you h ave to include those links into your article body and use your keywords as an anchor text so you get higer position for your site when google will indexed all your articles...

Originally Posted by chrishirst

http://www.highrankings.com/no-seo-articles-294

Chrishirst, thanks for your link to the “Just Say No to SEO Articles!”. It is always interesting to read another person view on something you are doing.
The strange thing is this though: Google has found only about 10% of the links that my (very substantial) article posting effort has so far created (85 articles at 30 sites, most with 2 links = 5100 links) and I can already see very positive results:

In the most important keywords I have moved up from the abyss (beyond the 2 – 3 page) to almost on the 1st page. This I am getting from Google Webmasters Tools.

For the “long-tail” keywords, I am getting a few hundred extra hits a month that I was not getting before. This I am seeing on Google Analytics.
This alone would not really warrant the major time I have put into this way of doing article building, but as I said, Google has only seen 10% or so of my links so far. I am hoping for better things to come.

The problem with SEO guides for newbie’s is this:

1. So called experts 99% of the time use sarcasm instead of statistics or referenced sources to invalidate persistent rumors of ways to get links in order to move up on Google’s search results. Sarcasm is the least convincing form of argument for me so I never feel guided.
   
2. These guides often just conclude with two words: quality content. But ignore the fact that you need to build links in the beginning to get people to see that content in the first place. Furthermore, I don’t see why Google would hate articles (for example). Why would not links from articles be seen as beneficial? From my own tests they certainly seem like they are.

Finally, I want to ask this question: Why does almost everyone put links with keyword style anchor texts in their signatures if rubbish links don’t matter? Why “say no to articles” but “yes to unrelated forum posts signatures”? – how can the latter possibly matter more than the former? For example: an article about crowd control must surely matter a great deal more in terms of relevance than a forum post?

Even more finally: I am not trying to sell something related to articles! I just feel strongly on the subject

For example: an article about crowd control must surely matter a great deal more in terms of relevance than a forum post?

Certainly, BUT only ONE and published on you own site.

BTW the site in question and the associated sig links are currently kept up purely for experimental purposes, 30,000 + sig links and still no Google first page and no SE referrals for that phrase.
Gets a lot of referrals from this forum though and THAT is the real value of links of ALL KINDS, to get qualified traffic.

Articles should be used to promote YOU as being knowledgeable about a topic, and by posting them to "article sites" you are simply giving your work away to every clueless numptie out there.
http://www.modtalk.co.uk/article/c-a...e-directories/

Use many article sources it is better to use few like ezine, hubpages, squidoo.