Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
>> their PR6 sites
Of course you meant PR6 homepage. ;)
>>in matter of hours
Sounds very dramatic. But tPR is not updated daily. If you've been losing PR you've probably lost it bit by bit over a longer time frame than a few hours. But, put that way, it doesn't sound as catastrophic.
>> seen a one page site a few days old with not a single incoming nor outgoing link and not found in a single SE, match the now dropped PR of that of a 9+ year old site
Age has no bearing on PR, age has no bearing on PR, age has no bearing on PR. Just because the new page has no obvious IBL that doesn't mean Google hasn't seen one somewhere. That this now matches the PR of a 9 year old site has nothing to do with the price of fish.
>> identically laid out sites with the same linking structure and links on the same host and server where one site may have dropped 2 spots and the other site stayed the same
It's about IBLs. Dropped 2 spots could look exactly like dropped 1.1 spots. And, at the lower PR levels, dropped 1.1 spots can easily be caused by values of IBLs changing. At the higher PR levels it's unlikely that the second site has identical IBLs to the first from every single every page the first site has an IBL... and no other.
I sympathise with anyone who's leaked PR this update but less emotional responses and more proactive searching for the hole is a sensible way forward.
>> that thinks there is nothing wrong, and thinks they have all the answers
I find it exciting that I have more questions than answers. And, I'm open to the possibility that there is a problem with tPR. However, if you've already found your answer - i.e. that the toolbar is broken - then there's nothing you can do, it's not your fault and the best course of action is to sit back and see if it rights itself. :)
toolbarqueries.google.com 1
64.233.161.99 ...1
64.233.161.104 ..1
66.102.7.99 .....1
66.102.7.104 ....1
216.239.59.99 ...3
216.239.59.104 ..3
216.239.37.104 ..1
216.239.39.99 ...1
216.239.39.104 ..1
66.102.11.99 ....3
66.102.11.104 ...3
216.239.57.99 ...1
216.239.57.104 ..1
66.102.9.99 .....3
66.102.9.104 ....3
216.239.53.99 ...1
216.239.53.104 ..1
Then another one of my sites that was also a 3 shows all 2's and 1's on that tool! Two of my sites still show the same across that chart. My main site is 5's and 3's in that chart, with the 5's being in the EXACT SAME DC's as where the "3" appears above. What is interesting is I rose in the G SERP's for some search phrases at the DC's where I have a LOWER PR!, and which is also the case at google.com here where I rose the exact same way. Yet at the DC's where I have a HIGHER PR, I'm further back in the SERP's showing what Google.com showed for SERP's a few days ago!
Edit Updated
The brand new site of mine I mentioned with one page, no IBL and no OGL, using that PR check tool, shows its previous "0" at the exact same DC's where the "3"'s are above, and showing its new PR3 where the 1's are above.
[edited by: Clint at 12:39 pm (utc) on July 18, 2005]
Well said... or, written?
I lost out badly in Bourbon and my PR has stayed at 6.
This appeared as more of a blanket statement than I intended. Sorry. It just looked to me that the thread had changed, but many of the names had stayed the same.
I think my main point was with PR being as out-of-date as it is, except for whatever moment in time it is updated in the tool bar for, there is NO WAY TO KNOW WHEN YOUR PR ACTUALLY CHANGED.
(I wonder if they do this on purpose?)
Justin
My first site (PR5), the domain of which was purchased in August 2003 but the content and the site map of which was only uploaded round X/mas 2003, is now #1 at Yahoo.com and MSN.com and #9 at Google.com on the approx. 10,000,000 results of a very competitive two-word keyword. It’s #19 at Google.com on the approx 25,000,000 results of an extra competitive one-word keyword. Has been rising in position steadily, with a few fluctuations during the last year.
With this last update the site’s site map PR was raised to PR5 (from PR4) and all the secondary pages (over 500), with an exception of a handful willingly buried pages, gained PR4 (most of them were PR3).
How?
Let me mention what I’m NOT doing first. I am not using a blog. I have never purchased links. I am not listed in Dmoz (never cared to apply but will probably do so when the site gets PR6 – that doesn’t mean Dmoz cares about PR but I have my own reasons). I am never using “illegal” SEO methods. I have never submitted the site to Google, Yahoo or MSN. I have never created “similar sites” in the hopes that one will “help” the other.
