| 6:18 am on Jul 15, 2004 (gmt 0)|
No, no - let's back up for a minute. It isn't PR and links by the "site," it's links and PR by the "page." PR is on a page to page basis, not site-wide.
The logarithmic value is, simply put, for calculating how much it takes to move up for each numerical notch up, and how many links from a page of one value it will take to be equal to a link from a different value page - taking into consideration the number of links on each of the pages.
Page not site, so you have to ditch the above calculations.
>>It appears that one should spend the most amount of time trying to get links from sites with the same PR or better.
Don't we all wish! But it doesn't work that way. As long as they're quality pages with somewhat of PR, while - sure, it's nice to get them from higher pages, it doesn't pay to over-stress about it. PR is important, but it's not the be-all and end-all of everything.
Hyperlinking is at the very core of the meaning of the web and it behooves us to participate in it according to the original spirit it was intended for.
| 7:12 am on Jul 15, 2004 (gmt 0)|
lgn1, you seem to be one of those people who think
when there 30 links on a page a link tp you from that page will not benefit you, only because there are 30 other links on the page.
This is simply not true, there is no logical cause why google should decrease the value of the PR a page passes only because it links to more other pages.
A simple example, which you also could try yourself.
Set up a page and link it from a, let's say PR6 page. The page will get a PR of 5 then. Now you put 100 links on this page and with the next update you will see, that all the 100 pages got PR4, the amount of links does not matter.
The only thing which causes a problem (rightly) is that a site with 1000 links and nothing more will be regarded spam and therefore will possibly not pass or even get a PR.
| 9:56 am on Jul 15, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|It appears that one should spend the most amount of time trying to get links from sites with the same PR or better. |
there are other aspects apart from PR:
- other off-page factors (anchor text) are also taken into account for ranking
- you can benefit from visitors coming from these pages
Also, the PR of the pages might increase with time.
|you seem to be one of those people who think when there 30 links on a page a link tp you from that page will not benefit you, only because there are 30 other links on the page. |
|Set up a page and link it from a, let's say PR6 page. The page will get a PR of 5 then. Now you put 100 links on this page and with the next update you will see, that all the 100 pages got PR4, the amount of links does not matter. |
The latter statement is definitively incorrect. Not only for the original algorithm but also for the current algorithm the passed PR depends on the number of links. This can be verified very easily.
| 10:03 am on Jul 15, 2004 (gmt 0)|
1. If you have the time read the G doc on the subject
2. Note direct from Google on April 7 2004
The outward PageRank flow is divided by the number of outgoing links, so there's a sort of diminishing return if you have a ton of outlinks.
I have so many test sites that have confirmed the G doc.
Best not to confuse new guys asking for advice, with assumptions
| 10:25 am on Jul 15, 2004 (gmt 0)|
hmm, I have tried it with the amount of 500 links on a page and it worked. Of course what I don't know is the "internal" PR count for those pages. I can only talk about toolbar PR here.
But maybe it also depends on the source of the link of the site with the 500 links. There could be differences whether the link comes from an let's say educational site or from a commercial site.
Also the PR which is passed to the site containing the 500 links could play a role. I have tried it with a PR6 link, maybe it does not work when the site only has a PR4 or less.
But when we talk about the toolbar PR it makes no difference for me if I have 500 links on a site or one.
Of course there maybe differences in calculating rankings.
| 10:34 am on Jul 15, 2004 (gmt 0)|
>>But maybe it also depends on the source of the link of the site with the 500 links
>>There could be differences whether the link comes from an let's say educational site or from a commercial site.
No, not at all, Greg. It's got nothing to do with the quality of the source or type of site for plain old raw PR, and there's no room for guesswork. Page Rank is a numerical value and nothing more.
Page rank passed to each page linked to from any given page = amount of distributable PR for the page divided by number of links on the page minus a damping factor. That's it.
It really is important to read the original paper to avoid misconceptions. Even without being able to follow along or understand the maths, which most don't, the concepts are still there and that's all that's really needed.
What's seen on the toolbar is just a rounded off approximation; it's far from giving anywhere near an accurate measure though it's still a very useful tool.
| 12:25 pm on Jul 15, 2004 (gmt 0)|
so that means, at some specific amount of links on the links-page all those pages linked to from this one site will get PR-2 due to this formula. But then there has to be an exact number from which on a link-page will only pass PR-2 (on the toolbar), right?
| 12:37 pm on Jul 15, 2004 (gmt 0)|
There's a world of difference between the PR you can calculate (raw PR) and the heavily adjusted PR that shows on the Google toolbar. I believe calculations from the green bar are very misleading.
| 3:02 pm on Jul 15, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Google's been cleaning up this one lately..at least from my point of view...
Have a site that's been advertising on another site for years...and because of how the ad is placed Google had traditionally been showing dozens of inbound links from the site where the ad was placed...from a variety of pages
Then with a recent backlinks update the inbound count went down to just 1...and this is what I was hoping for..
The multiple inbounds links from this industry sector authority hub which had been sitting at PR4 for many months was influencing our PR...now this site has gone to PR5 and we have benefited...and in this particular niche sector a PR5 does very well (at least the bots crawl regularly)...
| 3:43 pm on Jul 15, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I don't know about you, but I will take links from 343 PR 2 pages over one PR 5 link any day of the week.
Maybe you need to stop chasing PR and just get on-topic links from sites that will benefit you with traffic and diversifying your overall link network.
Anyhow today's PR 5 can be tomorrow's PR 2 and vice versa.
It's a lot easier for a page to go from PR 2 to PR 3, 4 and 5 than it is to go from PR 5 to PR 6.
I will take the odds on those 343 sites any day of the week.
| 6:34 pm on Jul 15, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Also remember that the PR that is shown is an integral number. If the page rank has a base of 7, ie PR 5 = 7^5 then you would need the equivalent of 16807 single pages linking to give a PR of 5 to a page, you would need 117,649 to give PR 6. But what if you had 117,648 linking, you would still have a PR of 5 showing for your page and it could have 48 links coming off it and still give the linked pages a PR of 4.
Its even more complicated then that because of the damping factor etc.
You can see the original paper here
be interesting to know how much they have modified the PR from this original computation.
| 9:41 pm on Jul 15, 2004 (gmt 0)|
What's the current thinking on PR "leakage"? I think I have some evidence there.
I run a web directory, hundreds of links on a specific topic, divided between 10 pages in the same folder. It has convinced me that there's an "internal" PR and an "external" PR.
1. Each page links to every other internal page.
2. Each page, including the index, links to 20-50 external links as well.
3. Outside links link *exclusively* to the index page, so, in theory, only that page starts with PR.
4. In theory, the index page should pass along minimal PR, since its PR is 2/3+ "leaked" to external pages.
5. But my internal pages show high PR as well.
Therefore, PR is tracked differently external vs. internal. QED?
Incidentally, it follows that you shouldn't worry about leaking PR because you link. This is good for web quality anyway!
| 1:36 am on Jul 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I have a site with about 100 pages. Does Google have any problems with my placing a text link site map at the bottom of each page? What possible negative effects will this produce?
Will this help get increased PR onto the newer and lower PR pages?
Any comments are welcome.
| 11:53 pm on Jul 16, 2004 (gmt 0)|
100 links on the bottom of each page isn't exactly user friendly. Try to break it down into logical sections for individual pages and use a regular site map for all of them.