Forum Moderators: open
Is there some receognition by Google that it is a single page site? and a linit on the PR set?
<I 'm guessing a lot of it has to do with the fact that those 8000+ links are all from the same domain.>
Why would that make a difference? Many, or all, of those links are on pages with decent PR. I don't believe domains are taken into account when calculating PR.
Wouldn't he have said site by site if that were so? i'm intrested to know.
Also internal pages of one domain do show up with the link command when the pages are pr>4. Woudn't you think those wouldn't show up if there were not 'calculated'?
[edited by: ikbenhet1 at 5:43 pm (utc) on Feb. 21, 2003]
If they did, what fun would optimization be? We'd just print everything GoogleGuy said, and call it a day - there'd be no need for 'discussion' at that point.
<Nick, the domains DO count. Getting links from 5000 sites is not the same as getting links from every page on a 5000 page site.>
Do you have evidence of this? Based on Google's original algorithm (which has probably changed since, but to what extent is unknown to us), it counts links on pages only, and puts no weight on the site that those links come from.
If:
www.widgets.com/index.php
and
www.widgets2.com/index.php
...both link to a site, that's exactly the same number of backlinks as:
www.widgets.com/index.php
and
www.widgets.com/index2.php
...linking to a site. The PR is calculated in the same way, and no more or less weight is assigned to the PR because the links came from one site or two.
If you believe otherwise, please post how you're coming to this conclusion :-).
If Google hasn't changed their algorithm, then why doesn't the spam I helped companies create a few years ago still dominating the serps?
By spam in this case, I mean tons of interlinked domains with zero content, auto generated, and cloaked to the hilt.
Since these pages are gone, it stands to reason that 1) they were penalized or 2) Google changed their algo.
It's both, because if not, then I could recreate the *exact* same spam, using the same techniques, and OWN Google.
That's not gonna happen -> at least, not in that fashion.
Then, we'll wait a year to be sure things are stable, and evaluate the PR of each site. We could leave the links in place after that as an ongoing experiment. I'd agree to report back every month or two to keep members up to date. ;)
Or how about - you get the WebmasterWorld one - and I get the thousands of PR 5 + links from the members various domains?
<---- Sure, I'll report back how it does. From the beach. Sipping one of those things with a paper umbrella.
Only 1 page so far.
We all know there is a difference in the quality of those links. You can bet Google knows it too.
This is a bold statement and I have seen no evidence to support this, have you?
BestBBS is penalized -> yep. PageRank hasn't changed since day 1. Google's algorithm is static.
Once you have mastered the ways of the Jedi, only then will Google truly rank your site.
What you need to do is plug your ears and hum during the google update...and whilst that happens, and your body begins to rise off the floor - don't panic!
Just keep humming till your rank rises...I'm sure it will.
I hope you feel better for that rant
Sorry about that. Didn't mean to offend - I think my humour needs work this morning, and I need more coffee. :) Cheers.
you've got stickymail, mfishy
Most all the pages that link to BestBBS.com are threads that have "esitmated page rank"...
The threads themselves are not actually linked to from other sites and the page rank is just carried down from the WebmasterWorld main page's PR.
The only reason that the PR have changed is probably that there is just one page left and therefore no contribution to PR from the site itself.
I remember reading that making your site bigger and bigger, adding more and more pages, has diminishing returns. I recall reading that after about 500 pages, adding more pages linking to your homepage, doesn't give the same degree of PR boost to your homepage that the 1st 500 pages gave. Perhaps someone can remember where that thread is, and reference it.
Another suggestion was made a few months ago, during one of the update threads, where someone thought they noticed an algorithm change, whereby multiple internal links seemed to transfer less value than before, for big sites over a certain size. Someone else seemed to notice the same effect.
It wouldn't surprise me that Google could easily implement such an algorithm change. Nobody can guarantee that One Page = One PR vote anymore, because creating more and more pages to create more votes is too easy to abuse.
