Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.196.17.157

Forum Moderators: open

Message Too Old, No Replies

Backlink PR3 Site

     
1:14 pm on Jun 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Jan 5, 2003
posts:389
votes: 0


I have always been under the impression that a site needs to have a pr4 to register as a backlink ... I have recently launched a brand new site and I have one backlink from a site with a PR3 - Can anyone explain this?
1:21 pm on June 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:May 22, 2002
posts:1001
votes: 0


I think that you only see backlinks for PR4 + sites, not that the - PR4 sites don't show up as backlinks.
1:24 pm on June 12, 2004 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 30, 2002
posts:236
votes: 0


jakegotmail

I have also been seeing this for 2-3 weeks. PR3 links do occasionally show.

This may just be that the linking site is showing an incorrect PR. Or that it hasn't been updated yet.

4:16 pm on June 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Sept 20, 2003
posts:189
votes: 0


Total Paranoia is right. Moreover, I've seen even PR1 sites show as backlinks. Can anyone confirm that if a site is showing as a backlink, it is definitrly passing PR?

There's a pretty good thread on a similar topic here:

[webmasterworld.com...]

4:58 pm on June 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Oct 8, 2001
posts:2882
votes: 0


I believe that at the recent Search Engine Strategies conference in London, DaveN suggested to a Google rep that it might be better and more fair to show a random sample of backlinks instead of only higher PR links; that would allow site owners of smaller domains to see more of their backlinks, even if they don't have high PR links.

I know the Google rep thought it was a really good idea that would help smaller sites that might not have high PR links, so they passed on DaveN's suggestion. If you see the link: command start to return a wider spectrum of backlinks instead of high PR links only, you can thank a WebmasterWorld member for the suggestion!

5:38 pm on June 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 14, 2002
posts:422
votes: 0


Whoa .. second DaveN suggestion to make it into a GGs post.

( [webmasterworld.com...] )

<added>I'd be personally pretty happy if my PR4 links didn't show up</added>

6:46 pm on June 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 4, 2002
posts:1958
votes: 0


Interesting. I had a 'rep' at SES London and he happened to be talking in a group with a Google rep and DaveN. My 'rep' heard Dave suggested that Google not show any backlinks at all.

Maybe it was a different conversation. ;)

7:56 pm on June 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:June 20, 2002
posts:4652
votes: 0


"it might be better and more fair to show a random sample of backlinks instead of only higher PR links"

It might be a pretty awful idea too. Showing a "random sample" of backlinks is ridiculous. Either show them or don't. Have some criteria that makes logical sense instead of "random".

Dumb idea, very bad news for webmasters, and for webmasterworld too as the number of "why don't my good links show up" posts are going to go through the roof.

On the other hand, good news for Google competitors as they will be able to deliver at least one thing more accurately.

(And frankly GG it's sad to see this anti-webmaster idea promoted as something having value.)

8:10 pm on June 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:June 20, 2002
posts:4652
votes: 0


The black helicopter guys are gonna love this one. Sheesh.

Note to the Googleplex: You guys run a search engine. What people want from you for *any* search is relevant results, with the most relevant results weighted first, and the least put last -- and in any case, the most relevant ones at least somewhere. Random results, for *any* search, is just plain incompetent.

8:32 pm on June 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 1, 2004
posts:812
votes: 0


randomness is bad - agreed.

I worked in a niche of a medical field, where the strongest player who was primary in that niche was a PR5, the next layer was a handful of PR4s, and everybody else was below.

Since the only links available that were close to pure for the niche were low relative PR, it would have been nice to see them as backlinks. It didn't make sense to get links from higher PR sites because they were by nature not relevant to the niche or the niche keyword search.

The PR algorithm encouraged spamming, since high PR sites (which had a strong general presence in the major field) got all the attention for the niche keywords, despite the fact that their websites didn't serve the searchers well.

8:44 pm on June 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Nov 19, 2002
posts:3454
votes: 0


I thought they were always pretty random. I've seen PR2-3 links showing up occasionally for the last 2 years, and I almost always hive higher PR links that are missing.

Once I figured this out, I have pretty much considered the link: command to be for entertainment value only. We get to watch people worrying about something that is almost meaningless.

8:51 pm on June 13, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:May 23, 2003
posts:801
votes: 0


Hmmm - GoogleGuy makes good comments, but...
I see that his interests in his profile have changed.
(Yes, some of us *do* get some kind of weird gratification from checking the laws of physics now and then...)

