Wrong, wrong, wrong!!!! First of all PR has absolutely NO effect on where, how or why you rank. Forget that... Secondly you don't ask Google the answer to a question when the have bias. Why do they have bias? Well do you really think they are going to say "yeah they have more value"? If they did it would encourage more spamming. So saying they don't have more value would help keep it down some. There is data that supports .edu/gov having more value. Proof Google loves .edu sites
i think .edu domains are not special . they are like the other domains . if you can find backlinks , they will get pr and will get good serp results
I would have written a content related page and link from it to the website. and of course make sure there are links to it from other sources. edu links are hard to get...
Yeah, that's what I'm planning. Would any of you be interested in buying a page like this? I'd have to check into the legality, etc, but I'm sure I could find some students willing to sell their pages.
You're mixing up the issue - the question was centered on the value of a link on a .edu domain, not how PR comes into ranking sites. The point I was making is that all other factors being equal (even though they never are) a link on a .edu is of no more value than a link on a .com or .net or .whatever. In other words - the domain extension is not a factor in the "weight" given to a link by Google. If you think otherwise....great. I'm telling you from experience (and backing it up with Matt quote) that it's true. I know, I know...Google is out to get everyone and they lie all the time Sorry, I just don't buy into that conspiracy theory. The only proof there is the word proof in the title. My intial reposnse to this thread was to simply address the OP's question; "Would that likely have any positive effect on my PR?" The answer is "yes", but no more so than if the link was on an equal .com or .net page.
So far I have seen no proof from your side either. But I would take Aaron walls word over yours or Googles any day. Its not a conspiracy theory it is pure logic. If you owned a search engine and were working hard to keep it relevant would you(I mean with your head screwed on right) be telling your users how they can manipulate it? No you wouldn't. You would influence them in a way that would keep them from manipulating it. I have done minor testing of this theory and so far all tests have come back positive.
lol, I'm not here to "prove" anything, don't need to. I run my own tests and draw my own conclusions and have been working with directly with .edu's for years. Perhaps Aaron has done the same and has arrived at a different conclusion - that's great and I'm sure his audience is thankful for the information he's provided on the subject. My only purspose of posting at all in this thread was to give the OP an answer to a question, not a history of search or pages and pages of "proof". Outside of debating with me (which is of no benefit to the OP) I've yet to determine what you're hoping to accomplish by posting in this thread? At the end of the day the OP will most likely benefit from the link they were inquiring about...domain extension aside.
If you do link it I'd be careful how you use it since most universities have usage policies against using their resources for personal gain. I know some people have been suspended or expelled because of it, though those were extreme cases. I know one guy who was barred from using university resources at all, and ended up nearly failing some of his courses because of it (lab time, server access, etc.).
To the OP: sites don't have PageRank, pages do. It depends on why your page has a PR7 as to whether or not it is valuable/ That's like saying gas has no effect on how fast your car goes. By itself it may not mean much, but it is an important part of the equation. The question isn't whether or not they have more value, the question is whether or not they have inherent value. You cannot go get a charter and start up an .edu domain and expect it to mean anything more than any other domain just because of the extension. No, you haven't. If you have tested anything, without knowing the details I can say with a very high amount of certainty that all you tested was that a particular page on a particular .edu domain seemed to carry some weight. I'm pretty damn certain you did not test and/or prove anything to do with ambient starting weight factors. -Michael
I was just showing that there is no logical reason for you to be correct and further more evidence proves differently but if you research proves otherwise more power to you.
Can you provide a link that would explain this more? eg which "types" of PR are valuable? I've been trying to read up on my University's policies. So far what I've found is one state law that bars using State-owned resources for personal gain but it appears as if it only applies to state employees. Could out proved a relevant link about the cases you're talking about? I'd be interested in reading about them.
It has to do with backlink recursion depth. Generally speaking, if you have a page that is PR7 and the reason it is PR7 is because it has half of a million PR1 links pointing to it, then a link from that page would be more valuable from a link from a PR7 page that is PR7 because it has a single link from a PR8 page. If the reason that your page has a PR7 is because, say, you rented a PR8 link and pointed it to your page, then you would have been better off pointing the rented link directly at the end resource you are trying to boost, rather than putting something in between. -Michael
Hows it going? - Be careful now that you don't contradict yourself like last time when you argued with me. Wrong. Backlinks are gas. PR might be likened unto the speedometer but certainly not the gas. A site DOES NOT NEED PR TO RANK IN GOOGLE BUT DEFINITELY NEEDS BACKLINKS. Try and keep your facts straight. If you weren't misleading honest folk you would be a laugh. PR is the gas? I am not trying to convince you. I could care less what you think. I am providing the webmaster with the whole picture. What they do with it is not my problem. There you go again.. acting as if you know what I do. Since you have supreme insight into my life. Do you mind planning my day tomorrow? Sit back, grab a real seo resource and read until you learn something. So far you have said nothing accurate.
