homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 107.21.135.68
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
Forum Library, Charter, Moderator: open

Google News Archive Forum

This 214 message thread spans 8 pages: < < 214 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 > >     
Update? Backlinks updated
Yahoo 1,100,000
steveb




msg:110824
 8:38 am on Aug 8, 2003 (gmt 0)

No new page rank tho.

<edit... there is new pagerank. -fi and -cw seem to be leading the way.>

[edited by: steveb at 9:18 am (utc) on Aug. 8, 2003]

 

msr986




msg:111004
 2:38 am on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)

It is hard to say when GG will get to showing your back links. Conventional thinking would suggest that you must wait for the next update. Updates used to happen approximately once every month. After the last "update", something has changed. No one can say for sure how and when your back links will come in. At this time, some of the data centers are showing more back links for some sites. Maybe this is an indication that some sort of update is right around the corner.

Hang in there.

echo1573




msg:111005
 6:18 am on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)

yes,my website has the same question,i think probably google doesnt think much of backlinks really!

onfire




msg:111006
 10:33 am on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)

I have a new site, it went up in April, and i added a few links which brought the GBOT running and it has been a regular visitor since.

Then June 15th we saw an Update and my site was showing only 3 backlinks out of a possible 12 (all vary in PR etc)

Then i got a DMOZ listing, and it was not until last week that google decided to see this and now we show with a CAT, but it was still not showing up in the backlinks.

However yesterday after doing the usual checks, i noticed that my backlinks being shown had increased from 3 to 10, with 4 of these being internal, and at last it was showing the ODP link.

But PR is still 0 (white)

However i am still not quite sure what's going on as it seems to be that not all DCs have this new data, because 8 times out of 10 it will just show the original 3 and then sometimes the new count of 10.

(i know not many but they are enough for me as its quality not quantity that really counts)

But checking with www-cw it shows the new count of all 10

So will there also be an update of PR soon as well, now that the Backlinks issue seems like its being sorted/fixed?

steveb




msg:111007
 7:40 pm on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)

PR has been updated on -cw for a couple days.

worker




msg:111008
 8:05 pm on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)

Has the new PR propogated out to the toolbar yet, or do you have to do the toolbar query gymnastics to figure it out?

I thought that maybe it had, and that my sites aren't showing a change...but I'm hoping the new PR isn't showing in the toolbar yet.

Anyone know?

AthlonInside




msg:111009
 8:17 pm on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)

> PR has been updated on -cw for a couple days.

and GV and IN

hetzeld




msg:111010
 8:47 pm on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)

> Has the new PR propogated out to the toolbar yet, or do you have to do the toolbar query gymnastics to figure it out?

You need the "gymnastics" if you want the PR show for 100% of the pages you're visiting.
Otherwise, you'll face the round-robin feature and have the new PR once in a while.

Dan

allanp73




msg:111011
 8:59 pm on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)

Does this mean that Google will not be hiding backlinks and pr in the future? I was beginning to believe that it was phasing these out in order to discourage SEOs.

wordy




msg:111012
 9:26 pm on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)

When you say PR has been updated on -cw etc., how can you see it in the toolbar?

FleaPit




msg:111013
 10:29 pm on Aug 12, 2003 (gmt 0)

Backlinks may have been included and PR may have been updated somewhat but not all backlinks have had their PR contribution factored into this PR update. I have a few sites with some nice juicy PR links which show in backlinks but the PR has yet to increase. Next update I am hoping to see the effect a PR8 link has on a PR3 site!

Gus_R




msg:111014
 1:10 am on Aug 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

wordy, add in your host file this line:

216.239.57.104 toolbarqueries.google.com

It's located at \windows\system32\drivers\etc\host on w2k/xp, for w9x somewhere.
Replace ip for the datacenter you want to point and restart IE after change.

Gus

sit2510




msg:111015
 6:56 am on Aug 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

>>> Next update I am hoping to see the effect a PR8 link has on a PR3 site!

Fleapit, I bet you can surely expect to see the backlink of that PR8 in the next update, provided your link can be found in the G cache for that page.

Since June, I see a few similar instances like yours that not all the quality links that you got and crawled in that cycle would show up in the coming update, but do show up in the next one instead. A few links I got in May (although appear in cache) did not appear in June link update while others did - but these links were not missing and added in this August. Same happening seems to repeat itself for some links I got in July - being crawled and cached, but not seen in August update.

hetzeld




msg:111016
 7:26 am on Aug 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

For the sites I'm monitoring, the new backlinks show on:
www-ab
www-cw
www-gv
www-in
www-sj
www-zu

The new PR value is visible on:
www-cw
www-gv
www-ab
www-zu

Dan

wordy




msg:111017
 1:38 pm on Aug 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

Gus_R

Thanks for your post!

risto




msg:111018
 8:17 pm on Aug 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

Host file in w9x is located in: \windows\hosts.sam

juniperwasting




msg:111019
 8:28 pm on Aug 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

Delighted to say that www has given me back 50 of the 70 backlinks it dropped, and boosted my PR back to normal.

My rankings were never all that effected during these shake ups, not sure why. I have seen others in my main competition SERPs bounce like basketballs.

LogicMan




msg:111020
 9:32 pm on Aug 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

Backlinks on one of my pages is now back in the March 12th to April 11th timeframe. I don't change links that often so it is hard to tell if backlinks are current or not but I just noticed one that I haven't had for a while so I looked at my notes.

