My site is 3 years old, has 600 backlinks, is in TOP 1.15% in alexa and has PR0 <--

[GeorgR.]

Google Page Ranking and Pagerank Algorithm | www.1UP-SEO.com

Scuse me, this is a fricking joke and i took the freedom to rant on my blog about it. This especially in light if the fact that i am coming from others forums where i read stories about sites who gained PR5 in 2 months.

My main blog is 3 years old w/ 600 backlinks and i am getting traffic, and i am stuck with PR0.

I am not a IM newbie, all my other sites gain PR like PR1 or PR2 very quickly, even new sites. But this one will probably NEVER get out of that PR0.

Sorry, rant off. Its just utterly ridiculous.

[Intrepreneur]

You needa use some more nofollow on stuff on there. Would be my best recommendation for ya.

[carlos123]

I am undoubtedly a relative newbie compared to you George but if I may say...what difference does it make if you are a PR0??

Anybody who knows anything at all internet wise knows that the PR rating is pretty much just a bunch of hot air these days. It's pretty useless for ranking and traffic purposes unless one wants to sell links. For selling links to others PR is a big factor in the minds of many (though in truth it's value as a real indicator of link worthiness is highly, highly exaggerated).

But...if you aren't selling links and are getting lots of traffic that you can convert into paying you somehow from your site what difference does having a PR0 make? Who cares!

Carlos

Originally Posted by GeorgR.

Google Page Ranking and Pagerank Algorithm | www.1UP-SEO.com

Scuse me, this is a fricking joke and i took the freedom to rant on my blog about it. This especially in light if the fact that i am coming from others forums where i read stories about sites who gained PR5 in 2 months.

My main blog is 3 years old w/ 600 backlinks and i am getting traffic, and i am stuck with PR0.

I am not a IM newbie, all my other sites gain PR like PR1 or PR2 very quickly, even new sites. But this one will probably NEVER get out of that PR0.

Sorry, rant off. Its just utterly ridiculous.

[mattalways]

I have a feeling there is more too it... I have a site with 1,800 backlinks and it is a PR1. It was a PR4 but lost its PR and went to a 1. I think there is more too it. You might have made Google mad or something like that...

I know it is a pain though, but Google PR really doesn't matter when it comes down to it. It's cool to have a higher PR and can be good for when you're selling a site, but at the end of the day, it really means nothing.

[Tom Goodwin]

Originally Posted by Intrepreneur

You needa use some more nofollow on stuff on there. Would be my best recommendation for ya.

I really don't think that could be the issue. My very young site with approximately 900 backlinks showing up in yahoo site explorer (1300 showing up through SEO Spyglass), has exactly 2 no-follow backlinks (both vbulletin profile links that went no-follow). So, we are talking 2 out of around 1000 total backlinks. That site went from a PR0 to PR3 with the google update a couple of weeks ago.

[FaTaLiT33]

Perhaps i think your getting links from Nofollow links? Agree with Intrepreneur you should link relation to nofollow if you dont want to pass your PR to other sites. You should try them.

I got my 1 and half month blog to PR 2 by having made non-niche related external links to nofollow. give it a shot

[Cackle]

You might also want to check the history of the domain before you owned it. Had it been dropped? Check archive.org and waybackmachine - was there a site on it before?

And like others said - it doesn't matter so much. I have several very high quality sites with zero pr still....with lower quality sites with pr1 and 2. It doesn't mean your site isn't quality. In fact I just closed a deal for several hundred dollars with someone who approached me to post their link on my zero pr site on a yearly basis. They cared about subject matter and quality. PR and even traffic volume, for that matter, wasn't their main concern.

[GeorgR.]

Well it is the case that my blog once got PR2 (i think)...but then i slacked and didnt update any content and it sank back to PR0. But i am also convinced there is more to it although i dont know what exactly it is.

AFAIK i also have problems displaying adsense ads there. But this was like 2 years ago. The only thing i can think of is the number of affliate banners or whatever else reason - but i think its ridiculous but you can see that there is content on the site and its a high quality blog.

I dont really "care" about the PR....but it just makes me mad seeing how it is "penalized" for whatever reason like its a brand new site which it isnt.

