Forum Moderators: open
Has anyone done this and encountered problems?
All the PR papers say more pages = more PageRank (since every page gets a tiny bit of PR to start with). If this is so, why don't we see sites filled with well-linked random text dumps? How does Google guard against this?
Unfortunately - what people read and think they know are not fact.
Log Scale is not theory - it is (or at least was) fact.
PR is not an interger - this is also fact.
PR as calculated by google is different than what you see on the toolbar - fact.
95% of everything most people ever wanted to know about Google is ALREADY out there. Some people just don't know where to look - and it isn't like most of this is a secret.
One extreme to the other (PR10 to PR0)!
Most of what is known about PR is not theory, but fact.Unfortunately - what people read and think they know are not fact.
Huh? "what people know" and "what people think they know" are the exact same thing! Knowledge is knowledge, whether or not it is right is a different matter.
Could you please cite your sources for these facts. None of the sources I have checked out prove any of your contentions.
Log Scale is not theory - it is (or at least was) fact.
I would really like the citation on this one. It's not in any of the papers I can find.
It certainly appears that they use a log scale, but I can't find any proof.
PR is not an interger - this is also fact.
Let me be a little clearer on this one. Look a The PageRank Citation Ranking: Bringing Order to the Web, Table 1.
Every one of those numbers is an INTEGER number. 1 = 1/100 and you can do integer math. From a programming standpoint it makes far more sense to use integer calculations in this situation.
PR as calculated by google is different than what you see on the toolbar - fact.
Are you saying that the PR used for calculation is different than what is shown or are you suggesting the obvious that there are rounding issues in such a small display?
Whether or not toolbar PR is log 6 makes very little difference to your ability to evaluate the relative competitiveness of the pages ahead of you in the serps and exceed their value in Googles appraisal.
It's much more important to optimize your internal link structure using a much finer-grained tool, and then spend the majority of your time getting high quality links.
High quality links in this case is not synonymous with high toolbar PR.
This discussion has been totally about PageRank, not about position in the SERPs. As far as I can tell, no one involved in this discussion has confused the two.
High quality links have EVERYTHING to do with toolbar PR. High quality link are not necessarily synonymous with high search results on any keyword(s).
Yes, with all due respect, that is the point I was making. Do you prefer PageRank to ranking well in the SERPs?
(then again, I hear pagerank is fetching a good price these days...)
> High quality links have EVERYTHING to do with toolbar PR.
> High quality link are not necessarily synonymous with high search results on any keyword
There may be a mismatch between us in the use of the term "high quality links." I assert that "high quality links" (as determined by Google, opposed to "low quality links," defined by Google) are far more important to good Google ranking (as well as good ranking on other SEs) than internal links, especially over a certain threshold of internal links. Are you disputing this? If so, please advance the discussion with your theories (hopefully with a cogent argument to back them up) or test results, or calculations that match field data.
Even the most cursory examination will acertain that toolbar PR does not equal superior ranking, either for that page, or for pages it points to.
Please understand; I am not trying to be antagonistic, but so far I have read few of your rebuttals and commentary to the suggestions offered to Slud that actually contained any helpful advice backed up by research, or even plausible theories. (I do see that you have many other more helpful posts elsewhere)
What are your suggestions for optimal internal page counts? How did you come to your conclusion?
A competitor has had achieved reasonable success by spliting of every variation of each product he sells onto a seperate page. I've done something similar in hopes of achieving similar success.
Has anyone done this and encountered problems?All the PR papers say more pages = more PageRank (since every page gets a tiny bit of PR to start with). If this is so, why don't we see sites filled with well-linked random text dumps? How does Google guard against this?
Although I personally disagree with this particular rational, there is a certain logic to this web site design strategy even if IMHO mis-guided by the wrong reasoning.
Each day I add new content and at some point, a particular page is content saturated such that the information can be better represented on two or more pages. So a content split occurs much the same as slud's inital example.
Each new page can better target to a more specific group of phrases (theme) and hence better overall SERP's.
There are many different types of online markets, two such groups are:
1. those looking for something similar to what you offer, and
2. those looking for addition web content that helps their own web visitors (and a valuable inbound link with new PageRank).
The more precise and focused your web pages are the greater chance that another web site owner will link to you. As well the more pages you have that support a widening diversity of content, the more you improve this chance of inbound links and in association, additional PageRank.
However, back at your current site, your individual PageRank of tomorrow will be less than your PageRank of today, since Google continues to add new web pages with each update and this expansion of the World Wide Web (as Google knows it) is still only worth 1 in the calculation of PageRank. At 5 billion pages indexed, current PageRank levels will be almost halved if not continuing to increase.
If you do not reach out and capture external inbound links at least at the rate of Google's updates your internal PageRank will slowly depreciate over time.
Whatever you have today will be somewhat less tomorrow and this is one of those so-called facts where no amount of internal page construction is going to be able to keep up with. IMHO :)
So...
I have a 600 page site that grows slowly and methodologically with the current mainpage and a few internals are PR7, the rest at PR4 or above (the bulk at PR 5 & 6). In addition, I have a vast assortment of incoming links most of which are PR1 - 3 and linking to almost every page of the informative part of the site.
As the bulk of my site does not currently have any outbound links, I have started to link to these unsolicited PR1 - 3 pages which should, in theory produce a significant number of Google backlinks (PR4), and in turn, provide additional PageRank at a greater value than just adding more internal pages.
I don't believe just increasing PageRank is worth being a primary goal of your online marketing strategy, although it can be a benefit of the bigger picture.
Dear...
I've just found your delightful (.......) web site in a search for
material to accompany a two-month long special (.....) display.
May we link to your web site?
(http://www.something.com)
May we use some of the information from it for
1) Information to accompany a (.....) display?
2) Activity sheets for (........................)?
We are a publicly-funded (..........) and do not charge for any of the services or activities that we would use your copyrighted material for. We would properly credit the information source.
Isn't this the real value of PageRank, shouldn't this be a primary online goal?
I bring this up... because this particular site owner has no clear understand, knowledge or skill in PageRank, but they do have PR9 on their topical hierarchy pages simply because they are "public" and every site around them links to them.
I requested a permanent link since their requirement in only of a two-month duration -- they agreed.
Internally linked pages matter less -- externally linked pages are everything.