That link was added on March 12th and then removed on April 11th. Why has Google gone back to showing it? If this is the continuous update, forget progress and go back to the monthly updates again.

lbobke




msg:111021
 3:23 am on Aug 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

Minutes ago, I had 151 backlinks, now the grand total is down to 0.
I hope this is just a passing problem...

Laurenz

takagi




msg:111022
 4:00 am on Aug 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

Now va and dc are updated as well, so fi and ex are the last 2 DCs with old data.

Dolemite




msg:111023
 4:15 am on Aug 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

> Now va and dc are updated as well, so fi and ex are the last 2 DCs with old data.

Odd that the first 2 DCs to switch in the last update are the last to switch in this one. I'd like to say that I understood the symmetry there, but I don't.

promis




msg:111024
 5:17 am on Aug 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

Now all data centers are updated. Has been the shortest Google Dance ever?

claus




msg:111025
 1:22 pm on Aug 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

risto:
>> file in w9x is located in: \windows\hosts.sam

You'll need to remove the ".sam" ("sample") suffix for the host file to work - it's just "hosts", no extension.

/claus

hetzeld




msg:111026
 1:36 pm on Aug 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

Even if all datacenters are showing the "new" backlinks, there is surely some PR adjustments to expect.
A lot of sites are still showing PR0 or even a grey bar.

For example Google France has a grey bar [google.fr...] (that isn't a penalty, for sure)

So, unless GoogleGuy publicly confesses he doesn't like frenchies and this grey bar is deliberate, there is still some PR changes to expect. :)

Dan

michael heraghty




msg:111027
 10:05 am on Aug 15, 2003 (gmt 0)

Okay, I know that for a long time we've been hearing about rolling updates, PR on toolbar not being reliable, etc.

But I've seen more fluctuation in recent days than I have previous seen over weekly, even monthly periods.

Some of the things I'm noticing:

-- An awful lot of page, with varying PRs, suddenly showing as "not ranked by Google"

-- keyword1 keyword2 has #1 position one day, nowhere to be seen the next

-- keyword1 keyword2 is nowhere to be seen one day, is on first page the next

While, overall, I would say that the recent changes have been favourable, this all makes it difficult for me to report to my clients.

When I tell them that keyword1 keyword2 has x position, I can't be sure that's what they'll see -- even if they check the same day!

I'm ending up telling them that Google's SERPs are simply "unstable" at the moment.

lbobke




msg:111028
 5:52 pm on Aug 15, 2003 (gmt 0)

ok, so, the day before yesterday, I had 151 backlinks, position 7 on the SERPs and a PR of 6.
Yesterday, I had 0 (!) backlinks, position 4 (!) on the SERPs and a PR of 4.
Today, it's 95 backward links, position 4 on the SERPs and a PR of 5.
As a matter of fact, I have received a number of additional links lately, from sites including the ODP and "about.com"...

Conclusion 1: the index is still extremely unstable.
Conclusion 2: the PR is not directly related to the SERPs
Conclusion 3: I'll continue to worry about my visitors' needs rather than Google's preferences. This search engine is utterly unpredictable...

Laurenz

nutsandbolts




msg:111029
 5:56 pm on Aug 15, 2003 (gmt 0)

My 400+ backlinks went to 0 for a while - but they are back again. I wouldn't worry, things are moving around. Just as long as your still in the SERPS in a nice position then don't panic.

ralent




msg:111030
 11:09 pm on Aug 15, 2003 (gmt 0)

One of my 24 (was 27) backlinks is finally showing PR. The other 23 show a gray bar. Before today all of my backlinks were either gray bar or PR0. This site has been up since March and I'm still waiting for PR.

troi21




msg:111031
 12:41 am on Aug 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

In this "update", I have seen a few sites that are ranking very highly due to blatant comment tag stuffing of keywords. Will filling out a spam report have any effect or should I mark it for GG's attention?

pmac




msg:111032
 1:00 am on Aug 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

>ranking very highly due to blatant comment tag stuffing of keywords<

Nobody ranks due to stuffing comment tags.

>Will filling out a spam report have any effect <

If it makes you feel better. I would look at the real reasons these sites are out ranking you and try and learn from it.

g1smd




msg:111033
 1:01 am on Aug 16, 2003 (gmt 0)


For a site new in early May some strange things have happened.

For months the link: command showed no results and site was PR0.

The inurl: command listed every page of the site as well as several pages from other sites and directories (including an ODP clone, Joe Ant, and a Joe Ant clone) that linked to the site.

A few weeks back (or more?), the link: command started showing links from two other sites that linked to this one. Those links were in place very soon after the site originally went live. The link: command still didn't show any of the more recent links that I know exist out there. It didn't even show any of those that it already know about and had previously shown when using the inurl: command.

At least a week ago, the inurl: results changed such that only pages from the site itself were listed, and still remains that way.

In the last few days the link: command on cw and gv has suddenly started listing all of the internal pages of the site, and a link from the ODP from late May. It does not list the other links that it had been previously showing with either the inurl: or the link: command.

The site is now PR4 on most pages too. This changed a couple of days ago.

There has been an update of some sort but the data is still incomplete or broken.

claus




msg:111034
 2:19 am on Aug 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

>> the data is still incomplete

I'm getting more and more convinced that this is not WYSIWYG...We see less and less of what data G really has...

Weird that for some sites, serps are improving while backlinks are decreasing by 50% or more and PR is still constant (albeit some also loses this). This can only indicate that the data G uses are not the data that we see, but it does not necessarily mean that it is incomplete, only that a smaller set is public...

/claus

This 214 message thread spans 8 pages: < < 214 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved