| 7:53 pm on Nov 28, 2004 (gmt 0)|
From what I can gather, Google now transfers PageRank across a 302 redirect, but since the 302 code specifies a temporary move, Google may continue to index both URL's. However, the algorithm isn't well developed to consider how to rank either side of the 302. Sound accurate?
| 1:58 pm on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Anyone? I'm really interested in ideas about PR does transferring across a 302 redirect.
My site's new listing is on a PR 8 page (the only listing on that page) and on about 20 PR 6 pages.
Makes me very doubtful, yet very hopeful, like a deal that's too good to be true.
| 4:51 pm on Nov 29, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I'm bumping this thread up to the top as I am curious about this as well. I too have a lot of academic links and suspect I have lost some as webpages have been redone in such a way as to not give direct links.
| 1:47 am on Nov 30, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I can guess the answer from the total lack of response to my question. The fact that WW also uses 302 redirects for external links and that the consultant hired to advise the latest redesign for the directory in question is billed as a search engine expert, supports only one conclusion. We'll see-- I'll report back next time Google updates it's PageRank calcs.
| 2:07 am on Dec 1, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I hope it will work for you, Bentler, but personally I avoid these redirects. check this thread:
Altough there are people reporting the problem as fixed, I still have a site which is listed with wrong url. PR is still missing.
| 4:59 am on Dec 1, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I already know it won't work for me. I found a great example of a botched site design that uses a 302 redirect link counting mechanism for all its internal links-- the PR 8 home page uses all 302 redirects to link to its second-level pages, which show PR levels of 2,3, and 4 when they should be 7.
In researching it I've found this is a Microsoft supported mechanism to track visitor movement through an asp.net Website. As a side-effect, it undermines the effectiveness of Google, which continues to refuse passing PR across a 302.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if this is at the root of webmaster complaints regarding Google's accuracy, the "sandbox" phenomenon on new sites and G's recent index rebuilds, -- from what I can tell, 302's are commonly and inappropriately used to contain PR leakage to external sites and in the case of sites like the very, very large asp.net site I analyzed, unwittingly-- possibly with strategic methodology courtesy of G's competitor. It seems to me the 302 redirect technique and Google's refusal to tear down that wall has broken PageRank. Maybe they haven't even figured it out yet.