Not really. Because pages full of spam would theoretically be penelized and not able to pass PR. If you're talking about adding hundreds of pages full of content just to link to your home page, then I don't consider that spamming, because content is what Google wants.
First off, going back to the theory that any page contributes PR, and the domain from which it originates (yours or someone else's) means nothing..
If I create a 1000-page website, then it's probably going to have a structure such as this:
Home page -> 10 Sub-Pages -> Each to 10 Sub-Pages -> Each to 10 Sub-Pages.. or something of that sort.
As we know, the toolbar PR is different than the actual PR (the "actual PR" being a number that Google doesn't tell us), but the toolbar is an indicator of actual PR with a logrithmic scale of 6-8 that may look something like this:
Toolbar PR -> Actual PR
0 -> 0
1 -> 1
2 -> 8
3 -> 64
4 -> 512
5 -> 4096
6 -> 32768
7 -> 262144
8 -> 2097152
9 -> 16777216
10 -> 134217728
These conversions are speculation on my part, but they are of that form.
So my brand new site full of 1000 brand new pages (each page having a theoretical actual PR of 1 prior to indexing) means that my site has a total PR of 1000 which it will pass around based on the internal and external linking.
So first off, each page has about 11 links on it, one always to the home page, and 10 other miscellaneous internal links. Each page's actual PR is 1, take 85% of that (dampening factor), and divide it by 11, which means that each link is going to receive a PR of 0.08 boost. 1000 of these links to the home page means it has about an 80 (I'm simplifying) once it's indexed. That will give it a toolbar PR of (low) 3. In my experience, this sounds like a common initial PR (and lower if the site has fewer pages).
Now, I'm going to go out and get some backlinks from other sites. A site, for example, that has a toolbar PR5 on their page that links to me, and they have 19 other links on that site, are going to give me between 174.08 and 1392.6 additional actual PR (based on the chart above). That's much more PR than any of my internal pages could give me. The PR of my internal pages does not increase substantially on their own because nobody, or few people, link to them.. they link to my home page. Because of this, the PR that my internal pages can give to the home page many times is less than what I can get elsewhere.
So.. am I going to get a higher PR if 1000 other sites link to me than if 1000 of my own pages link to me? Probably, because the pages of those external sites very likely have a higher PR.
Does this mean that Google puts less weight on pages from the same domain? No, it means that they put less weight on pages that have less PR.
But they very well may put less weight on multiple pages coming from a single domain, or they may limit the amount of links to a page from a single domain as a few have suggested. The number of links to BestBBS resulting in a PR4 seems to support one of those theories.. but I'd hope to find something else as well before becoming a hardcore believer in these ideas.
Are you saying that when you are getting a reciprocal link to another site you are getting the benefit of their links which could or could not be relevant to your site in varying degrees?
<Are you saying that when you are getting a reciprocal link to another site you are getting the benefit of their links which could or could not be relevant to your site in varying degrees?>
I'm saying that if a page as a toolbar PR5, then based on my "representative" chart, I can only know that their actual PR is between 4096 (the lowest PR5) and 32767 (32768 begins PR6):
(4096 * 0.85) / 20 ~= 174.08
-or-
(32767 * 0.85) / 20 ~= 1392.6
The total amount of actual PR given to each link on that page.
The Google Gremlins chuckle late at night over TB PR discussions they have read at WebmasterWorld.
Somewhere, the goals get lost. The question shouldn't be, "Why is a site PR4 but with 8,210 Back Links?" but rather, "How should I set my goals in order to reach #1 in the SERPS for my 800 keyphrases"?
If the little green bar vanished from everyone's toolbar would the questions change? Then think about the questions that would still be pertinent if the little green bar vanished. Those are the important questions.
Another example you can use to help draw a conclusion. Take a look at the Backlink TouchGraph:
[touchgraph.com...]
But look at the overall concept. Google ranks sites highly because they are hubs. You can't be a hub with only one spoke. Potentially, if Webmasterworld had several PR7 "hub type" pages, bestBBS might have benefited enough to get a higher PageRank.
