PR0, High rank.

Should i start worry?

[Morrison]

Hi,

3 of my pages got PR0 last update. (default.asp and two major pages)

the rest of the pages have the same PR.

my site still rank very high on google including the pages with the PR0 (default.asp rank 2nd on my main keyword)

i thought maybe that is a mistake and my PR will be back befor the next update but it still have PR0.

i can't see any reason why have PR0. i didn't do anything to "cheat" google.

i have two question:

1) do i need to do anything about this PR0 (and if yes, what should i do), or there is a chance this is a mistake and next update i'll get my PR back.

2) is there any chance i got this PR0 becuase i use popup menus using "display:none" and JS function to change it on mouse over.

thanks.

[WebGuerrilla]

I wouldn't worry about it. Ther have been many pages that have turned up with a white/grey toolbar that still rank well.

It appears to be connected with the pastupdate.

[webmasterworld.com...]

(Check out GG's comments in the 7th post)

[Morrison]

thank you very much!

[new_BEE]

Hey you don’t have to worry about that! All my 50 pages are PR 0 and I have more 5000 top ten spots with google.

But this will affect your inbound linking campaign. Nobody will link to you assuming that you are banned by google.

[AthlonInside]

It looks to me Google is trying to HIDE something from us. I beleive the PR we see and the back links we see are obsolete. There are real PR and real backlinks hidden at the back that feed the search.

Hey hey gOogle, I KnOW! :)

~~ Want Beer?

[worker]

This PR thing is a double-edged sword. I have a site that is less than 3 months old, and based on the content, I've had a good number of sites agree to link to it. Some are older sites with a PR6 and even a PR7 or two.

Based on the number of links, and the PR's, I would expect that my new site would show some sort of reasonable PR. It doesn't. It is a solid white bar.

The content is solid, and it is strong enough that some pretty decent sites want to link to it. BUT there should be a LOT more links by now. I have to assume that the PR0 that is displayed is preventing the site from growing as quickly as it should. Other sites are afraid of linking to what appears to be a banned site (due to the white bar).

I can't blame them. I won't link to a site with a PR0 either.

I hope that Google will soon address what has been happening because there are serious negative ramifications to the way this is unfolding. They have created PR, and now it is limiting the growth of good sites.

[alice]

Doesn't the all white bar indicate that you are indexed by Google, but have a PR0? Wouldn't someone who is banned or simply not yet indexed simply show the grey bar?

I would link to someone with a white bar, but not a grey bar.

[Jenstar]

Here is a little more info on the white bar:
[webmasterworld.com...]

The grey bar means a site has not yet been indexed. If someone has been banned, they will show a PR0 (a white bar). However, a site can show a PR0 for reasons other than a penalty (many established sites, including this one, have pages showing PR0 for recently added pages).

I would be more likely to link to a grey bar than a white bar. And if you do a check on a site, you can probably determine if a site is penalized or just not assigned a proper page rank yet. (ie. is the main index page PR0 or just some of the internal pages?) If a site remains at a PR0 for multiple updates, it is likely banned or penalized by Google. If a site has been banned, I would think twice before linking, especially if it is reciprocal.

Morrison, if you are ranking high for your keywords, don't spend too much time worrying about your PR right now.

[alice]

So a site penalized would be 0. That's good to know and thanks for clearing that up for me. But if a site is outright banned...why would it show 0? Wouldn't it be out of the index altogether?

I guess I'm trying to distinguish between penalized & banned.

[Jenstar]

But if a site is outright banned...why would it show 0?

The toolbar ranks a site out of 10. So it is showing that a banned site has a score of 0 out of a possible 10.

A site that has a grey bar hasn't been evaluated by Google yet, so Google hasn't assigned a score from 0 to 10 yet, hence a grey bar.

Even if the site isn't showing in the index (or only found by searching under that particular name but not under any keywords), Google is still showing people that it has that score of zero.

[Total Paranoia]

I have a large website that has a PR5 on the index page but all other pages apart from two show a PR0.

I am aware that the dominic update messed things up for a lot of websites but I am just wondering if anyone has seen a return of PR on thier internal pages yet?