[Cackle]

you mention # of affiliate banners - that can definitely be the reason. Google frowns upon too many.

[sterday]

Originally Posted by Intrepreneur

You needa use some more nofollow on stuff on there. Would be my best recommendation for ya.

I honestly second that, Most of the people who are doing link building for their sites are concentrating only on DoFollow links, But google will find and think it as a unnatural links.

If you build 1000 backlinks, it should have atleast 100-150 NoFollow links, Which will really helpful and google thinks it as natural links.

Thank you

[secretjustin]

Hey ,

I hope I can offer a constructive opinion about your site from my perspective.

600 backlinks in 3 years isn't a lot. But of course you had some valid reasons for that. No worries there.

On many pages your site looks like a pier out on the ocean. Like a dock with two long legs going down each side of the page.

*my picture only shows one leg on the left
___________
| | Header | |
| | Content| |
|_|Content| _|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |

Some articles are justified to have that length but especially the smaller posts, it's a bit much. I think the rule which I keep to is, having content to stretch at least the length of your side panels.

I went through a few of your articles and they are high quality in terms of being written in the English language, but they are "interesting." I personally wouldn't link to your articles/reviews/blog posts. There are thousands of blogs/sites just like yours that have and say similar things. Nothing really stands out from them. (I know, Who do you think you are secretjustin? some nobody with less than 100 posts. Fair enough, I've been a member here for a couple months and lurk more often then engaging. But I've got some free time tonight )

I suspect if you start tossing some "link bait" on there, you know more "educational, entertaining, enlightening" (not plain jain review style stuff, jazz it up), and maybe do something with the look of it, you will get more attention and over time your PR situation may rise along with the traffic.

It looks like you've got some regulars, so that's great. Maybe do some sort of contest that will really get things buzzing with them. That will spread like wildfire if you offer some sort of decent prize.

But I would focus on luring people with some better content, and making that content visible.

SJ - Peace

[GeorgR.]

Originally Posted by secretjustin

Hey ,

I hope I can offer a constructive opinion about your site from my perspective.


SJ - Peace

yes, you are of course right. Be glad you didn't see the site a week ago because the template was totally screwed up and never displayed right in Internet Explorer. I made the template in Artisteer and they just recently fixed that problem.

As for my blog, its not a site i make money with, its really more a personal "blah blah" blog where i occasionally put some SEO/IM stuff up. Its very hard to compete in the SEO niche since, as you say, there are a lot of good authority sites in that niche already. But i also dont want to compete with them

I was also just checking my backlinks, for this one i do indeed have many NoFollow links...so it cannot be the lack of nofollow links.

Since it's not really a money site i could care less about the PR0 - i just want to know the reason why Google doesn't like my site The weird thing is that i DO get good rankings for IM/Seo related keywords...sometimes WAY up in Google.

It looks it is some kind of "PR Penalty" which maybe not many people know about...but i guess all i can do is try to build more links and maybe get some higher PR links just out of curiosity.

[arttse]

I've got a 12 page website. 11 pages (including the contact page) have a PR2 but my homepage - the landing page - the most important page...has a PR0.

Go figure!

[GeorgR.]

interesting...i might investigate if some deeper links have higher PR but i doubt it

[ShanghaiTours]

600 backlinks are not so many, and are you constantly updating your site?

[GeorgR.]

Originally Posted by ShanghaiTours

600 backlinks are not so many, and are you constantly updating your site?

occasionally....but really didn't do any link building, despite some blog comments and the occasional backlink here and there.

[Intrepreneur]

Originally Posted by Tom Goodwin

I really don't think that could be the issue. My very young site with approximately 900 backlinks showing up in yahoo site explorer (1300 showing up through SEO Spyglass), has exactly 2 no-follow backlinks (both vbulletin profile links that went no-follow). So, we are talking 2 out of around 1000 total backlinks. That site went from a PR0 to PR3 with the google update a couple of weeks ago.

Not backlinks.. nofollow links on his site. There are a few I would be changing to nofollow.

[GeorgR.]