Since you feel the need to call me out (ie not logical, wrong! wrong! wrong!, evidence that PROVES differently, etc) lets see the evidence you claim exists. I was just trying to help the OP, you on the other hand didn't even respond to the OP, just my points within the thread. I would love to see the evidence that supports the theory that all other factors being equal a link on an .edu page carries more "weight" than that same link would on a .com page - again - all other factors being equal.
The actual PageRank algo is out there somewhere, I just don't have the link handy. Hm. Got a link? I don't seem to recall that one. In fact, iirc correctly last time you just dipped into fantasy land as a defense, but I don't remember where that was. And... how do you get PR again...? Dude, you've been misinforming people for years now, give it a rest already. Ok, fine. Are you saying that what you tested could distinguish between a "default" weight that .edu's start with, vs. just happening to have weight due to tons of links and being old? I wasn't claiming to know what you did, I was claiming to be pretty sure of what you did not do, since I do know you well enough to know that you wouldn't have a clue what a properly conducted scientific test was if it came up and took a rather large chunk out of your ass. -Michael
For me to come up with 2 sites that are equal or even semi equal would be almost impossible and that is why I said minor research because there is no sure-fire way to prove it by comparing two sites. You got to use logic and common sense. Like I said from the research I have done the edu links always stick out on top however again this doesn't prove it because as some seo say(some of my good friends believe this) edu links just have more valuable links pointing to them. I don't believe that. It is fine if you disagree with me. In a blackhat discussion with 1eight, remember I don't. A good majority of my sites have lower PR(except a few) but outrank many of the big players. Interesting view. You wouldn't care to send me some of this info would you? PS. I think this thread has gone a little off-topic. So if you don't mind lets turn it back the other way.
Oh, you mean this thread? The one with 220 posts, and not one of them mine? I have never contradicted myself in an argument with you. I've only even ever talked to you a few times, and the last time, iirc, was when I was pointing out that you should really tone down your damn arrogance, since you were a newb yourself quite recently and really don't know all that much. Looks like it hasn't changed though. Ok, that tactic of going off topic at the end while pretending not too only works if both guys in the discussion are stoned. If you're the only one it's not that great of a strategy. I didn't mean how do you personally get PR, which should have been obvious. I was asking how does anyone get PR, and since you will probably continue to answer in this vein I'll just mention it. You get PR from links. It is pointless to say that PR isn't the gas, that links are, since they're both parts of the same thing. It was an analogy to the fact on how it's all part of an integrated equation. I already mentioned that it matters in how you get your PR. Your whole tactic of trying to sound smarter by touting the "PR doesn't matter" sermon, the bandwagon that so many jump on these days, falls seriously short. Well, this thread would be a good start. To be fair though, I think I did confuse you with someone else when I made the comment, because I don't see you now at the forum I was thinking of. I know I have seen you post stuff similar to what is in this thread, which is probably why I confused you with someone else, but I can't find the specific instances I was referring to. And yes, this is off of the original topic. You went off topic from the get go, and continued in your argumentative non-contributing manner since then, and your being big about how those arguing with you should go back on topic is nice and all, but an obvious misdirection tactic nonetheless. If you weren't posting bs that is likely to harm others efforts at learning it would be easier not to respond, so I'll make a deal. Stop posting off topic, and I promise I won't reply to it. While I can't speak for GuyFromChicago, it's probably a safe bet he won't either. -Michael
Well to keep the thread clean I am not going to keep arguing everything. I will straighten out a few things though. I don't deny that I haven't got years and years of experience in the seo field. Seo who claim that are complete fakes. Years means nothing. Experience is what counts. I started sometime in May 2005 as I remember. I was new to it then but do you think Aaron or Rand or even Matt Cutts was born with their knowledge? Actually Rand is newer to the game than some of the other seo and yet has some of the best info out there. And as I have said to others like you. What you think of me is irrelevant. Its what my clients and users think. I am here at DP and other forums to help educate and to dispel myths that people like you spread. And my views are backed up by many of the prominent seo such as Rand, Aaran and others. You can believe that Google has only YOUR best interest in mind but that is complete foolishness. I think Google is the best search engine and to keep it that way they will do anything even if it means leading us to believe something just to keep us from manipulating their engine. If you were in a bike race and your opponent told you a short-cut would you follow it? It would be kind of stupid seeing as the opponent has NOTHING to gain by telling you the right but everything to gain by leading you on. Same thing with Google. What ever is best for Google is what I going to be taught by Google. If you haven't figured that out then I seriously doubt your seo experience. So what your telling me is that if I have a PR2 that is identical to a PR7 in backlinks, on-site optimization etc etc. The only difference is the PR that the PR7 would outrank the PR2? Its interesting that you think PR is the gas. What are backlinks? Maybe the radio? Your thinking is skewed. PR is a speedometer. It is NOT needed to run the car or even drive but it is there to give an estimate of your speed. The only difference is Google doesn't give us a totally accurate PR. Google has admitted to this. So valuing it would be foolishness.