[peewhy]

Quite a few of mine have droppped from PR5/4 down to PR0.

I can't be bothered to get bothered about it until the fat lady sings.

[chrisnrae]

Newer sites can also often show a PR0. New sites often end up getting indexed by the toolbar before any backlinks are showing. The result is a PR0 until google has found and counted some of the backlinks. AI agree with Jenstar that my own personal feeling is that linking to a greybar is safer than a whitebar. But, if a whitebar is new, chances are, it just hasn't had any backlinks found yet and therefore has been assigned a PR0.

[ogletree]

If a site has a white bar but still shows up good on the SERPS and shows up in other peoples backlinks then it is not banned. It is banned if it is not in Google. There may even be sites with PR that are bad. Google Guy said the toolbar is worthless right now. To not trade banners with somebody because of the toolbar is stupid. A person can look at a site and tell if it is in a bad neighborhood. It is not that hard. Making judgment by the toolbar right now is stupid and lazy.

[nobug]

Another example - my site is ranked since 2 monthes PR0 (homepage, secondary pages kept their PR) meanwhile it was previously PR3. I cannot explain that difference, I pay great attention to playing the rules Google expects. I spent lot of time to understand why I was PR0, I could not find any reasonable reason. I just surrendered.

Despite this, my site is still progressing on its KWs. I share the opinion of folks who state that :

- PR is less and less weighted in listings

or/and

- displayed PR does not reflect a more complex one used internally by GG to list sites relatively to KWs.

The only valuable rule to me is to release content of interest for the internet community ...

[HeyJim]

Here's a PR0 theory.
Do a "print screen". Paste the resulting graphic into your favorite graphics program. Magnify the area where the Google tool bar is. If the page is not an absolute zero there will be a tiny sliver of green showing.
I've always found a tiny bit of green on the few sites I've checked but I believe when I first learned of this I was given the url's of a couple of penalized sites and there was no green at all.
Anyone know any penalized sites we can check out this theory on?

[Jenstar]

I just tested this with a known banned site (ironically, a SEO company that states they will submit your site to 900+ FFA sites, because this kind of link popularity is so important ;) ) This site has had a PR0 for well over a year.

I took a screen shot, and the toolbar shows two pixels of green as a border around the PR meter - not where the white should appear, but on the left hand border (the border is one pixel of grey all the way around where the PR appears).

I checked this against a newly added page that Google just hasn't added PR to yet, and the same two pixels of green on the border appears.

Can anyone else verify? I only know of one site that I am 100% certain is banned.

[illad]

I have a few sites that went live in March, were indexed before Dominic, and were given a PR0.

Since then I've gotten a ton of links, and they are still PR0. These sights are not banned, google has just not calculated PR for these new sights.

I'd like to hear what's happening with those who have newer (March+) sights, has ANYONE been given their proper PR score?

A check on -fi and the other datacenters still shows PR0 for these sights. I am hoping that pagerank will be calculated when this dance is over, as googleguy says it will, although I give little weight to what he says.

So, who here with newer(March+) sights actually has any pagerank?

[Jenstar]

Welcome to WebmasterWorld, illad.

New sites seem to take a little longer to get assigned PR with the last few updates, so I definitely wouldn't worry. PR should settle down soon, and you will be able to see if you have been assigned a PR value yet. If not, don't worry, it all takes time.

However, I did launch a site in April, and it showed up with PR with this update. It also depends on how quickly Google found you through your incoming links. So I wouldn't put as much value on your "launch" date as opposed to the date that Googlebot first discovered your site.

[Gus_R]

Hi, I got the same, my site started on April and actually shows in serps, but I've PR0 for all of my pages, and it isn't banned or penalized.
I suppose toolbar data is old/wrong for now.

[Jenstar]

Welcome to WebmasterWorld, Gus_R.

Just hang tight. If you are showing up for the serps, that is good, and I wouldn't even bother worrying about your PR value right now. It is how well you are showing up in the serps for your keywords that count, not how much green you have ;)

[Gus_R]

Thank you Jenstar.
I admit it's difficult not to be worried, but things are going like predicted in the threads.