Everyone thinks differently, and especially on the topic of linking there are some big differences of opinion. One of the areas disagreed on is whether it's important to have links from sites or pages that are on topic. Some people even flat out refuse to link to or exchange links with sites that aren't on topic.

There are more - but let's say there are 4 factors we look at first thing regarding getting links from or exchanging links with a site (assuming there's no penalty or funny stuff on the site):

1. Total number of links to our site - sheer numbers
2. Anchor text
3. Page Rank - a mathematical value
4. Topic of the other site, particularly the page the link to us will be on

Let's dispense with #1 first - the numbers are important; the more the merrier. There are people with top rankings in some highly competitive markets that some other people won't even go near - and they can crank out maybe 50K inbound links in a week or two. That's numbers in action. There are other things too, but if the numbers didn't count they wouldn't bother.

Then #2 - we know anchor text is important, there's no disputing there.

That leaves Page Rank and the issue of being "on topic." As a very general rule of thumb, let's say PR will often go down by increments the number of clicks away from the homepage.

So figure a homepage is PR5, it links to the "index" page of a link directory, which we can assume is PR4 for our purposes, and from that index page there are links to the categories, on topic, where the pages are PR3 - or maybe PR2.

Which do you think is better, to have a link from a directory category page 2 clicks away from the homepage from an "on-topic" site that's PR3 or PR2, or from an off-topic link page one click away from the homepage that's PR4?

Which do you think is more important, the topical relationship or the PR?

right now I would say pagerank...going forward that will likely flip though.

Since I don't care what the little green bar says, I voted for "On topic PR3 or PR2 page" because I am more likely to get some ROI from a user that has the same interests in mind when comming to my site since he is coming from the same topic.

Thats just my humble opinion.

Whenever I'm asked this "either or" question, I always reply "Get both!".

Google seems to work on values that are both qualitative and quantitative - so there are advantages to both methods used with a little consideration.

However, IMO the question over-simplifies more complex issues - I do not see links as having blanket values according to PageRank or topic. Also, Google has changed quite a bit over the past couple of years, so it would be dangerous to work in terms of trying to decide today's absolutes, when tomorrow's could be very different.

The bottom line in SEO seems to be: if you can personally see value in getting any particular link, then go for it. But everybody's motivations will be different.

I never bought into the PageRank metric or care about this link model as is full of theoretical fallacies.

I would say Be On-Topic and Stay On-Topic. However, one or few off-topic links here and there won't hurt that much. Add links only if you think is of value to visitors and your revenue model. My two centavos (cents).

Orion

"On-topic" is almost certainly a pink elephant in many instances, anyway. Off-topic linkage is a fundamental aspect of connectivity, and in most instances is certainly counted. The question is one of degrees.

Marcia,

1. How can one know what a page's 'true' PR is? Certainly I am not alone here in saying that the green bar is really not the true measure of PR.

2. How can one get 50,000 links in a week or two without crossing into the border of spamming? Furthermore, won't so many IBL's trigger a red flag?

Thanks!

Hey Marcia nice poll! never saw this before I'm glad promedia resurected it. Of course I voted "On topic."

btw...getting 50k links within a couple weeks cannot be defined as anything but spamming. BIG RED FLAGS IMO

also, Pagerank should be used as a guide, not a directive.

2 centimes

Thanks Boggs! I was about to go on eBay and buy a 50,000 links package - J/K :)

What is your opinion on the number of pages a site has indexed as a metric to determine a single page's quality?

Another conviction On-Topicalist, getting increasingly interested in on-page position though ;-)

Thanks Boggs! I was about to go on eBay and buy a 50,000 links package - J/K :)

What is your opinion on the number of pages a site has indexed as a metric to determine a single page's quality?

To be honest, I had never considered that as a factor in determining a site's linking charisma. Perhaps I should look into that. ;)

Could be a factor, but I kind of doubt it would figure in the ranking algorithms. However, the more pages a site has indexed, the more likely someone would find the site, and thus the more likely that someone would click on your link. Other thoughts on this?

*What is your opinion on the number of pages a site has indexed as a metric to determine a single page's quality?*

If informational possibly significant, if commercial, not ;-)