Almost imperceptibly, but there's definitely a shift in his interests...
This surely needs factoring into the equation.

<grin>
DerekH

4:36 am on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Oct 8, 2001
posts:2882
votes: 0


It's really quite funny that you noticed that, DerekH. I was just playing around with my preferences, so it doesn't mean anything. Maybe I'll have to tweak my profile every few months, just in case people enjoy checking. :) steveb, I was just trying to get across that someone suggested showing from a wider spectrum of backlinks, and that it sounded like a good suggestion.
5:25 am on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 11, 2001
posts:2725
votes: 0


Well at the least the PR>4 only showing is/was rather discriminatory.

I'd say higher Pagerank tends to float around more easily in English than in lesser used languages.

5:49 am on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:June 20, 2002
posts:4652
votes: 0


A wider spectrum would of course be great.

If the point is... wider spectrum along the same lines as currently, in other words, more backlinks shown, then of course that would be awesome.

But if the point is fundamentally changing backlinks displayed so that some randomization occurs and many important links (PR-wise or otherwise) are not shown, this is a diminishment of Google as a search engine. Backlinks are one of the best ways to find quality related sites, much more so than the related sites displayed in the results. Downplaying that, presumably to confuse aggressive seo's wondering about effectivenes off purchasing pagerank, would be a great shame.

GG, my comments were also motivated by the other comment about updating backlinks quarterly. That too is a pro-spammer, anti-user, anti-webmaster concept. I shudder to think of the bandwidth the rogue bots the mega link spammers would suck up trolling the Internet if they had to work harder to find the data.

6:09 am on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:June 28, 2002
posts:4154
votes: 0


Dave N makes history.

it was a proud moment in that session when Dave and others made some comments ...

Shak

6:18 am on June 14, 2004 (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


>>Backlinks are one of the best ways to find quality related sites

I've yet to come across a non-webmaster who used links: to find quality related sites, Steve. It's primarily useful for webmasters and SEOs to check backlinks for their own link-hunting campaigns.

It's also used by some to locate high PR purchase opportunities. And I seriously doubt that providing SEOs with more useful and profitable tools is very high on Google engineers' list of priorities.

6:45 am on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 1, 2003
posts:1203
votes: 0


>It's also used by some to locate high PR purchase opportunities. And I seriously doubt that providing SEOs with more useful and profitable tools is very high on Google engineers' list of priorities.

Finding high PR pages is easy, with or without the links command. Showing an accurate number of links isnt going to make a difference when it comes to gaming the system because it doesnt tell you anything other than the number of links.

For instance, it wouldnt tell you whether or not the link passes PR. It doesnt tell you whether or not google gives credit to just one link or multiple links from the samer page, or for that matter, from the same website.

Like BigDave, I thought it already was somewhat random. I have links from PR6+ pages that dont show as backlinks, whereas other sites have links from these same pages that do show as backlinks. Isnt that random?

6:51 am on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 30, 2002
posts:295
votes: 0


Maybe I'll have to tweak my profile every few months, just in case people enjoy checking. :)

No please this will just lead to a proliferation of "GG profile update watch" threads.:)

6:59 am on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Nov 19, 2002
posts:3454
votes: 0


The link command doesn't help you find high PR sites, but it does help you find high PR sites that link to sites that are similar to yours.

I could care less about whether a link shows up on backlinks to my site, but when my site was young, checking out who linked to similar pages led me to sites that would also be interested into linking to a site like mine.

That use doesn't require that google show all the links to be of value.

8:10 am on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 4, 2003
posts:61
votes: 0


Pr4+ backlinks theory is 100% true with Google, Google definetely show only Pr4+ backlinks in google backlink check,

Backlink results in google go through couple of filters as we found out and one filter is sites with less than Pr4 wont show,

People noticing sites with lesser than PR4 in google backlinks are all dynamic links, As we all know Toolbar Pagerank messes with dynamic links, So I recommand dont believe what the toolbar say for dynamic links, I have seen the toolbar showing PR6 for my hotmail Indox which is a password protected area, I have seen the toolbar show PR5 for Yahoo SERPSs, We all know Yahoo SERPs are blocked from crawling through the robots file, Like this I have seen many messed up dynamic links showing some random PR, I have seen many brand new forum dynamic links having a PR3, so dont believe the toolbar for dynamic links,