But my pages are all full of genuine, original content. English being only my third language, I’m not particularly good in writing professionally, but it seems that the site’s “honest” set up has attracted authors who agreed to give me permission to publish original content which is not to be found ANYWHERE else on the net. Meaning I don’t like the “articles” method whereby the same article exists in loads of other sites.
In my brief “online career” I have always tried to put myself in the SE’s shoes and think like I owned Google for instance. Or if I owned a big department store, would I want the same type of shoes in all shoe departments? No, I would want variety and quality, that’s what I would want to be able to attract more potential customers.
“PR behaved exactly as it should” (as well as SE positioning) with my other 3 sites too, by the way. These other sites are targeting totally different markets and of course, keywords.
My 2 cents.
Maria
I rose in the G SERP's for some search phrases at the DC's where I have a LOWER PR!
Clint, I'm not picking on you mate but it is generally accepted that PR plays only a small part in deciding SERPs. You'll find many examples of lower PR pages ranking above higher PR pages.
Also - with regards this page that has no IBLs but is sporting some PR - if you have no links to the page how does Google even know of its existence?
Sounds very dramatic. But tPR is not updated daily. If you've been losing PR you've probably lost it bit by bit over a longer time frame than a few hours. But, put that way, it doesn't sound as catastrophic.
No, I've been monitoring PR using some "future rank tools" for a few weeks now, and ALL of them ALWAYS said for ALL of my sites that I would "have an increase of X% on the next update". Hence some confusion there. (I didn't check the brand new site since it wasn't even up then).
Age has no bearing on PR, age has no bearing on PR, age has no bearing on PR. Just because the new page has no obvious IBL that doesn't mean Google hasn't seen one somewhere. That this now matches the PR of a 9 year old site has nothing to do with the price of fish.
Now HOW can G see an IBL, when the site never existed!? If PR is based upon links, then it has everything to do with the "price of fish".
A link: check on Y shows this for the number of links:
(Including www and non www searches)
Main site: about 900, and it dropped 2 PR (on index).
Secondary site: 260, and it dropped 2 PR.
Unrelated one page site 1: only 17 and its PR stayed the same and matches that of my main site's index.
Unrelated one page site 2: only 20, and it dropped 2 PR.
Unrelated one page site 3: only 20, and its PR also stayed the same and matches that of my main site's index.
ALL of those that are linking to the unrelated sites are ALSO linking to my main site. All of those that link to my main site are linking to the INDEX page, the home page. I only have about 75 internal links going to a "main" page on my main site, where its PR stayed the same and is now greater than my index page.
So, as Ross Perot once said, "I'm all ears" (eyes in this case) if anyone has some explanations. ;)
if you've already found your answer - i.e. that the toolbar is broken - then there's nothing you can do, it's not your fault and the best course of action is to sit back and see if it rights itself.
You know, that's exactly what people had to do during Bourbon. It finally "righted" itself, at least it did for the most part in my case.
I agree with you 1000% oddsod (msg #:266). Yes, “PR is behaving exactly as it should”.
Ok, if you think it's perfect, then kindly please explain my dilemma, as well as many others on this thread.
We don't even have the URL and I wouldn't have the time to do the research on your sites. We can help by providing some pointers but it would be your responsibility to find the "holes". Enlist a good SEO company if you're willing to consider that it's not a "broken" toolbar that's causing your problems.
[edited by: oddsod at 1:13 pm (utc) on July 18, 2005]
I rose in the G SERP's for some search phrases at the DC's where I have a LOWER PR!
Clint, I'm not picking on you mate but it is generally accepted that PR plays only a small part in deciding SERPs. You'll find many examples of lower PR pages ranking above higher PR pages.
I understand, but what I was pointing out was only the pattern I saw, that it was "interesting" or maybe/maybe not enlightening that on all of the DC's where my PR dropped, I got higher in the G SERP's and on all the DC's where my PR is higher (where it was a few days ago), I'm further back in the SERP's. Hell, like many here have said, I'd GLADLY drop a PR spot or 2 if it meant RISING in the SERP's!
Also - with regards this page that has no IBLs but is sporting some PR - if you have no links to the page how does Google even know of its existence?
