Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
I see PR changes for my 5-6 sites. Some went down some went up.
Check on these datacentres.
72.14.217.104
72.14.221.99
209.85.135.102
My blog went from 3 to 5 PR. :)
[edited by: tedster at 7:35 pm (utc) on Nov. 1, 2007]
Can anyone see and 10s apart from google.com? Looks like a new standard being released.
[edited by: Interent_Yogi at 9:31 am (utc) on Oct. 28, 2007]
Adobe.
All it takes is one link a day before the cutoff date to get PR. When someone posts their new site went from PR0 to PR3, that had to come from somewhere.
With more sites competing for the pie, PR will inevitably go down for most sites. Some that get particularly more links will go up, but ten years from now when there are 1000 times as many pages on the Internet as their are now, the toolbar will obsolete itself as most everything non-spectacular will be PR2 or below.
www.youtube.com - PR3
youtube.com - PR3
www.youtube.com/index - PR2
youtube.com/index - PR2
No redirects. All the same page.
But
uk.youtube.com - PR7
uk.youtube.com/index - greyed out
In which case it would be something completely different than it is now, so there isn't much point in talking about that. PR is link power now, and a trillion new links is going to lower the link power of the vast majority of pages that were in existence prior to the creation of those trillion links.
w3.org is still PR10
"so for example the top 3% may be pr10"In which case it would be something completely different than it is now, so there isn't much point in talking about that.
and yet i was commenting on your assertion of the pr2 upper limit years from now. But that situation that doesnt refer to the near future had a place but an idea of what may replace it doesnt?
It would be the same as it is now, simply projected in a visually different way. relative merits would be unchanged which is what pr is. Relative link power.
With more sites competing for the pie, PR will inevitably go down for most sites.
I've been under the impression that all pages have, regardless of any other page linking to them, some initial PR 'voting' power, which is dampened with each link forward.
That would make the pie bigger, and not inevitable lead to slide in PR for most sites.
However, if that is not the case anymore, and PR comes from, say trusted seed sites (TrustRank), that would explain the downward adjustment in many cases as internal pages would count for less than they used to.
Mind you, I haven't seen any evidence that toolbar PR is critical to rankings--at least for the moment. My top-ranked competitor for one major keyphrase has the #1 spot with a PR3 page, while my PR5 (formerly PR6) index page for that topic is in the same #2 position where it's been for quite a while. (It's been #1, #2, or #3 for years.)
yes this has been the case since big daddy to my eyes....visible pr is pr mixed with some other factors....index pages being one and age another...its hard to pin it down but sometimes it seems theres even the old guess work going on as it did in the old days..when you were assigned an assumed pr..for example each directory would lose 1 pr from the base page in early updates and then be corrected over time for new pages...
I've been under the impression that all pages have, regardless of any other page linking to them, some initial PR 'voting' power, which is dampened with each link forward.
That's not exactly the way PR is figured - although you do have some of the elements in there. First, let's discriminate between the process of calculating PR and the actual PR that is finally "awarded" to a url.
For calculation purposes (only), every url in the link graph is awarded some starting value. This value is completely arbitrary, because PR calculation is "iterative" - that is, the calculation goes through repeated cycles, around and around the link graph, changing every url's PageRank until the PR values stop changing at any significant level. For instance, a new full cyle through the link graph is only changing values at the 11th decimal place, or whatever level is important for ranking calculations. The "damping factor" in the PR equation ensures that the calculated PR values actually will close in on a limit.
But to be in on the calculation cycle, the url must be on the link graph in the first place - no backlinks? no PR!
launched a site a few months ago; had maybe handful of inbound links, yet promptly PR 5. Now PR 4.
I've built a few small sites for friends and have seen the same thing. Matt Cutts once mentioned on his blog that there are factors in Google's total algo intended to help "mom and pop" sites - so that they aren't comletely buried by those with big money and large numbers of pages that a small mom-and-pop could never approach. I've always assumed that artifically high PR was at least part of that attmpt.
It may of some technical interest why PR does not correspond to SERPS results, but it's all theoretical. I'm concentrating on my places in the SERPS at the total exclusion of PR. After all, all Joe Public understands is the SERPS; PR is a total mystery to the average search engine user. And quite rightly so.
It may of some technical interest why PR does not correspond to SERPS results, but it's all theoretical.
Well, it isn't theoretical to the people who sell or buy links based on PageRank. :-)
For those of us who aren't into link selling or buying, the recent PR changes are intriguing or, in some cases, worrisome because of what they might imply about future rankings. (Disclaimer: Note the weasel word "might," which could just as easily be "might not" or "don't.")
However, I'm surprised (kind of) to see that a lot of the pages that are listed as not yet receiving Page Rank are still without page rank. This includes newly published pages, as well as others that were published years ago but were caught up in the -950 Penalty, but have since recovered.
I was hoping that some of these, showing as Not Yet Ranked in Webmaster Tools, would have gotten a ranking this time, as it's been quite a few months now since my site recovered from that insult.
I guess I'll wait to see what happens next round, traffic is up but still not where it was prior to when the site was hit a few years back. Despite fixing a slew of issues that weren't issues when the site was built, it would appear the amount of time to fully recover is based on the amount of time it was penalized to begin with.
So...I just have another 2-3 years to wait...
But I would definitely agree, watch rankings rather than PR. Or more to the point, watch your traffic. That's where success is made.
No, unlinked pages are not born with PR. The only way to get PR is to get links from existing pages.
Or to hijack page as this pr update is going out of this way to reward.
The site's have just displayed PR on the TBPR - home page has no PR , the internal pages have PR 4 / 3 and 2 right down to the deepest pages. All pages link back to the home page.
Any ideas on this, or are we just waiting for Google to complete it's routine?
