Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
Im interested why some sites have moved down and others up in similar PR brackets
Is moving up in the directory confirmation that google rates the site as more of an authority or is it just a case that the true PR is calculated based on the value of all of the incomming PR divided by the number of pages in the site?
Even though the directory green bar may be the same size, the directory order is supposed to be based on PR. So if I moved up two spots but our green bar is the same length, I can conclude that:
Either their PR went down just a bit; or
My PR went up just a bit; or
A combination of the above happened.
This rule does not seem to hold true everywhere, but it does work in my category.
Is moving up in the directory confirmation that google rates the site as more of an authority or is it just a case that the true PR is calculated based on the value of all of the incomming PR divided by the number of pages in the site?
I'm not sure what you mean by suggesting that the incoming PR is divided by the number of pages in the site. Almost certainly having more pages in your site is good. The PR value of an incoming link may be affected by the PR of the page linking to you, and diluted by the number of other links on that page - that is perhaps a more accurate account, but perhaps thats what you meant.
Moving up the page depends on your PR, as well as other factors, in particular the perceived relevance of your site to the search phrase. As you say being an authority on the subject is therefore key, but also having the page well made, relevant key words, back links from relevant sites, links out to relevant sites etc
Back on the subject of Back Links - I have more BLs on some Data Centers, but on most remain unchanged. I've seen no major SERPs changes yet
I noticed a few sites overtake one of the sites we work on in the directory.
The site in question has increased its number of pages and the number of links to it but some are results pages which are Dynamic and dont carry page rank at all.
The sites that have overtaken it carry less pages and less links but have used a mod rewrite on the dynamic pages to gain page rank.
Im thinking that if you link to pages on your own site that are dynamic with no page rank in effect the links from those pages are giving zero page rank to the linked pages.. if you follow?
If this chain of thought is right then a site with loads of pages can suffer if the PR is not passed around the site correctly or is passed to pages that cant pass any page rank on.
Brett - you said GG wanted to name it. Why Gilligan GG :)?
Gilligan - it has a name.
Brett - you said GG wanted to name it. Why Gilligan GG :)?
Are we Lost-At-Sea?
Why Gilligan GG?
Bob Denver of 'Gilligan' fame dies at 70 ...
Is there a change in SERPS? ....except for the one or two specific travel type sectors we've had a few threads about. But...
And, is there a change in the situation with the www/non-www and the 302 disasters? Or is that not even worth asking anymore? :(
I have ssen no changes in the SERPs. I have seen changes in PR and BLs.
And, is there a change in the situation with the www/non-www and the 302 disasters? Or is that not even worth asking anymore? :(
One thing I've noticed is that the site: command is showing 38,400 pages for my site, compared to 13,600 the last time I checked in late July. (The actual number of pages on the site is between 4,500 and 5,000.)
The site: command also shows 1,460 www versions of my pages (roughly the same as the up-and-down numbers in July) even though I resolved the www-vs-non-www issue with .htaccess more than five months ago. (OTOH, links: numbers are still the same for the www and non-www versions, as they've been for a number of months.)
Also, a small number of pages that have been MIA for months are still missing from the index.
So far, the update--if it is an update--hasn't changed much (as far as I can see, anyway) except the numbers that I get with the site: command.
ROFLMAO - Oddsodd - we both know that is not going to happen. (Come on Google prove me wrong :))
I think this update has been going on for a while just more quitely then in the past. They are adjusting lots of little settings before the finally reprocess the index with the newly adjusted algorithms.
I seem to notice a slow down in Freshbot result (content that jumps to the top during the everflux) prior to major updates. I usually get tons of traffic from random topics being discussed at my sites that are not from major index updates. This 'fresh' information seems to slow down quite a bit prior to, during and just after major updates.
More backlinks, but still a snapshot.
site:command now gives 8 times the actual number, while it was close to double earlier.
No change in SERPs as far as I can see, and no change in visitors either compared to the last 2 weeks. (waiting for the post-Labory day crowd - if they exist!)
Don't be, they may be the people you pulled ahead of. In every update, there is an equal number of winners and losers.
You and I are winners this time.
Maybe everyone is just getting over excited as usual but I dont see anything that suggests an update as of yet.
All backlinks through the dance tool, google itself for .co.uk as well as the US ip's are the same.
Probably Google just updating something small but it doesnt look like a large scale change in any respect as far as I can tell.
Probably Google just updating something small but it doesnt look like a large scale change in any respect as far as I can tell.
Agree... I can't find 1 change in serps, other than the usual daily flux. If this really is an update, it's the most lame I've ever seen.
Thats my 2cents for the day anyway, im going home.
