| 4:41 pm on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
What are the cache dates of the supplemental pages?
| 4:57 pm on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
CAn anyone explain why G would have moved our site from PR4 (which is has had for 3 years) up to PR5 for the last few weeks, and now, with this update, back to PR4 after such a short time - what is the point, or value, of such a change?
| 4:57 pm on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I'm seeing cache dates anywhere from December 26 to January 23.
| 5:00 pm on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|CAn anyone explain why G would have moved our site from PR4 (which is has had for 3 years) up to PR5 for the last few weeks, and now, with this update, back to PR4 after such a short time - what is the point, or value, of such a change? |
I don't think all the various Google servers have the same pagerank - I have one url that has been flitting back and forth between PR2, PR4 and PR5 depending on which server I hit and when I hit it. This has been going on for some weeks now.
| 5:23 pm on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Fri 22 Dec 2006 - I have a page with PR assigned - anyone know when the cut off date was for this current PR which seems to have settled, (even my directory pages have regained PR)?
| 7:44 pm on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Seems as if google is crawling supplementals every other month now. Thats interesting...and also very good!
| 8:48 pm on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
My earliest new PR is the 26th of DEC.
| 10:35 pm on Jan 26, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Two new sites put online 1 dec 06 have just been entered at PR 2, no changes in the SERP's,
I used to see new sites start at PR 3! But It took at least 3 - 4 months , now its faster with lower entry PR!
I have one site (4 years old) gone down from PR 3 to 2 and it has for sure dropped several pages, What I cant figure is that this site is made just like my other 15 or so sites and they have not budged?
This would mean that PR is still a big factor? looks like it....
| 12:26 am on Jan 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
"Thats interesting...and also very good."
Hardly. It's very bad.
I guess I was mostly wrong previously. A page can go close to instantly into the supplemental index. Crawling previously got you a parallel result, but now it appears it won't.
Contrary to what Matt has posted, having supplementals is normally the death of a page. I've gone from a page #2 for its standard query to now not able to even rank in the top 1000 for its entire title, something not remotely competitive.
Google discarding pages from its index is now common, but supplementals being quasi-discarded is far worse. At least with other discarded pages, all you have to do is point many more links at a URL and it will be indexed, whereas a supplemental result will lurk around poisonously in the background for months. That may be better than the 18 months a supplmental would hang around previously, but a unique content page being supplemental and not allowed to rank three days after being crawled is pathetic.
| 12:39 am on Jan 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Have you tried to pay for traffic to your pages that are supp? I would not be surprised if the big G would pull those pages out of the supp if you were paying ;-0
| 1:04 am on Jan 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Yes another damn PR data push.
Stable one but it's hatefull to me.
| 4:07 pm on Jan 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Thanks for your comments, so the news cant be all bad (apart the one site which has dropped)
|I guess I was mostly wrong previously. A page can go close to instantly into the supplemental index. Crawling previously got you a parallel result, but now it appears it won't. |
Excuse me I im a stupid french guy and am not familiar with the term supplemental index. Would this be all the pages on the site apart from index?
| 4:57 pm on Jan 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
If you go to google and use the site command like:
and then scroll all the way to the bottom you will most likely notice that some of your pages are marked as Supplemental.
The supplemental pages are ones google views as the flotsam and jetsam of your site. The problem is they sometimes mark relevant pages as supplemental.
| 9:55 pm on Jan 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Last summer I doubled my number of pages in one big chunk. Now all these pages finally got TBPR. So just an "unnatural growth delay", not a filter. Lucky me.
Nevertheless my webmaster central console still shows a big green bar saying "pagerank not yet assigned." Interesting to see the console does not work "just in time."
[edited by: Oliver_Henniges at 9:56 pm (utc) on Jan. 27, 2007]
| 10:56 pm on Jan 27, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Does anyone think that TBPR from as far back as June 2006 is still showing on the tool bar?
When i run a check using a well known datacenter check, the response is consistent accross the checked DC's
yet, using IE6 , the toolbar shows rankings from
June 06, October 06, an Jan 07
, I know because the same homepage can show 3 different TBPR in the same day, depending on when I log on
An I know the first time I saw each rank for the first time
| 4:48 am on Jan 28, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|I have at least 15 sites (so far - I'm still checking them) that went to all supplemental or filtered except for two pages. |
I'm seeing the same thing with my site, though the filtered results are still ranking well for individual search queries.
I've also noticed the same thing has happened to a news site I visit regularly, so it looks like a bug which will hopefully be sorted out soon.
| 5:05 am on Jan 28, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|the same homepage can show 3 different TBPR in the same day, depending on when I log on |
I haven't so much noticed the pr fluxes since I decided to take the tool bar off my browser .. (it was driving me crazy) However I have seen fluxes in traffic... seems here in mid america we get awesome traffic before 9am, then around 11am and then again around 2-3pm. Then it goes berzerk after we close for the day. Some of it may be surfer habits, however the main volume of the flux comes from google searches. Most other sources remain fairly constant.
I'd almost wondered if the big G had implemented time zones for sites and had us mixed up...
| 2:18 pm on Jan 28, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Thank you davidgid
I understand that now!
Does any body use the page rank prediction tool and what is this worth? If I believe this my site that was taken down to PR2 has a futur prediction of PR4. This would be nice to believe..
| 7:13 am on Jan 31, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Just noticed that 2 of my sites that once were PR7 have now just dropped to PR6. They have been online for 6 plus years and never had any problems and rate top of their keywords - can anyone shed any light on this? Why would this happen?
Also - should I be concerned about this? Traffic is the same, rankings are the same? Is PR worth bothering about anymore?
| 12:53 pm on Jan 31, 2007 (gmt 0)|
My site went from a PR4 to a 3 and I get many incoming links (organic, not exchanges). I quit trying to figure out PR.
| 2:57 pm on Jan 31, 2007 (gmt 0)|
One of our site PR increased from PR4 to PR5, and some of our newly launched sites too showing PR 2.
| 4:41 am on Feb 1, 2007 (gmt 0)|
<moved from another location>
PR Shifting again! Lordy lordy. This is happening twice a week!
[edited by: tedster at 5:05 am (utc) on Feb. 1, 2007]
| 5:45 pm on Feb 1, 2007 (gmt 0)|
link: command has been fluctuating on my site from 11 to 22 to 1.
Does this mean something.
| 6:09 pm on Feb 1, 2007 (gmt 0)|
No, changes in the link: operator results have no meaning you can take away.
| This 54 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 54 ( 1  ) |