In this thread from August 2003, Debra brings up the point that she's seen the Google link command returning links that were below PR4. Jill & others question & then confirm her observations. Qwerty resists the analysis but finally hops on board.
While I don't have the benefit of looking at exactly what you guys saw then, this issue brought up a debate for me at another board earlier today. I found the most direct info here at your forum so I thought I'd share some research. In the big scheme of things, this issue is not that important but it's stuck in my head now
Disclaimer: We all know that the TB PR is an approximation of real PR & that the TB PR can be flaky at times. Anytime I say PR, I mean TB PR unless noted otherwise.
I checked the backlinks on highrankings.com.
That's a lot of backlinks so I just poked around the first 100. Checked every non-indented page & a few indented ones. About half down I came across a link from a gray TB page (shows a cache):
Couple down I see this with gray TB & no cache:
Next a nice auto generated looking page with PR1, shows cache:
Next was a gray TB, shows cache.
Finally was a gray TB, shows cache page.
That's all that I originally found in the 1st 100 backlinks. My initial reaction after finding a couple was that the old PR4 & higher rule has indeed changed. Then I thought I saw a pattern. All dynamic urls... except 1. So is there a pattern?
Let's look at them 1 at a time.
The home page has TB PR5. site: shows 182 pages indexed but all the articles show gray TB. Until I refresh a few times. Then I see a nice green PR4 on the TB for that page. Next...
No cache, huh? If you watch closely, you'll see the url indexed by G gets redirected to www.webpronews.com/ebusiness/sitepr...rInclusion.html. Hmmm. Follow the site's navigation from index & you'll see you gotta go thru the archives to the 2003 archives to the summary of the article then thru a redirect to get to the real article. Try link:www.webpronews.com/wpn-3-20031203ShouldYouPayForInclusion.html & you'll see that G'bot actually sees a redirect page as a link to the page in question. With all the redirection going on, I don't find it hard to believe that the link: command & the TB could be out of whack to our eyes. I'm gonna chalk this one up to too much redirection to get a good read on the real PR of that link. Next...
Looks like a dynamic, auto generated page on a site that's basically trying to catch a bunch of keyword traffic. The home page www.aallix.com/ has a PR6. With only 30 links off that page, I'd expect all the next level pages to have PR6, PR5 or PR4. But that's not what the TB shows. Only 1 internal link goes to a static looking url. www.aallix.com/top_keywords.php That page shows a PR5. All the other internal links have a dynamic variable in the url & they all show PR1. I don't buy that. I think the TB is wiggin out on those urls. Next...
The only link to this page seems to be from www.cheverus.org/library.asp which shows PR4. None of the "Internet Resources" pages under the Library section show PR. The page in question doesn't link to highrankings.com. It links to rankwrite.com which redirects to highrankings.com. We can debate whether LibraryLinks.asp?cat=20 should really be a PR4 page but we don't know for sure. If it's not a PR4, it's probably close. I think the TB is getting dizzy between the dynamic url & the redirect. Next...
I can't read the site but I found the listing pointing at rankwrite.com on this PR6 page
Google's displaying the cgi redirect page on the site that gets shot to rankwrite & then to highrankings.com. Again, I think this is a case of the TB not being sync'd up with what the index shows in the link: command. I think that the link is giving credit from that PR6 page or at least passing enough PR thru the cgi to count as PR4 or better.
I also looked briefly at the joeant link mentioned. While there's no backlink there anymore, there is a redirect going on so I'm betting that's what was messing up the TB PR when you guys saw it originally.
There's a total of 9 urls in those 1st 100 links that contain a ? character. I see that there's a couple forum posts in that link list that I should look at but it's too late & I'm beat.
I know this isn't complete & full data but I think it's more than was originally raised in this thread that started the "rules have changed" comments. Just consider it food for thought.
My current working theory is that the TB PR gets messed up on either dynamic urls, redirects or some combination of them both. I think that the old rule of the link command only showing backlinks with PR4 or higher is still valid. You just need to know that it's *Real* PR4, not necessarily TB PR4.
Anybody want to chime in on what I've pointed out so far? Anybody want to check the other 500 backlinks?
Edited by Scottie, 06 February 2004 - 09:24 AM.