Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 107.20.75.63

Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

link pages being removed?

site has good PR, links page has PR0 or not indexed.

     
5:24 pm on May 19, 2003 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 11, 2003
posts:130
votes: 0


Not sure if this has been discussed, or just a coincidence but,...

I'm seeing quite a few sites with good PR on all pages except their links page. These pages had PR before, now they are either PR0, or grey ( not indexed ).

It seems it's more consistent at sites that have just one links page with multiple topics on it, sites with multiple links pages (directory style links pages) on topic seem OK.

the consitencies I see are:

Most have link text pointing to them called links
Most are called links.htm or have links in the URL.
Most are 1 page, multi-topic links pages, e.g., there is no targeted theme to the page, anything from greeting cards to health sites all on same page.

Could these be mistaken for FFA's?

I haven't checked fully, but many are listed on "link trading" sites. Maybe peple have created link farms and don't realize it?

I've seen this on many sites. It doesn't seem like a coincidence.

11:22 pm on May 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member rfgdxm1 is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:May 12, 2002
posts:4479
votes: 0


It may be martinibuster that Google is penalizing pages that it determines are just links to other sites. Your Corporate Partner Page my be collateral damage in a part of the algo that is trying to squish pages that amount to little more than swapping links to boost PR.
11:22 pm on May 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:May 19, 2003
posts:17
votes: 0


Within a few days of publishing a new index page with a words "links" connecting to "linkpage" my PR dropped from 4 to 3 on home page. Thanks for highlighting this as was confused as was told adding links would improve my PR.
11:33 pm on May 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:May 8, 2003
posts:103
votes: 0


BTW,

All pages in the sites in question link to the links page. No other pages have PR less than 5 for at least 15 months

11:39 pm on May 21, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Sept 1, 2000
posts:1120
votes: 0


I think it's way too early to determine a plan of action. I see no consistancy with this issue yet, not enough to determine what to do or if we should be doing anything.

Wait before taking action ;)

12:53 am on May 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

joined:Feb 26, 2003
posts:484
votes: 0


paynt

Agreed. The number one link exchanger in my industry controls the top 5 positions with "++" (css nounderline) links to links pages with "links" in the url. They have one link exchange area from their index page (it is not linked to from anywhere else on their site), and others from other pages. It sat rock solid through the sj, ww2, etc. process. And of course, most of their links come from totally unrelated sites. Their methods have been reported time and time again. Someone here asked me for their URl and the search term, I gave it to them, and then they reported it to Google it is that bad!

Now, if they are still there, with so easily detectable methods. I am sure we are missing the full story at this time. At least I hope so.

GoogleGuy

Really disappointed. The portal site I gave you made a recovery in the rankings, but my site got toasted again under the Spam, and the Spammers are still there and doing great.

1:06 am on May 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

joined:Feb 26, 2003
posts:484
votes: 0


rfgdxm1

Please empty your inbox. It is full and no-one can email you.

1:32 am on May 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member rfgdxm1 is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:May 12, 2002
posts:4479
votes: 0


Done GrinninGordon.
1:43 am on May 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 24, 2003
posts:216
votes: 0


Google should not punish sites for link exchanging and large link pages.

It's gotten to the point where webmasters are "snitching" on any and everyone just because they're above them.

2:02 am on May 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 22, 2003
posts:250
votes: 0


What about link rings set up by by webmasters that basically put the links of all their sites on each website, regardless of the fact they they have nothing in common? This seems wrong to me.
2:06 am on May 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member rfgdxm1 is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:May 12, 2002
posts:4479
votes: 0


Crosslinking a large number of sites twilight47 can get the Google Death Penalty. However, how large is large is not known.
2:14 am on May 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member marcia is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 29, 2000
posts:12095
votes: 0


>>I'm seeing pages on sites with PR0 that had PR5/6 yesterday. These are somewhat newer pages, last three months, and they appear to be treated as though they've not been indexed yet, although they are still in their respective positions as previous.

I'm seeing exactly the same thing with a site that had its first pages go up on the first Monday of March.

It's far too soon to be able to really know anything and probably not too safe to be getting into too much guesswork. I'm just going on as if everything is normal, and not worried a bit.

2:15 am on May 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 22, 2003
posts:250
votes: 0


I reported one of the sites on the ring and it appears to have been penalized. The ring appears to have about 30 unrelated sites all interlinking by the same designer.
Does google follow up on the whole ring or just site by site reports?
2:20 am on May 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member rfgdxm1 is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:May 12, 2002
posts:4479
votes: 0


One question twilight47. Is this a traditional webring, or does each site directly link to each other site?
2:22 am on May 22, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member marcia is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 29, 2000
posts:12095
votes: 0


twilight, you just have to wait and see what happens. Google tells nothing.

I think that's what we all have to do at this point in time. There's nothing left to do but wait and go ahead and continue to work as we always do.

3:40 pm on May 23, 2003 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 26, 2003
posts:24
votes: 0


Has anyone else noticed pages being PR0 like their site map?

On one of my sites this has happened plus a couple other pages on the site as well. The only thing I can see is that the pages have next to nothing for content, just a few images and lots of links.

I have another full directory that is now PR0 and the opening index page has very little content but about 80 links to the deeper pages that hold the content.

The actual main page of the site is fine, well it dropped from pr6 to a 5, and so are the content pages that are not below one of the pr0 pages.

This setup looks and works well for the visitors of my site to get around so I hope I don't have to fill up the pages with advertising or other filler junk text just to keep the spiders from thinking these are link farm pages or something, after all they do link to internal pages not out to others.