Originally Posted by Intrepreneur

Not backlinks.. nofollow links on his site. There are a few I would be changing to nofollow.

argh...now i GOT it! Yes there might be some PR leaking out...will do this right now.

Edit: I added NF to most of my banner links, but there is still MANY external links mainly because:

*) the bookmarking links (digg, reddit etc..) - i am not sure whether i should "close" them too, i would need to modify the module

*) several javascripts like bloglog, cproads, feedburner and a bunch more

In fact, i had problems with the site since site analysis told me i had WAY too many javascripts on there.

[NiceBlogger]

In my opinion PR is not very important.Your site must be very well optimized and to be very well ranked in searches results , this are the most important things.

[paulgl]

nofollow neither helps nor hurts, so I don't know what that
comment is about.

600 real backlinks is not a problem. I have a lot less and get
PR4.

If your PR0 site is still getting traffic, no worries.

I would not worry about google PR and certainly not equate
google in any way with alexa. Alexa is even a more useless stat.

The only thing worth fretting over is traffic. Either you got it,
or you don't.

Paul

[jazbo]

Well somethings not right. As an example, my newest site was created at the start of December, I did virtually nothing other than around 6 content pages and then some social bookmarking and forum mentions and its now a PR2.

So something is going horribly wrong on your site, if you care about PR rather than traffic that is.

My largest astonishment is that your site offers SEO services, yet on your lastest post you bemoan the fact you have no PR after 3 years. If you can't get PR, at least don't cause your conversion to crash by writing content that basically says "I don't know jack about the services I'm offering".

[Mike Anthony]

Its amazing to me to see so many people say that PR has no meaning or value. I thought this board had bettter SE educated people. PR is related to authority and authority does help you rank. Sure it might not matter for low competitive words that less people care about but if you ever decide to go up against really competitive terms it will matter.

A quick look at your site's backlinks show that a lot of them are nofollow and therefore will not pass on any link juice.

[GeorgR.]

Originally Posted by jazbo

My largest astonishment is that your site offers SEO services, yet on your lastest post you bemoan the fact you have no PR after 3 years. If you can't get PR, at least don't cause your conversion to crash by writing content that basically says "I don't know jack about the services I'm offering".

You didnt get the point....isn't that exactly what i am complaining about? I laid out there is no rational reason for me having PR0 according to ALL my site's states - so the lack of PR is *not* because of my lack of SEO knowledge There is a penalty on that site and i can probably do cart-wheels and will NEVER get any PR anymore, regardless.

As for my SEO knowledge, it doesn't take a lot usually to gain PR, my other sites do. But there is something off with that site which has nothing to do with SEO, backlinks or any other SEO factors we know.

I never really cared doing actively SEOing this site since it doesn't make me money...but even if many of the backlinks should be nofollow it should at least have SOME PR due to age, articles on ezine and whatnot, my $0.02

[NiceBlogger]

I've had my blog at PR0 , and i've had some good posts on the first page at keywords like "dofollow"

[GeorgR.]

Need to add that my PR is *gray* - so there is def. some kind of penalty on it. I am pretty sure that my blog once reached PR2, but for some reason dropped. I simply dont remember what i did but i dont remember doing anything "bad" let aside "bluefart". I might simply write to google. Maybe they just hate my site since not all blog entries are "pro google"

[Tom Goodwin]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

PR is related to authority and authority does help you rank. .

The issue for me, is whether there is a causal relationship, or whether the effects are simply correlated

Backlinks/SEO --> PR
Backlinks/SEO --> Search Engine Ranking

So, while I agree that a decent PR is correlated to search engine ranking, i'm not convinced that a PR in any way effects search engine ranking.

If it is simply correlated, then PR is nothing to do with ranking.

[downloadvyp]

what matters is the quality of the backlinks.try to have related backlinks with your website

[GeorgR.]

Originally Posted by Tom Goodwin

The issue for me, is whether there is a causal relationship, or whether the effects are simply correlated

Backlinks/SEO --> PR
Backlinks/SEO --> Search Engine Ranking

So, while I agree that a decent PR is correlated to search engine ranking, i'm not convinced that a PR in any way effects search engine ranking.

If it is simply correlated, then PR is nothing to do with ranking.

