march's PR now?

[littleman]

looks that way to me in my neck of the woods.

[minnapple]

I agree, I can confirm a March PR match on 8 sites, suspect it on others.
Minnapple

[rfgdxm1]

My site went back up to PR6, which it was in March, from PR5 in April. Thus, true here also.

[NovaW]

not seeing PR from March. Has been a steady PR8 (not that it seems to be of any value right now - may as well be PR1 - my site might be higher in the SERPS!)

[quotations]

I am still seeing the newer, much lower PRs.

[Abigail]

I've gone back up from a 5 to a 6 also - dropped to the 5 in April after being a 6 for some time.

[annej]

I've gone back up from a 5 to a 6 also - dropped to the 5 in April after being a 6 for some time.

I had the exact same experience on one of my sites! Nice to have that 6 back.

I do hope the PR are ready to stick

[uber_boy]

After a few weeks as a PR6, my site's returned to its identity as a PR7. However, the traffic levels have not recovered to their previous levels...

[Alphawolf]

100% for sure here. Site I updated mid february:

All old pages (I kept same URL names) have PR. (5's and 4's)

All new pages added are PR0'd.

AW

[Yidaki]

For what it's worth: a client's site, first crawled april 2, shows a grey bar for all inner pages. The index page still has a pr of 3. However, the pr does not affect the rankings of the inner pages. They all have good positions for their relevant phrases - that's what counts.

So to me it looks like there's still no stable index. I don't think it's a glitch - google's index is simply not yet ready.

[jady]

True here - a new site of ours in March wasnt yet ranked yet (ZERO PR). Then went to a PR 5 for the month of April - now is back down to a zero. But ranks stayed up! Very weird indeed to see a PR0 site rank well.. :)

[seofreak]

2 sites i know of have gained their PRs back from March after -1 from original.

[Marcia]

jady, I've got the same thing with a site that first started getting uploaded very beginning of March. Showed PR5 in April, but though still ranking for the primary keyphrase - the first few pages that went up - it's down to the original PR0.

What got uploaded later in the month had rankings with the Fresh listings but it's not ranking for those now. On another site a new directory was added that got picked up and had a Fresh listing with "guesswork PR" but that's now grey.

LM, it does look like what we're seeing reflects back to the very beginning of March. Though later pages show with an allinurl: check, for ranking purposes it's as though they weren't even there.

[Ltribe]

My PR is the same as March.

My home page had disappeared for a key phrase - suggesting I guess that some old links weren't being counted.

Just now, my home page reappeared in the SERPS, and at an improved position.

Funny thing is it's only showing three links (not even Google directory!), but the ranking in the SERPS suggests that it's counting all the links, even though it doesn't show them.

Perplexing, but I'm sure glad I'm back.

L

[Alphawolf]

Though later pages show with an allinurl: check, for ranking purposes it's as though they weren't even there.

'xactly!

Google has decided a new page added mid february is best for the most important phrase on a client site. Well, that PR0'd page now ranks #151 as opposed to #10 when it had PR4.

GoogleGuy mentioned another deep crawl..and I think it was deft_syder who mentioned he saw Deepbot.

Perhaps another full deepcrawl/update cycle before the more recent pages inherent PR?

Do URL descriptions seem old to people as well?

AW

[seofreak]

I don't think I have been deepcrawled in the last 3 months .. Although my main page changes every 20 days in google (ofcourse, i update regularly) but none of the internal pages (about 150) as i suspect I have been penalized for cross-linking .. does this behaviour of google suggests I have been? Coz only main page having PR3 comes up with fresh changes .. rest PR0 internal pages are the same old

[allanp73]

About 2-3 months ago I decided to change one of my sites URL and design. I completely removed it at the same time from any places where it was linked and updated the links with the new address.
When I view Google's cache of the pages, the updated version with the new link is shown. However, if I do a link:oldurl.com the same pages appear as if they are linking to the old URL.
My conclusion is the page information is new but the linking information is at least 2-3 months old.
So I am really looking forward to Google's next link update.
Anyone make any similar observations?

[flex55]

same here, i understand that this is all what's dominic is about (see GG's comments on dominic, compiled by albert) -

links db is still old.

it looks like this dance is over, isn't it?

[Yidaki]

>My conclusion is the page information is new but the linking information is at least 2-3 months old.
>Anyone make any similar observations?

Yes. And from reading through the last week's posts, i guess many others also made this observations. Isn't this what GoogleGuy confirmed zillion times? More backlinks will be added step by step.

[SEO practioner]

I have the same thing here guys

:-!

[JasonIR]

More backlinks are being added. Dance is not over... not nearly.

[Alphawolf]

Isn't this what GoogleGuy confirmed zillion times? More backlinks will be added step by step.

Yeah. but he didn't mention they'd be taking links away first going back to Feb-early March links.

AW

[edited by: Marcia at 10:25 pm (utc) on May 24, 2003]
[edit reason] Threads combined, thanks AW. [/edit]

[Marcia]

He didn't say, but it looks like that's what they did do.
I'm convinced that what we're seeing is an old incarnation of the index, and my guess is that it's for purposes of recalculating and testing.

My only serious concern is over one site that I inherited something with, but I can't do anything about that except try to fix what was done before I came along. Other than that, though it's interesting, as long as I know pretty much what I'm seeing, I've only got so many hours in each day so I figure we'll know what the story is eventually, and until then I'd better go on as usual and assume everything's fine.

If I don't keep up I'll fall behind and then when we DO know for sure it'll be a hassle to try to get adjustments made that ARE actually necessary.

[mandy54]

Same thing over here :-)
(Finaly a threat that clearly states wats going on)

[chrisnrae]

100% for sure here. Site I updated mid february:
All old pages (I kept same URL names) have PR. (5's and 4's)

All new pages added are PR0'd.

AW

BINGO AW... same here.

[crobb305]

My rankings on some important keywords are starting to go back to top position like they used to be (vs. second or third page recently). Looks like what GG said would happen MAY be starting to.

[edited by: crobb305 at 10:08 pm (utc) on May 24, 2003]

[parabola]

Jason IR <<More backlinks are being added. Dance is not over... not nearly. <<

Hate to rain on your parade, but GoogleGuy has already said the update's over and new backlinks will be added next time round.

[webmasterworld.com...]

I hope we can move on with this and just consider this update over finally. I know it's lousy but the writing is on the wall.

[skipfactor]

My rankings on big keywords are going back to #1 like they used to be (vs. second or third page recently). Looks like what GG said would happen, is starting to. Yay!

Same here and my MIA home page is back. Yay is right!

[nutsandbolts]

Google giveth and taketh away. My site dropped off all datacentres but CW & FI 5-6 hours ago, presumed dead.

[coconutz]

>>All new pages added are PR0'd.

Existing pages = PR same as March
New pages from March (April 9 cache) = PR0
New pages from April/May (no cache)= PR grey, estimated PR no longer displayed