| 2:10 am on Oct 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Seeing a full update here. Gray bar issues on our biggest site finally resolved :)
| 2:16 am on Oct 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I see it also... seems to be on one minute and off the next...
| 6:09 am on Oct 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Yes, is a PR update , nothing unusual at me.
| 9:26 am on Oct 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Yes, its an update...
| 10:38 am on Oct 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I thought I am special ;)
| 11:18 am on Oct 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I confirm the update here in Portugal too ! lol
One small step for mankind one giant leap for ....me ! PR 3 to PR4 ! From December 2008 until now ...
| 12:24 pm on Oct 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I actually have one that went from PR3 to PR0! GRRRR! I have inbound links, no spam, fresh content every few days... oh well. No google love there. My other sites are what I expected.
| 12:34 pm on Oct 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
yep, update in progress... no big movements, just +1/-1 on sites i monitor.
| 2:18 pm on Oct 30, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Yes, one of my website been to 6
| 4:32 am on Oct 31, 2009 (gmt 0)|
My homepage went from 3 to 4 and my internal pages went from 2's to 3's.
| 6:08 am on Oct 31, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I come from china,my website from 4 to 5!
| 9:15 pm on Oct 31, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I'm seeing an update of the little green line in the google toolbar in Europe across websites.
[edited by: encyclo at 9:25 pm (utc) on Oct. 31, 2009]
[edit reason] moved from another location [/edit]
| 12:28 am on Nov 1, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Yep, definitely seems to be an update. My home page dropped from 5 to 4 but my internal pages that were mostly no PR after redesigning the site and having many URL's change are now showing up. Many ist level pages are also PR4.
Would have been stoked if it wasn't for the home page dropping from 5 to 5 but as we know, PR doesn't mean that much.
| 10:26 am on Nov 1, 2009 (gmt 0)|
let me know when microsoft is a pr1 and then i'll agree pr means nothing.
| 12:01 pm on Nov 1, 2009 (gmt 0)|
pr isn't meaningless but loosing meaning.
| 12:11 pm on Nov 1, 2009 (gmt 0)|
one of my site has lost the PR but I still see it on first page for my targeted keywords. So PR is nothing for me except satisfying my own will.
| 2:27 pm on Nov 1, 2009 (gmt 0)|
well, now you are defining parameters. Your measure of importance being your relative difference between your own rankings and your own pr and those in your sector. Very narrow view of pr then. Oh and losing visible pr means nothing. Everyone loses pr everyday as the pool of sites sharing that single true unit of pr grows.
| 2:35 pm on Nov 1, 2009 (gmt 0)|
what I mean is most people think PR influence on SERP, but thats not true.
| 3:31 pm on Nov 1, 2009 (gmt 0)|
To be precise, PR does influence the SERPs - it's just not the only influence. Many people make no distinction between a page's ranking and its Page Rank, using the two words as if they meant the same thing.
PR is one of the "query-independent" factors. That means it doesn't include anything about keywords in its calculation. It's more like a measure of raw "page strength" compared to all the other pages on the web, rather than compared to just pages about the same topic.
| 7:04 pm on Nov 1, 2009 (gmt 0)|
and then of course theres the spidering.
| 12:12 pm on Nov 2, 2009 (gmt 0)|
What the...Google first says that PR is no more relevant, then updates it..and on top of it, it is not even consistent..
In the two years my main site existed, it moved from 0 to 4 without there being any generous linking from other websites. And in the past quarter, with me managing quite a few PR 6, PR 8 links to my site, it drops from 4 to 3..
Way to go Google..Its your choice if you want to give PR such a rubbish burial..
| 12:31 pm on Nov 2, 2009 (gmt 0)|
spidering: quickly as nebulous an indicator as PR.
| 12:40 pm on Nov 2, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|And in the past quarter, with me managing quite a few PR 6, PR 8 links to my site, it drops from 4 to 3 |
Are you sure the backlinks were relevant to your site content? I have seen many people who often prefer to link with highest PR sites without even thinking about content relevancy.
| 12:49 pm on Nov 2, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Relevance wasn't a factor in the original PR formula. The whole idea behind PR was generating a "query independent" measure for the raw strength of a page.
Even though Google has made changes to the way PR is calculated today, PR is still not the same as "ranking". It still does not, IMO, have anything to do with topics or semantic factors. There certainly are such factors in the complete Google formula - but PR isn't one of them.