A few days ago i read a really interesting article on wired about the birth of google. It all started with that Larry Page and the other guy developed that "pagerank" as a factor to determine actual "authority" of web sites. This pagerank was what made google the better search engine

From that point of view..i am convinced that links from a high PR site are more "valuable" and thus also affect ranking...because otherwise PR wouldnt really have any use except being some "obscure" value...

PR is a direct result of backlinks (number of backlinks and strength of backlinks)..this is the basic principle Google is built upon. So there is a relationship and you cant separate PR from "backlink strength"..its the same thing really.

[dburk]

Originally Posted by GeorgR.

A few days ago i read a really interesting article on wired about the birth of google. It all started with that Larry Page and the other guy developed that "pagerank" as a factor to determine actual "authority" of web sites. This pagerank was what made google the better search engine

From that point of view..i am convinced that links from a high PR site are more "valuable" and thus also affect ranking...because otherwise PR wouldnt really have any use except being some "obscure" value...

PR is a direct result of backlinks (number of backlinks and strength of backlinks)..this is the basic principle Google is built upon. So there is a relationship and you cant separate PR from "backlink strength"..its the same thing really.

Hi GeorgR,

You are correct, it is the total value of all your backlinks that determines your page's PR. Not all backlinks have the same value and many are virtually worthless, therefore the number of backlinks cannot be used as a reliable indicator of backlink value. Even the PR alone of the page that links to you cannot tell you the value, you must divide that value by the total number of links contained on that page.

To complicate things further, to determine backlink value you must know the current PR of the backlink page which is updated frequently but reported on only once every few months.

So backlink value is rather difficult to measure and the PR of your own page is not that meaningful (except when selling links). You can have high PR with poor rankings or great rankings with low PR. Google doesn't rank pages based on PR.

From that point of view..i am convinced that links from a high PR site are more "valuable" and thus also affect ranking...because otherwise PR wouldnt really have any use except being some "obscure" value...

An important thing to remember is that search engines don't rank websites they rank web pages. Naturally, it follows that the PR of the linking page is what counts, the website itself doesn't have PR.

It seems to me that PR, how it's valued and how it impacts rankings is a mystery to most Internet marketers and even many SEO's don't really understand it. The PR of your web page has very little direct influence on where you page ranks in the SERP. That is determined primarily on the relevance of your web page.

Where PR does play a major role is in how it influences the value of your backlinks. It appears that Google uses this as a weighting factor applied to your anchortext value. This makes a backlink from a higer PR page carry more anchortext value than a link from a low PR page.

Your anchortext value influences the relevancy score of your page for the targeted keywords within your anchortext. This in turn influences your ranking within the SERP. Your own page's PR is used as a tie breaker when you have the exact same relevancy score as another page. Therefore it is not important except in those rare cases when you have a tied relevancy score.

It would be much easier to improve your page relevancy than it would be to improve your PR and a much better use of your resources. You can improve your page's relevancy score by a combination of optimizing on-page content and building relevant backlinks from high PR pages.

[GeorgR.]

Pretty good read dburk!

I myself wondered many times about such a "relevancy value" since its obvious that a PR7 backlink from a page about The Jonas Brothers can not have the same value as a page about Windows Security, assuming my site is about Anti Virus programs. So..what has relevancy and authority within one theme/subject has no relevancy for the other...sometimes i would pay good money to know about all those factors

[Mike Anthony]

Its a good read but not entirely accurate.

A) Google does rank web sites not just pages. True SERPs are not that ranking but it is in the algorithm. Its called authority and it is related to PR. Its one of the reasons why Wikipedia is so hard to beat in so many categories. Same goes for article sites and news related sites.

B) Yes. SERPS are determined as closely as possible on relevancy but no it isn't even close to being rare for two or more sites to be close in relevancy. I don't know how anyone can think so. SO it actualy is false the PR doesn't have much of an effect. It has a HUGE effect and you can see it in the results over and over again. Yes of course because of relevancy you can see higher PR pages being passed for lower but when the two pages are close in relevance as happens over and over again (just think about two articles on SEO and you will see how two articles can cover almost all the same points using the same words etc).

