribute some valuable info, you are not going to get anything in return.

So the most important thing here is to post valuable info and continue to interact with your forum friends by responding to their comments.

The most important thing to remember is to write the post with a targeted keyword phrase and build on it.

you can get back links from signature links by answering the forum question and
using hyper links.

Actually that’s not true, whether we like it or not sig links do have an impact on rankings, just not for really competitive keyword phrases.

My site ranks second on for ‘web design buxton’ which is a teeny bit competitive keyword phrase. When Sitepoint nerfed the sig links it dropped 4 places and then bounced back when I gained links from a very ‘buxton’ oriented site which was enough to give that page the relevance and the original ranking back. I was as surprised as anyone that the SP sig links were helping that ranking so much but I wouldn’t want to have a ranking that depended on them because I think Google are only going to get tougher on crap backlinks.

I’m not trying to encourage the sig link spammers by pointing out that you’re wrong but neither can I let blatantly incorrect statements go by uncontested (besides, they’d have to actually read my post and most of them don’t.). I still think an invite only/paid forum is the only way to cure sig link spam.

I’m not sure you can come to any valid conclusions simply from looking at anecdotal evidence like this. As you know, rankings fluctuate all the time, even when we do nothing to our sites. The fact that your sig links effectively got removed (in Google’s eyes) and then your rankings dropped might not be related.

I have some anecdotal evidence of my own. I have a page linked to by some sig links on another forum and the page linked doesn’t even rank for the anchor text. It’s not a competitive phrase either. The threads are indexed and do rank for the phrase but my page isn’t listed at all.

This would be an easy test to replicate if anyone wants to do it themselves. Go to a forum whose sig links are seen by search engines and use a sig link whose anchor text is unique. Make sure the anchor text relates to the linked page. When those links are indexed, search for the anchor text. If your page shows up, sig links count for something.

Maybe somebody here already has this situation setup?

When you post on the forum, there your signature appear. Google, yahoo and other search engines crawl forum websites very often, they index forum page and you get a backlink.

Your sig link must be relevant to the forum you are posting on. - Felgall please explain this.

That doesn’t mean the sig link is worth anything though.

If you have a page about dog training, links from other dog training websites count more than links from Forex websites (all else being equal). The linking page should be relevant to the linked page to get the most value.

Why are you using the word ‘anecdotal’? What I said isn’t hearsay I experienced it myself, and I’d like to think that the veracity of my comments isn’t in doubt.

This ranking had been No 2 for a long time, then SP nerfed the sig links and it dropped 4 places, this happened at the exact time the sig links were hidden and I know that because it was the reason I checked the ranking and I also noticed that about 2.5k links had vanished from the total links pointing to that page. That was my post count at the time. It could have been slight random blip in my ranking but that’s unlikely because of the timing and the link count evidence and because it’s never happened before.

Then I got a significant number of good quality backlinks from the ‘visit buxton’ website which ranks number one for the word buxton and my page went back to number 2. Enough to beat everyone except the guy who ranks number one who is a colleague of mine which is why I’ve never tried to beat his ranking.

How much evidence would be enough to determine that there is a connection in your view?

If the page isn’t indexed then how is it relevant to a discussion about how sig links affect ranking? Get it indexed then let’s have a look at how the sig links might be helping it or not. If by 'isn’t listed’ you meant that it’s indexed but not ranking then post it, I’d like to have a look at it.

Now that’s an interesting issue and one I’ve been discussing with Felgall. I would have agreed with you till recently but some very knowledgeable SEOs have been saying that they’d take a link from an authoratitive site over a link from a non-authoratitive context related site and now I’m doubting my commitment to the ‘relevance is everything’ argument. I’m back on the fence until I can test this for myself.

Anecdotal evidence: “Evidence, which may itself be true and verifiable, used to deduce a conclusion which does not follow from it”.

Yes, the sig links got removed and yes your rankings suffered. That the ranking change was caused by the sig links being removed doesn’t necessarily follow.

I had a similar experience when I removed my sig links from SP, however the pages on my site started ranking higher. It would be just as invalid of me to conclude that those sig links were holding my site back. Changing something and seeing what happens isn’t a valid test. You need to isolate the variables being changed and keep everything else constant, and as usual you can’t do that with the search engines.

I probably didn’t explain myself properly. My page is indexed, and does appear in the SERPs for other searches. It doesn’t appear for the search phrase in the sig link anchor text. Maybe I’ve missed something though. But I’m obviously going mad as I can now see my page listed for that phrase! I’ll do some more checking.

If you could use some unique anchor text in a sig link to one of your pages where the page later shows up for that phrase, that would be a good test. :slight_smile:

I would, but I’ve invalidated my testing! bolx.

My evidence isn’t anecdotal, it’s a perfectly reasonable conclusion that I’ve drawn and the only counter to it so far is ‘you don’t know for sure, it could have been something else’, which is not really a reasonable position unless the ‘something else’ can be identifed and attributing the movement to some random dip in rankings is actually harder to prove as a cause than what I think happened. It’s also never happened before, another reason to believe that it wasn’t a random movement.

I think the variables were about as isolated as can be on a search engine. It’s not a very competitive phrase, none of the other pages that rank for it changed their positions except relative to mine Nothing changed on my page, there wasn’t a Google dance going on or a PR update. The only thing that changed was the SP links getting nerfed. The timing, the number of links that vanished from my IBL count, everything points to that being the cause of the ranking drop.

Whilst nothing is ever definite there are also times when there is enough evidence to suggest that one thing is directly related to another and I think this was one of those situations. The alternative relies on too many co-incidences to be a likely explanation.

Let’s test it.

Your sig links had their value removed - true and verifiable.
Your rankings dropped - true and verifiable (well, at the time it may have been, but I trust you anyway).

That the rankings drop was caused by the removal of those sig links is not verifiable. That’s as anecdotal as it gets. I go outside and it starts raining, therefore I can make it rain. The two events are verifiable but it doesn’t follow that they are linked.

The algo could have been tweaked during the time you saw the rankings drop. The data set the algo was processing might have been drastically different (or even a little different). All the factors that are considered are constantly changing and nothing remains the same. You can’t guarantee that the sig links were the only thing that changed. You might have a strong suspicion, but that’s not the same.

Now you’re talking. I have it on good authority that Felgall will eat his own head if you’re right.