Regarding dynamic links ill tell you those links which show up in the backlinks do possess a Google pagerank of 4 and above( not the toolbar PR), To find this out we analyzed around 1000 links, we traced the origin and the backlinks of the low toolbar Pr dynamic links showing in the backlink, Most of those pages originate from High PR pages and those links which power the dynamic link did possess good Pagerank, So according to our findings it is clear that those low toolbar PR dynamic links which show up in the backlink check do possess a real PR of 4 and above,

Googleguy I always thought you are a person who is in high position in google, I always respect your words, But I doubt your truthfullness from your answer in this thread, Dont misguide anyone, If you dont want to give a clear answer dont answer it, We are not idiots to listen to your stories, Till now i have not seen any low PR backlinks showing up, if it starts showing up ill let you know, May be ill agree it was a suggestion by DaveN, But right now it will be good if you dont Misguide us, Keep up your Good work in this forum, I am always an admirer of you and always expect clear cut answers not anything misguiding,

thanks,

8:13 am on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:June 20, 2002
posts:4652
votes: 0


Marcia, webmasters are people too...
1:00 pm on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 5, 2001
posts:2466
votes: 0


jakegotmail are you sure that it's only a PR3 or did it drop from a pr4 in the last PR update.

I have never seen a pr3 backlink show up in the link: command

powerofeyes i don't thing GG actually discounted the the PR4 theory he said
" If you see the link: command start to return a wider spectrum of backlinks instead of high PR links only "

and the biggie here is ** IF **, i have seen Google change things like this very quickly in the past, the guestbooks.htm and html pages, sites going missing and re appearing very quickly, Dupe content in certain keyword areas ;).

jcoronella : I did say no backlinks at all, but went back on this a little later I also said TB pagerank updates once a year like a christmas present but then went to Qtr updates,

GG have you had a report from the google rep that starts with "T" we sank a few beers with the Yahoo Boys, those guys can drink, Stuart, Tim and of course Mr Andy Williams ;)

DaveN

3:59 pm on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Oct 8, 2001
posts:2882
votes: 0


Was Tim there this time? I didn't see him on SES schedule. Sounds like pubs in London should shake in their boots when folks all converge in one place to drink together. :)
4:08 pm on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 5, 2001
posts:2466
votes: 0


No Tim Mayer wasn't their... Tim is one of the search engine programmer's ;)

Stuart - Yahoo's Sweeper and all round good guy made me laugh so much
Andy - Head of Uk searches
TIm - the programmer

DaveN

and now i will get shouted at for making off topic posts lol

so can you just state for the record that there is a PR threshold when using the link: command in google.

4:14 pm on June 14, 2004 (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


OK, here's one for ya all. When we see backlinks showing that have no PR showing on the toolbar, should we assume that when the toolbar updates that page will be =>PR4?

Tell us. ;)

4:22 pm on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 5, 2001
posts:2466
votes: 0


I guess the answer to that Marcia is yes ;)

DaveN

4:58 pm on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 4, 2003
posts:61
votes: 0


Thanks for clearing that Dave, I did understand what googleguy meant but many people gets confused from the words he is saying, The way he answered was a bit confusing that is why I cleared that up,

Regarding marcia's question I guess the answer is No Not yes,

When a low PR backlink shows up it simply means that link is a dynamic URL, Toolbar cannot parse original Pagerank for that dynamic link URL properly and cannot show what pagerank that link exactly possess, Toolbar is too messy with dynamic URLs,

We found when a link shows up on a backlink check with Pagerank lesser than 4, It simply means that link is a dynamic URL link and it possess a Original Pagerank( Which google knows not Toolbar PR) of 4 and above,

As Googleguy said may be Google might follow DaveN's Suggestion showing random links in future but right now it is not happening,

5:12 pm on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Nov 19, 2002
posts:3454
votes: 0


Powerofeyes,

The PR3 links I remember seeing were not dynamic, nor did they rise to PR4+ the next update. They were real pages with real assigned Toolbar PR.

Seeing these links is very uncommon, so running a few tests is not going to be able to force them to show up.

I do believe that Google filters on several factors when makingup the list of links, but I have come to conclude that PR is *probably not* one of these things. It is just coincidence that the higher PR pages will have more of the prerequisites to make it into the list.

5:34 pm on June 14, 2004 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Oct 4, 2003
posts:61
votes: 0


Hello Bigdave,
Can you PM me the google backlink results where it is showing static URLs with Pr3 or lesser, We have done enough research on this and I have replied this post after a lot of analysis, Not just some vague guess,
if you have seen static URL links Pr3 or lesser showing in backlinks please PM me, Please dont say you remember seeing it, if you have proof of it now Please show it,
This 34 message thread spans 2 pages: 34