C) As anyone who has done any SEO knows Google's system is multi layered not one dimensional. Sometimes relevancy does take a back seat as anyone who has wondered why a site that had poor content outrank theirs.

[Khal]

George,

Here is a funny story for you.
I have this domain that I bought about 18 months ago.

I built a static site and basically left it.
This site never had a single page indexed in Google for about 14 months.

Last August, I decided to blow away everything and rebuild it as a blog.
About a month later, I decided to check the blog to see how it was doing.

My eyes nearly popped out of my head when i saw that it had a PR2 and had many pages indexed.

Also, it now sits at the top of Google for over 11Million results for the main keyword.
Go figure.

Khal

[GeorgR.]

Thats what i did with some of my older sites....ranking immediately shot up once i replaced the static site with wordpress

[dburk]

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

A) Google does rank web sites not just pages. True SERPs are not that ranking but it is in the algorithm. Its called authority and it is related to PR. Its one of the reasons why Wikipedia is so hard to beat in so many categories. Same goes for article sites and news related sites.

Hi Mike,

This is news to me: "Google does rank web sites not just pages." Unless you are referring to "Site Links" which is simply a way of consolidating individually ranked pages that would all appear at the top of the SERP.

I'm not quite sure what you were trying to say here: "True SERPs are not that ranking but it is in the algorithm. " (?)

In most cases, when I see Wikipedia at the top ranked position I view it as easy pickings, with a few notable exceptions of course.

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

B) Yes. SERPS are determined as closely as possible on relevancy but no it isn't even close to being rare for two or more sites to be close in relevancy. I don't know how anyone can think so. SO it actualy is false the PR doesn't have much of an effect. It has a HUGE effect and you can see it in the results over and over again. Yes of course because of relevancy you can see higher PR pages being passed for lower but when the two pages are close in relevance as happens over and over again (just think about two articles on SEO and you will see how two articles can cover almost all the same points using the same words etc).

Rare or not, it doesn't change my point and that it is much easier to improve relevance than PR. A slight advantage in relevance always wins over any PR advantage.

Relevancy scores are determined by more than just on-page content. Even if it was, prominence plays an important role in how relevancy scores are determined by Google. Having the exact same content in the exact same order would likely trigger a duplicate filter rather than a tied relevancy score. When you change the precise order or location of the relevant keywords you are effectively changing the relevancy scores. This makes relevancy scores, IMO, that are tied much less likely than suggested by your comment.

Originally Posted by Mike Anthony

C) As anyone who has done any SEO knows Google's system is multi layered not one dimensional. Sometimes relevancy does take a back seat as anyone who has wondered why a site that had poor content outrank theirs.

I would never suggest that Google's system is one dimensional, however relevancy is the primary factor that pages are ranked by and all their multi-dimensional methods are centered around this goal.

Human perceived content quality is very different from relevancy score algorithms. Google does not attempt to subjectively score quality of content, instead they rely on inbound links and this is typically the reason you will see "poor content" outrank a site with better content. Other times it is simply because the poor content has a better relevancy score than a page with better written content. Poor content will always outrank great content if it has a higher relevancy score, as calculated by Google.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by dburk

Hi Mike,

This is news to me: "Google does rank web sites not just pages."

It shouldn't be I have tried to explain it to you before. Its called authority. In particular domain authority. Here a good video on it from SEomoz. the bit on authority is at the 7:40 mark. This is a common concept in SEO.

SEOmoz | Whiteboard Friday - Domain Trust and Authority

In most cases, when I see Wikipedia at the top ranked position I view it as easy pickings, with a few notable exceptions of course.

For a compettive term? Yeah right . Sorry but you are blowing smoke. Since you view it as easy picking I am sure you will share with us the really competitve term that you easily outranked a relevant Wikipedia article with your low PR relevant page. My bet is an analysis will show you haven't or it can hardly be considered competitive or perhaps its so but it surely wasn't easy pickings. I await your proof. Perhaps on this you will actually present some.

To listen to you the only thing that is in the algorithm is on page relevancy. Google goes beyond the page to look at many things to determine ultimate relevancy, trust and authority. You see it in SERPS every day. Your analysis is too simplistic.