G DOESN'T know of its existence! (If I understand your question), the webpage was only put up several days ago and is up now, is how any PR check tool can see it. The page does show in Y and it showed up in Y about 2 days after it was up! I did the link:domain.com command at Y since that doesn't work very well at G.
Enlist a good SEO company if you're willing to consider that it's not a "broken" toolbar that's causing your problems.
HA! We all know that "good SEO" has nothing do with G. ;) Their SERP's for a ton of search phrases prove that. That's been proven in the Bourbon threads (let's please not go there again). Remember, I'm NOT the only one on this thread in this position and asking these questions.
Are you saying that the premise of PR has changed and it's not based on IBLs anymore? The pointer to engage an SEO company is not for SEO work but because the better SEOs are well placed to find your missing PR.
It's a well respected member here who runs an SEO company who helped me find the issue on one of my sites: capitalised page names causing a duplicate content problem in Google. Like I said, I don't know it all and sometimes it's good to have an expert opinion.
[edited by: oddsod at 1:22 pm (utc) on July 18, 2005]
To be able to express an opinion about your site Clint (msg #:279) or a guestimate of what happened I would want to see the site in depth, investigate its reciprocal linking structure, (for example whether you're linking to banned sites - I'm personally checking regularly and finding that G is banning sites daily. As a result I'm deleting 10% of my links on a constant basis) and loads of other factors that may affect PR and rankings.
By the way I'm only managing my own sites and I am not encouraging you to get in touch with me because even if you propose a collaboration I wouldn't accept :) I hope this comes out as a smilie and not as a square like in my previous post!
Hey why am I seeing squares instead of quotes or apostrophes in my previous message?%@$#&?
Is it happening on just that one post or all posts? Looks fine on my end. I use IE so I can only speak for it now, but I've seen similar things happen on it when under "view" and "encoding" is set to something a webpage "doesn't like".
If Google doesn't know of its existence how can it give the page PR?
Are you saying that the premise of PR has changed and it's not based on IBLs anymore?
No, I have no idea, but that would seem to be the case wouldn't it, according to this example.
Well, all this could sort itself out over the next few days and it will all be moot point. We could be seeing temporary TPR "fluctuations" (ala Bourbon).
A link: check on Y shows this for the number of links:
(Including www and non www searches)
Main site: about 900, and it dropped 2 PR (on index).
Secondary site: 260, and it dropped 2 PR.
Unrelated one page site 1: only 17 and its PR stayed the same and matches that of my main site's index.
Unrelated one page site 2: only 20, and it dropped 2 PR.
Unrelated one page site 3: only 20, and its PR also stayed the same and matches that of my main site's index.
If so, you are trying to find the answer with inaccurate data.
The questions are:
How many links did each have at the time of the last PR toolbar update, compared to the number of links that were accounted for in this update?
What was the PR of the pages that contained each of those links at the exact time of the last update?
What was the PR of those same pages that contain the links at the exact time of the more current update?
What was the exact link structure of each page of you site at the exact time PR was last updated?
What was the exact link structure of each page of you site at the exact time of the most recent update?
How has the PR of the links pointing to the sites/pages that link to your site changed from the last update to this update?
How has the PR of the links pointing to the sites/pages that point to the sites/pages that link to you changed from the last update?
and so on...
I promise, we are trying to give you answers, but the only real answer is to read the documentation for yourself (or resign yourself to listening here) and then watch, monitor keep records and adjust at every update. I understand you ranked well before the Bourbon update, and if I am reading your posts correctly, you are again ranking well... Be Glad!
Ranking, Gaining PR, and the rest of SEO is a full time job. It is full time to understand. It is full time to measure and track. It is full time to make adjustments. It is not something you can do when you are not running your business anymore and it will just keep getting tougher.
This is what I do all day every day. I really, honestly have patent applications, papers, documentation, recent and old update threads and other information that most people do not have time to read bookmarked. If you do not have this kind of time to spend to understand how things are happening and where they are going, please trust some of us who are trying to help you out, and don't scream "broken" the first time something you do not understand happens.
Obviously there are errors, things get broken or out of alignment, and stuff always happens... But, for the most part, most of the time, things work the way they should.