Any others finding pages with lots of links getting into trouble or is this just my design doing this?

3:45 pm on May 23, 2003 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 17, 2002
posts:15
votes: 0


Same here, site map whet PR0 as well as link page.
4:50 pm on May 23, 2003 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 26, 2003
posts:24
votes: 0


I think this is getting crazy that we would have to add a bunch of junk to a sitemap page just to keep it from being banned.

If it works for people then it should work for google as well. Now I will have to put some text that looks like this on any page that has lots of internal links...

"This section intended for Googlebot only to keep this page from getting banned sorry, blah blah blah..."

...but then I might get banned for repeating the word "blah"

5:23 pm on May 23, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member pageoneresults is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Apr 27, 2001
posts:12166
votes: 51


Don't worry just yet. The update may be over (in a sense) but PR has not settled in yet. What I'm seeing is Google cache of older pages. To me, this means that any newer pages, last 90-120 days, may have suddenly went to PR0. They are still in the index and ranking just fine. I'd say wait another week or so and see what happens with PR. I don't think they've calculated new index into old index hence the problem with PR.
5:28 pm on May 23, 2003 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 24, 2002
posts:464
votes: 0


I have a site with a site map and checked it after reading a thread. Indeed- PR0'd.

But- the majority of indexes (haven't checked in 2 days) have that page ranking #10 for a fairly important keyword.

I should note that this site map would make a good landing page as it contains the initial paragraph from each section of the website.

'tis another wacky aspect of this google roll out.

AW

6:39 pm on May 23, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Oct 27, 2001
posts:10210
votes: 0


AffiliateGuy wrote:

Has anyone else noticed pages being PR0 like their site map?

You may find an answer (or at least a possible explanation) in this thread:

[webmasterworld.com...]

7:00 pm on May 23, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member tropical_island is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 16, 2002
posts:2744
votes: 0


After reading the posts here and on the other thread it was with some nervousness that I went to check our site map pages on 5 of our websites. All are showing PR 4 or 5. Hopefully this doesn't mean that they just haven't gotten around to us yet.
7:14 pm on May 23, 2003 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 26, 2002
posts:435
votes: 0


Yeah, sitemap.html is PR0, links.html PR4!
7:19 pm on May 23, 2003 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 1, 2002
posts:221
votes: 0


I Totallyyyyyy agree with pageoneresults.
7:23 pm on May 23, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Jan 22, 2002
posts:959
votes: 0


As Pageone says, don't worry about it. I've mentioned it before - but take gamespot.com as an example with the current Google "update"... It's showing a 0/10 pagerank while normally it's a fat and juicy 9/10 - it isn't penalised, shows up on searches and is fine and dandy. It just shows that even the big boys are being affected by wonky rank at the moment. Don't fret about it ;)
5:01 pm on May 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

joined:Mar 29, 2002
posts:107
votes: 0


It is great to see how people are reacting. But, I have to say Chill... it would be wise to sit back and take in these changes. Not like complaining is going to boost ones PR back to what it was. It would be smarter to do some housekeeping and sort out what is next, and address the actions took us to this point in time.

I think it's way too early to determine a plan of action. I see no consistency with this issue yet, not enough to determine what to do or if we should be doing anything.

Wait before taking action

agreed

8:03 pm on May 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 24, 2002
posts:464
votes: 0


Also, business.com is PR0'd. Main page- internal pages are ranked.

AW

8:28 pm on May 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

Moderator from US 

WebmasterWorld Administrator martinibuster is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Apr 13, 2002
posts:13973
votes: 123


The only thing I see consistent is that the pages of mine that got whacked have been recently updated- The pages that didn't get whacked have been untouched for months.

As I noted elsewhere, I think it's a case of the toolbar showing actual PR instead of the usual guesstimate.

8:39 pm on May 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 24, 2002
posts:464
votes: 0


As I noted elsewhere, I think it's a case of the toolbar showing actual PR instead of the usual guesstimate.

Nope...have sites with old internal pages having zero links, but have PR. All new pages [feb] only are PR0'd (from my perspective).

AW

9:12 pm on May 24, 2003 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member rfgdxm1 is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:May 12, 2002
posts:4479
votes: 0


>Also, business.com is PR0'd. Main page- internal pages are ranked.

However, this comes up page 1 on a search of "business", leading me to assume the toolbar is showing wrong PR.

12:48 am on May 25, 2003 (gmt 0)

Moderator from US 

WebmasterWorld Administrator martinibuster is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Apr 13, 2002
posts:13973
votes: 123


All new pages [feb] only are PR0'd (from my perspective).

Yup. That's exactly what I'm referring to when I'm talking about the guesstimate.

Instead of the usual guesstimate of what the flow-thru PR is, it's showing zero or a gray bar- No guesstimate.

For instance, IBM has an "IBM Business Partners" page that is gray barred, but there on the first line it says, "News: PartnerWorld Web site redesigned," which would mean that the toolbar is showing the actual ranking (i.e. gray=not indexed), as opposed to the usual guesstimate.

Of course, if you consider it a little, I may be describing one phenomena and others are experiencing/observing another phenomena.

showing wrong PR.

It almost sounds like G's using an older database... and the gray bar would then be a reflection of it's "actual" status in that database, "not-indexed" and the PR "0" would be a reflection of the "actual" status of no links coming in to the page... Just speculation and not to be taken as a statement of fact.
This 272 message thread spans 10 pages: 272
 

Join The Conversation

Moderators and Top Contributors

Hot Threads This Week

Featured Threads

Free SEO Tools

Hire Expert Members