[carlos123]

Originally Posted by dburk

Google does not attempt to subjectively score quality of content, instead they rely on inbound links and this is typically the reason you will see "poor content" outrank a site with better content.

And that is precisely why in my honest opinion...Google's algorithm is fatally flawed. While they decry spam and spamming techniques they themselves are responsible through their reliance on links to determine relevancy for creating an environment in which spam or poor content thrives. They have turned backlinks into a commodity that is bought, sold, traded, and otherwise manipulated irrespective of the quality of the content being linked to.

Which is ironic given that their goal was and is to present the most relevant content to search queries.

Carlos

[E-supreme]

Wikipaedia definetly takes time to outrank, it is possible but your having a laugh when you say "easy pickings"!

I also fully agree that it is PR that shows the quality links coming to your website and in turn helps you rank and keep your ranking.

[turbohips]

OK well here is what I found on your site and take it for what it is.

1) you have 31 alt tags missing (lack of free keyword density here)
2) 45 scripting errors on W3C (effects load time and spiders crawl)
3) expires on 6-15-10 (might want to extend this some, some say this helps)
4) Your title on each page sucks (add more keywords there)
5) Norton has a block on your site for some virus on translation services page (fixed this asap)
6) Too many follow links (make them all no-follow)

With just these changes your PR should jump significantly. Especially #5. Hit the thanks button.

[GeorgR.]

Originally Posted by turbohips

OK well here is what I found on your site and take it for what it is.

1) you have 31 alt tags missing (lack of free keyword density here)
2) 45 scripting errors on W3C (effects load time and spiders crawl)
3) expires on 6-15-10 (might want to extend this some, some say this helps)
4) Your title on each page sucks (add more keywords there)
5) Norton has a block on your site for some virus on translation services page (fixed this asap)
6) Too many follow links (make them all no-follow)

With just these changes your PR should jump significantly. Especially #5. Hit the thanks button.

hu? Checking that right now. Thanks!!

You mean this: http://www.1up-seo.com/translation-services ?

There is really nothing on there, my kaspersky doesnt say anything either.
I think something is off with your Norton?

[dburk]

Originally Posted by carlos123

And that is precisely why in my honest opinion...Google's algorithm is fatally flawed. While they decry spam and spamming techniques they themselves are responsible through their reliance on links to determine relevancy for creating an environment in which spam or poor content thrives. They have turned backlinks into a commodity that is bought, sold, traded, and otherwise manipulated irrespective of the quality of the content being linked to.

Which is ironic given that their goal was and is to present the most relevant content to search queries.

Carlos

Hi Carlos,

That's like saying it's the womans fault she was sexually assaulted because she was beautiful or that it's the victim's fault they were robbed because they were dressed nice. The attacker is never blamed only the victim is to blame because they were exceptional in some way.

Google's success makes them a target, but the spammers are responsible for their own behavior. Google is not perfect, but I don't see anyone around doing it better, do you?

When Google came into the market Yahoo was already a giant and had a high quality human edited directory. They laughed and sneered at tiny little Google with their simple little interface and nothing but computer algorithms. The Toolbar was just adware for their silly little PageRank gimmick. The search giants pitied this pathetic little startup with their fatally flawed PageRank gimmick. History tells a different story.

No matter what Google does you will always have unethical operators trying game the system. Google continues to develop ways to detect and devalue spam and spammers continue to find new ways to game the system. I don't see that changing anytime soon. While you can choose to look at this as a fatal flaw, you could also see it as the price of success.

[turbohips]

Originally Posted by GeorgR.

hu? Checking that right now. Thanks!!

You mean this: English To German Translator - German English Translator - Spanish Translations | www.1UP-SEO.com ?

There is really nothing on there, my kaspersky doesnt say anything either.
I think something is off with your Norton?

Nothing is wrong with my Norton as it's the newest update and paid version not hacked. If my browser is giving me warnings I'm sure Google is getting the same warning thus a poor ranking and possibly a virus alert on the search rankings. You might want to check to see if Google has flagged your site. I'm only telling you what I see. Check their web master tools to see if you have any warnings.

