Google FAQ [DigitalPoint Version]

thanks for all of that valuable information KC TAN!!

 

Nicely done, except this part:

Add "or whenever Google feels like it - which may be more or less than three months".

No. That link is merely a list of previous Public/Toolbar PR updates with an extrapolated projection to the next update. It tells you absolutely nothing that the generic statement "about every three months (approximately) or whenever Google feels like it" doesn't already tell you. It is in fact misleading because it couches the generic statement in a lot of meaningless data suggesting greater precision than actually exists. You're just as well off flipping a coin onto a calendar.

You might also want to add the following:

Since Google PageRank is calculated on an ongoing basis (see Everflux 1 and Everflux 2), when Public PR is updated, it is important to understand

1. that Public PR (e.g., Toolbar PR) is only a graphical estimate of whatever "true" PR value Google uses in its algorithms;
2. that Public PR for many sites will only be truly accurate on the day it is updated and may fall out of date very quickly for newer and more volatile sites;
3. that PR is "only one of more than a hundred factors" used in ranking sites for Google's search queries; and
4. that pages with lower PR can and frequently do outrank higher PR pages for any given search query.

All this means that Public PR is a very poor way to evaluate websites or pages for any purpose whatsoever.​

 

Might also be worth pointing out that PR is a logarithmic scale rather than a linear scale.

 

Thanks for some of the clarifications to make things clearer

Please feel free to comment.

 

Really nice work and I hope this grows more.
One suggestion to add would be a tool that spiders your site and reports on the PR of pages and sub directories (??? Note sure if sub dirs can have a PR). I am currently looking for a tool like this and I know examples have been posted by others - just need to trawl through posts to find.

 

Only problem I found with your write up. Google gives them more value, they have no sandbox and links from them are very valuable.

 

Sorry, visio, but you are wrong - what KC Tan posted is absolutely correct. There is no special treatment of .edu or .gov sites based on the TLD per se.

 

Is there a solid piece of evidence like an official statement or Matt Cutts quote for this Minstrel? I'm not certain this isn't a matter of opinion from different SEOs or if it is indeed factual.

If it's been laid to rest by Google I'd like to know as I felt the same way as Visio

 

Sorry but your wrong. I have worked with edu sites before. Don't tell me it isn't true unless you got case studies to back that. But then you do like to think like a box don't you?

Matt actually has written a post at his blog about it. He says they are identical to .com or any other extension but that only confirms the opposite for me. Know why? Google knows edu/gov domains are getting spammed and by saying they are equal it may stop some of it or atleast slow it down. I made a post about this on my blog a while ago. I will try and find that. There is a difference in TLDs in Googles eyes. Certain ones are watched more by Google. Because of how cheap .info domains have gotten their watch by Google is much higher. .edu/gov have no sandbox and have great value. Believe me I have had them before. My friend got a link from a private edu site which was not known. It had two links from other edu sites and yet the value it passed was easy to see.

You can believe what you will about it but all you have to do is try and get some and see and please don't tell me it is because they have tons of links. Most of their backlinks are from other small edu sites so their would have to already be value put on them and besides I have gotten links from large sites who passed very little value.


Ohh and see what Aaron Wall says about it: http://www.seobook.com/archives/001816.shtml
Aaron is a real seo and I think his post has alot of weight if you don't believe me. Minstrel is known nowhere(no offense) but Aaron is known as a professional Seo. Again no offense but I had to say that as Minstrels knowledge of SEO lacks greatly. He believes alot of rubbish that was only applicable if ever during the early years of search engines and now has been done away with. I am not bashing him just making a point. He can say anything he feels about me as well.
Also most of the 'seo' I have seen backing minstrels argument fail to provide any real proof of being a seo.

AND my RED REP
well, you're definitely the reigning expert on "bull"

And exactly who said what about bull?

 

See comments at www.mattcutts.com/blog/seo-article-in-newsweek/:

Of course, visio has inside information and Matt Cutts doesn't

 

Oh no there is that word....sandbox! I thought you were a Google guy Visio

 

Matt Cutts has also mentioned this in one of his videos towards the end:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1756437348670651505

 

Awesome FAQ, KC Tan. Definitely a must-read for everyone. Thank you!

 

Mines unbiased his isn't and neither is yours. His posts will be made to benefit Google and if that happens to help webmasters so be it but if not the best interest of google will be the path followed.
Anyone who believes otherwise is fooling themselves.It doesn't take rocket science to figure that one out.

 

I loved that article by Aaron Wall, and also the link to that person who wrote about 'the mother of all links'.
I think it all comes down to google trust. If DMOZ or Yahoo list a site under 'schools' or 'university' or 'library' google is going to assign trust big time, for good reason. Similarly, however nice a dmoz link in general is, having one under 'personal pages' is not going to do one much good.

I would doubt whether google can pick up on every 'school' or 'library' website out there though. I mean, I write about education, does that make the rest of my website more trustworthy?

[total aside: I've got some links to my site on 'blackboard' pages: university sites that have a private area for students. This is not going to do my site much good in google though - as blackboard is a closed environment. ]

 

The fact that Cutts is not unbiased doesn't make him wrong. The fact that you are "unbiased" is debatable and doesn't make you right.

And exactly how am I biased, pray tell? I don't own Google stock. I don't have any interest other than that of any webmaster in Google. And if you'd bothered to read any of my forum posts or blog entries, you'd know that I'm hardly a Google or Matt Cutts sycophant.

At least try to make sense, visio...

 

Why the bashing guys, the intention was to help the DP community with this thread. Well done to the OP

 

I agree.

Visio is trying to claim that part of the FAQ is wrong. I'm supporting the statements of the OP based on the available evidence and pointing out that Visio's claim, based only on his opinion, is the one that's wrong.

 

Hi all,

I would like to clarify that this is a Google FAQ and all of my statements above are referenced to Google / Matt Cutts Blog.

We cannot do anything if someone choose not to believe in what they say. However, if anyone sees an official release from Google that opposes some of the points, please let us know by stating the reference.

Thank you.

 

a well written post and definitely worth getting stuck.
but i still doubt that the number of similar-themed posts will come down.