Is widgetbait no longer valid at all according to the new quality guidelines?

[MarieHaynes]

Thanks Marcus.  I see your points.

It's getting so hard to get good links these days!

[eyepaq]

But you can still develop and use them - it can still bring a lot of referral traffic if the item is really good.

[SEOAndy]

I'm interested to know more now. The thing is though, if the person did embed this widget to their site, it is not fair that the creator of the widget can let people know that he created it? Just as with a web design company putting "Designed by X" on the bottom of the website?

Or do I have the wrong end of the stick on this one?

[William.Lau]

I agree, this is probably the best option to get referral.

As in generating link juice, it is probably not a good idea. If a bulk of your links are from these links, it is highly possible that you will get penalized.

If you can get sites to put the widget on a dedicated page, that would be good...but most widgets probably don't have that option.

[RyanKent]

I agree with eyepaq. You can still create the great widgets and ASK for a link from those who use your widget. You can even track those who use your widget and reach out and contact those who do not provide a link and make a personal link request.

[William.Lau]

It is uses 'powered by example.com', although actual URL is extremely natural, if your anchor text is not proportionate and lets say sitewide widget links are 80-95% of your links, Google will penalize you.

Problem with widgets are they are sitewide, so lots of time it will create LOTS and LOTS of links.

Refer to: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-wpmuorg-recovered-from-the-penguin-update

[RyanKent]

You used the perfect example Simon. One of the first things SEOs recognized after Penguin is many sites were affected for having the site wide footer link from the web designer / seo.

Once again, editorial links are desired. You are welcome to add other links with the "nofollow" attribute as you deem fit.

[MarieHaynes]

Oh...I like that idea.  So, produce the widget, make it available to webmasters and then say, "If you like this widget please consider linking to our site."  That way the text of those linking is likely to be slightly different (i.e. some may say, "Via example.com" and others may say "Thanks to example.com for this tool" etc.

[RyanKent]

EXACTLY!

And as an extra measure, your widget will need updates, right? Whenever someone installs your widget or it updates, your software should capture the URL of the hosting site. That enables you to view the widget on the site and examine the provided link.

If someone is using your widget but did not provide a link, you can politely make a second request to the site owner.

[Fatwallet]

There's a lot of gray area in the widget scene.

Not all of the widget links will be considered bad - it's all about relevancy and noise.

If the site is about cars, and the widget is a car insurance comparison calculator, a link forced in the widget will likely still carry value (or at least, not bring negative value) if it's a 'car insurance' link and leading to a trusted source.

If the site is about cars and the widget is about car insurance but the link is a graphic design link, it's going to get scrapped.

[JustDucky]

Marie & All - Excellent Discussion.  I've been very concerned about site wide use of widgets and inbound links from penalized sites.  I've been considering developing widgets and licensing them out to particular sites with the restrictions that :  the widget appear only on one page (such as a blog post).  Since the underlying data would require periodic  updates, I could build in an "out of date" statement in case someone hijacks it to a spammy site or an authorized user doesn't listen and installs it site wide.   I view this implementation of widgets as more analogous to guest blogging than developer's site wide footer links.  Providing people I've had contact with a plug in for their specific locales should result in links without much asking.  So long as the anchor text is selected by the site owners (who are even encouraged to use the URL if they ask), I view this as less risky than the web developer's site wide footer links.   Am I still missing something important  / risky?   Thoughts ?

[RyanKent]

I don't feel you need to go to this extreme. The concern Google has is whether links are being authentically offered, or whether the target site owner is manipulating the process.

If a webmaster decides on their own to add your widget to their site, and they freely add anchor text of their choosing, then if it had an appropriate reason for being added site wide, it would not be a concern. For example, if you created a mortgage calculator widget which displayed on every page of a real estate site which showed a listing to a home, that should be fine. Even if the site operator placed a link such as "Mortgage calculator by abc.com" that should be absolutely fine as well. There is no manipulation from the target site.

[JustDucky]

Ryan - Thanks for the quick reply.   Soooo, I am overly concerned about strangers who own "spammy" sites taking the widget and putting it site wide on their spammy mortgage sites ?   After what some of the developers went through, I'm concerned about Penguin or its future mutations.

[RyanKent]

How likely is it that someone who runs a spammy site will freely link to your site? Even if one or two site owners take such an action, it is unlikely to spread.

It is good that you are improving your awareness related to links to your site. If you are a legitimate site owner earning natural links, you have nothing to fear from Penguin or Google.