[GeorgR.]

I checked my site multiple time including my own Kaspersy AV as well as mcaffee site advisor etc....i dont find a virus.

But on that sidenote, i have a guess what COULD have happened in the past in regards to my PR and this weird "penalty". (my PR is *gray*)

About a year or so ago the micro niche finder site was infected by a very bad virus, this caused my adwords acc to be suspended temporarily since i promoted MNF on adwords and also pointed to the MNF vendor site.

I was also ranking HIGHLY on google for "micro niche finder review" on my blog because i had a review up, and now this entry is totally gone from Google and not indexed anymore. (Today i resubmitted this since its a fricking joke...i ranked page #1 and now NOTHING).

My guess is that since the MNF site was attacked that Google also de-indexed all sites pointing to it? The MNF site was also marked in Google as "dangerous site".

Otherwise i have no idea why google deindexed SOME of my pages.

I need to say i am "slowly" (understatement of the century) getting annoyed by Google, first i am getting a new site which has some penalty on it (NOT 1up-seo, another site) because some earlier owner did bad things with the site 2 years ago. Now i am the NEW owner and made a total new site, but the penalty is still on the site.

1up-seo has that idiotic PR penalty, and for a few days i re-started adwords again and wanted to test something...but i fricking dont get ANY impressions. That one ad i had up for a week it just didnt get an impression. There is just some major BS going on which starts to annoy me.

[Mike Anthony]

Originally Posted by GeorgR.

I need to say i am "slowly" (understatement of the century) getting annoyed by Google, first i am getting a new site which has some penalty on it (NOT 1up-seo, another site) because some earlier owner did bad things with the site 2 years ago. Now i am the NEW owner and made a total new site, but the penalty is still on the site.

They aren't going to make the distinction that you are the new owner unless you really pursue it. It kind of like a company with bad credit. New ownership has to fight to get that smear removed. I can't entirely blame them. The number one identity of a site is their domain name. IF youa re under some penalty it isn't reasonable to think its just one that affects a so called meaningless Pr but it probably is affect yur SERPs. Even if you are ranking for some terms you probably could be doing better without apparent penalty.

[tjcocker]

I think Google is starting to make clear that they don't like SEO sites, or anything to do with IMers. Weather or not they are shooting themselves in the foot is another matter.

The writing is on the wall. Make sites about kittens or something and Google will love you, but anything remotely to do with making money online is out the door these days. Makes sense, it's completely flooded with scams.

[Joe16]

Hi,
I'm new to Warrior Forum and internet marketing in general. How did you get 600 backlinks to your site? What is the best way to get high PR sites to link to mine? Do they have to be in my field (massage therapy)?

[turbohips]

aside from the virus deal did you make the other changes I told you about yet?

[sarahberra]

PR is always changing so I don't even pay attention to that.

[GeorgR.]

Originally Posted by turbohips

aside from the virus deal did you make the other changes I told you about yet?

i nofollowed almost all the banners on my site, the service links (digg etc.) are already nofollowed. I dont have time to go through each old post and add image tags to it.
There might still be leaks with that blogroll widget etc...but in the last week i did already change a lot.

As in regards to HTML errors, they might come from the theme which i made with artisteer. Havent validated yet, but i might need to hand "hack" the theme if i want this to W3 validate. Maybe if i have time

Furthermore i messaged google on webmaster tools in regards to this, i told them there is some PR penalty on it and i would simply want to know why....and also for my other site i requested re-inclusion.

Yes, and @ poster further above, you might be right. IM/SEO --> bad. Just a few months ago Squidoo suspended over 35 really high quality lenses of mine which cost me a LOT of work. Really great looking lenses which i had up there for over 2 years already. Some of them ranked #1 in Google for various stuff.

I made the mistake that i had a honest profile w/ my name, said i am a SEO and webmaster....until someone pointed out that THIS was likely the red flag which got ALL my lenses + account booted of Squidoo. Honesty doesnt get you far as it seems (like being a SEO or webmaster or affiliate is a bad thing). (G is the biggest money maker in that area, just as a sidenote...) - and its sad that you will have more success doing this using some fake girly name, i 100% agree.