| 7:13 am on Nov 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
mmm.... google not scanning a page usually results in a gray pr status bar. pr0 means scanned by google and scored 0 :-)
don't worry, seems that the rest of your site is doing ok.
| 7:27 am on Nov 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
PR is on the move don't worry about it for the next few days it should settle down then
| 9:54 pm on Nov 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>>all except my links directory which shows a zero.
By chance, is your links directory named themeindex?
| 10:59 am on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Coconutz, I'm not familiar with Themeindex. I can tell you that I'm using Glossamer Threads 2.0 if that means anything.
| 12:28 pm on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Does the page have a .cgi extension?
|iam david lee|
| 3:26 pm on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0)|
is the PR currently being updated by google.
| 4:30 pm on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>> mmm.... google not scanning a page usually results in a gray pr status bar. pr0 means scanned by google and scored 0 :-)
I dont think its like this anymore. For some months now, i have alway seen PR0 in my new pages.
| 4:34 pm on Nov 14, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Bones, no the page does not have a .cgi extension. Thanks
| 1:54 am on Nov 15, 2003 (gmt 0)|
On a third look yes it does have the CGI extension. Does that tell me something?
| 3:49 am on Nov 15, 2003 (gmt 0)|
All the 'ordinary' pages on my site have PR (including the main page which is a PR6), but, every single page that has a .cgi extension shows as PR0.
Up until 4 or 5 months ago, they all had PR. When I first noticed this I thought it was a penalty of some kind, but all the pages continued to rank OK and are still regularly spidered.
I did a bit of searching a while back and couldn't find a single .cgi page that was also located in a /cgi-bin/ directory on the 'net with any PR. I even found a .cgi page with a PR8 backlink that was also PR-less (I did check robots.txt too).
Given that all my pages show up OK in the index and they all rank OK, I can only guess that it's perhaps some kind of bug with the toolbar. I find it hard to believe that all the .cgi pages I randomly stumbled across on the 'net had been penalised. Or maybe Google just disapproves of .cgi pages for some reason. For me, it started around the time Google appeared to stop 'guesstimating' PR - so it could be related to that.
From what I can tell, just changing the extension to .pl should work. Mod Rewrite might also be an option.
Other people may have different experiences. It's been a while since I tried searching for .cgi pages with PR.
| 5:37 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I should have also mentioned that many of my own PR0 .cgi pages show up in the backlinks for my site - which also makes me think it's a toolbar problem.
| 10:45 pm on Nov 17, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for all of the advice Bones. I was a little concerned since I'm putting a lot of time into gathering quality links and certainly wanted to receive credit for this.
| 12:24 am on Nov 18, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Bones: ISTR Google saying the toolbar would no longer show PR for pages which have? parameters in the url (e.g. www.domain.com/cgi-bin/something.cgi?duck=quack).
I think I've seen some cgi pages since which show PR in the toolbar, but personally I've changed all the cgi scripts on my site to look like /cgi-bin/something.cgi/quack.html.
| 2:03 am on Nov 18, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Interesting, I don't suppose you remember where you saw/heard that?
Even without any parameters, a .cgi page always seems to attract PR0 though. Just from a quick search of Google right now, I can find quite a few .php and .asp pages *with * parameters that show PR.
I just stumbled across:
If you search the backlinks for that page, you'll get about 30 odd links returned (some of which are PR5). Therefore, if .php and .asp pages with parameters show PR, I think it's odd that it shows a PR0.
| 2:13 am on Nov 18, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I have some cgi files on my site which I've modified using the method I described above which have PR4 currently...
Don't remember where I saw the bit about cgi files with arguments not showing PR though. I *think* it was on Google.com...
| 2:18 am on Nov 18, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Oh, I don't doubt it. :) But, it's the 'unmodified' ones I'm really talking about. In the example you gave earlier, I think Google treats it as a .html page, not .cgi - which is why it shows with PR.
I'll have another look through Google's FAQ's.
|brotherhood of LAN|
| 8:10 am on Nov 18, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Some (well,lots) reading here [webmasterworld.com...]
newwebguy, I'm ->guessing that the page either has "links" or "directory" in the URL, and this is how you -> may have PR0 ;)
| 11:18 am on Nov 18, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Yes, it has links in the url. Even though I don't have a PR rating on said page is Google raising my score because of the number of quality links in the links directory, or because of the CGI is Google unable to credit it. Once again thanks for everyone's help.
| 3:21 pm on Nov 27, 2003 (gmt 0)|
...and as if by magic... all my .cgi pages now have PR shown again*, and so do quite a few of the random ones that I previously checked.
A bug? I guess I'll never know!
* only if you follow a link directly from the Google SERPs mind - but it's a start!