Justin
Edited: Verbiage, or maybe they are all necessary, but I did edit the wording.
[edited by: jd01 at 1:37 pm (utc) on July 18, 2005]
(for example whether you're linking to banned sites - I'm personally checking regularly and finding that G is banning sites daily. As a result I'm deleting 10% of my links on a constant basis) and loads of other factors that may affect PR and rankings.
I too check regularly for banned sites for the sites to which I link. I even recently added a few "no follow" tags to some of the sites I link that are usually associated with UCE just to be on the safe side. Again, the sites I link to on my main site are 99% the same as the sites I link to on my other sites. The only difference is maybe 2-4 links fewer on my other sites.
By the way I'm only managing my own sites and I am not encouraging you to get in touch with me because even if you propose a collaboration I wouldn't accept.
Huh? Not sure of what your intention is there. Sounds insulting.? I hope not.
I don't know, THAT is the issue that doesn't make sense!
No, I have no idea, but that would seem to be the case wouldn't it,
So, in the absence of a change in how PR is calculated it remains that PR is based on backlinks. That you couldn't find the IBLs is no grounds to assume they don't exist. If you were unable to find the links to this new page there may be other things you're unable to track down yourself. Like the reason why PR has dropped on older pages. Good luck.
link:domain.com in Yahoo
combined with
linkdomain:domain.com in MSN
There is no point in checking BL's in Google.
They show somewhere between 5% and 15%, so there is no real picture of what links you actually have there.
Justin
Added: MSN is usually the slowest for showing new links for me, while Y is a little faster. But, of course this all depends on how often they spider the page linking to you...
>I even recently added a few "no follow" tags to some of the sites I link<
A no follow tag is not an indication of a banned site, which is a site that in-between updates loses all its PR, gets a 0, that is. The no-follow tag just aks the robot to not index the page.
>Huh? Not sure of what your intention is there. Sounds insulting? I hope not<
Not offended one bit Clint. My intention here up to now has been to READ and LEARN. As you can see I was registered in Nov.2003, 3 months after I purchased my first domain and have been silent most of the time. I don’t even know why I only have one registered post. Something with my profile I guess which I didn’t care to fill in. There should be around 5-6 posts in all. If I was a SEO trying to find customers I would make sure to get senior asap!
The reason why I’m around these days is because I’m facing a problem with my new php directory (http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum88/9193.htm) and because the G Toolbar is NOT showing the new PR on my end – it still shows the old PR so I’m collecting whatever info may help me to get this fixed
What is interesting is I rose in the G SERP's for some search phrases at the DC's where I have a LOWER PR!, and which is also the case at google.com here where I rose the exact same way. Yet at the DC's where I have a HIGHER PR, I'm further back in the SERP's showing what Google.com showed for SERP's a few days ago!
LOL, this reminds me an episode of Seinfeld when George came to the conclusion that every decision he took in life was the incorrect one. He then decided that from now on he will do the exact opposite of what he thinks or was led to believe all these years. If every conclusion he reached was the incorrect one then the opposite must be the correct one. And so he did and it worked magic almost immediately.
Maybe this is the case with Google nowadays. The exact opposite of what you’d normally expect and was led to believe for many years is happening . The PR thing is yet another good example of a glitchy no-sense SE. Maybe the exact opposite of G webmaster guidelines is the way to go for better PR and better SERP positions :)
I don't do link swaps on that one, so there should be no issues with outbound links, and the inbound links are all quality. Google is showing 0 inbound links, while MSN shows close to 400. This is particularly odd, as one of the links is from a PR5 page on Wikipedia, a site that I thought used Google for it's internal search. Aside from the few fake search result adsense pages that seem to link to us all, the rest of the inbound links are quality, one-way links. I don't see any 302s either...
Normally this PR shuffle can take a few days, so I don't stress it, but this site hasn't budged once since the shifts began.
The only thing I can guess at is duplicate content. The site is community based, with a wide scope of closely related topic matter. Content on each topic comes from the visitors, but topic pages exist, whether content has been added or not. This means a number of pages have a generic "Please add an entry" type message...
I plan to write some unique content for each, but I'm not entirely convinced this is the issue. Anyone have any thoughts on this or new/other reasons PR might've dropped violently with this last update?
Thanks much.
