1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Google pagerank is Updating

Discussion in 'Google' started by checkrankings, Jun 29, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. mvandemar

    mvandemar Notable Member

    Messages:
    2,409
    Likes Received:
    307
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    230
    #521

    I'd need an example. What it sounds like to me is you're talking about why the 2 don't match, why every dc doesn't have the same info, which is normal.

    Btw - for those who missed it, Matt is Back! Yay!

    Nice warm welcome from Minstrel on it. :p

    http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/yawn-stretch-blink-blink-blink/

    -Michael
     
    mvandemar, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  2. Cristian Mezei

    Cristian Mezei Notable Member

    Messages:
    3,332
    Likes Received:
    355
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    213
    #522
    You're joking right ?
     
    Cristian Mezei, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  3. CrankyDave

    CrankyDave Peon

    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    23
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #523
    Yes, but in the sense that each rollout had to be completed prior to the next, ie having to "reset" at each subsequent step. Jagger was also pre BD.

    Since PR data is stored separate from the page data (pointers), I'm not particularly surprised that it's being updated on a site by site basis rather than by DC's. I think this lends further credence to BD not being able to use previously stored data properly.

    We already know (per Matt) BD and the supplemental index *were* operating independantly and each (regular and supplemental indicies) *had* its' own spiders. I don't think it's a stretch to think the same problems hold true for PR as well. Also consider the problems with the SERP descriptions combining title and page text as the clickable link.

    BD does not "play well" the the pre-BD data and appears to have to gather it's own data a site at a time.

    Dave
     
    CrankyDave, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  4. Mong

    Mong ↓↘→ horsePower

    Messages:
    4,789
    Likes Received:
    734
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    235
    #524
    Matt Cutts is very diplomatic not very helpful to webmasters (imo). :eek:
     
    Mong, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  5. The Webmaster

    The Webmaster IdeasOfOne

    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    718
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #525
    Not saying that it is fixed..
    It seems that they are 'trying' to fix it...
     
    The Webmaster, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  6. Cristian Mezei

    Cristian Mezei Notable Member

    Messages:
    3,332
    Likes Received:
    355
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    213
    #526
    There's a LOOOOOOOOONNNNGGGGGGG way from it's fixed, to trying to fix it...
     
    Cristian Mezei, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  7. The Webmaster

    The Webmaster IdeasOfOne

    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    718
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #527
    Thats right,
    but what else we can do, except waiting and hoping that sooner than later they will fix it???
     
    The Webmaster, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  8. mvandemar

    mvandemar Notable Member

    Messages:
    2,409
    Likes Received:
    307
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    230
    #528
    Ok, I'm the one who said that they said they fixed it, and I'm basing it on this:
    which was then followed up by this:
    As far as I know, that's the only official word on the topic, and as far as I can tell, that's paramount to them saying that whatever was wrong that was returning incorrect site: counts has indeed been fixed. Does anyone else have any links to where they themselves (Adam, Matt, or an engineer) said anything about the topic since then?

    -Michael
     
    mvandemar, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  9. Cristian Mezei

    Cristian Mezei Notable Member

    Messages:
    3,332
    Likes Received:
    355
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    213
    #529
    Michael .. did you read my posts in that Threadwatch post ? Or the other's posts ?

    If a Google employee says it's fixed, and the rest of the world reports otherwise .. You do the math.
     
    Cristian Mezei, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  10. The Webmaster

    The Webmaster IdeasOfOne

    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    718
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #530
    there is no denying factor that google is broke right now,
    but with the current movement, we can assume that they are working on something..
    either they are fixing it or they are messing it up even more..

    I am hoping that they are fixing it..
     
    The Webmaster, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  11. mvandemar

    mvandemar Notable Member

    Messages:
    2,409
    Likes Received:
    307
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    230
    #531
    Ok, there is a major problem in the SEO/webmastering world of the way info gets passed on, from post to post, blog to blog, etc... it leads to some serious degeneration of the facts.

    Can you show me one single example of the site: operator not working? Or someone claiming it doesn't work, and their claim based on anything but what Adam said? I'm not saying you're wrong or picking on you... I'm just saying, show me. Please.

    PS BIG chance I missed some info somewhere, so you might not actually have a hard time proving me wrong. :)

    PPS or PSS, I forget which - you know I read those posts, I was one of the ones who responded to you. :p

    -Michael
     
    mvandemar, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  12. Nintendo

    Nintendo ♬ King of da Wackos ♬

    Messages:
    12,890
    Likes Received:
    1,064
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    430
    #532
    Example:
    http://www.seo-contests.com/cgi-local/google.cgi?search=site:vgchat.com

    123 results on Google.com and 37,100 in the datacenters. That's not normal at all.

    I gave an example like that to Adam Lasnik, and he confessed Google was broken...


    er, is this thread about a PR update, the definition of free, or how broken Google is!! :D:D:D
     
    Nintendo, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  13. mvandemar

    mvandemar Notable Member

    Messages:
    2,409
    Likes Received:
    307
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    230
    #533
    Dude, that was from 6/20. Google is now showing the same thing. Which means, that, according to you, they must have fixed it.


    Get with the program, it's about European Football, and how if they let Google referee, they could rollback the bad calls.

    -Michael
     
    mvandemar, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  14. scottj

    scottj Peon

    Messages:
    168
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #534
    I think that there were a couple of folks discussing a PR update, but I don't recall. :D
    I'm still not seeing any new PR here, though.
     
    scottj, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  15. Cristian Mezei

    Cristian Mezei Notable Member

    Messages:
    3,332
    Likes Received:
    355
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    213
    #535
    Eh sorry then .. :eek:
     
    Cristian Mezei, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  16. nate_king1

    nate_king1 Active Member

    Messages:
    951
    Likes Received:
    25
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    70
    #536
    nate_king1, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  17. dkessaris

    dkessaris Peon

    Messages:
    984
    Likes Received:
    119
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #537
    dkessaris, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  18. scottj

    scottj Peon

    Messages:
    168
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #538
    There is certainly more than one problem with the site: operator. So they fixed this one special case or one use. Big deal. There are more problems out there. Try this query, for example: "site:yahoo.com -yahoo" :D
     
    scottj, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  19. mvandemar

    mvandemar Notable Member

    Messages:
    2,409
    Likes Received:
    307
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    230
    #539
    Is that a problem with the site: operator, or with using it in conjunction with qualifiers? Do you have any other examples, especially ones without the extra text?

    -Michael
     
    mvandemar, Jul 1, 2006 IP
  20. The Webmaster

    The Webmaster IdeasOfOne

    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    718
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #540
    The Webmaster, Jul 1, 2006 IP
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.