Webmaster Forum - View Single Post - How does Google evaluate an inbound link??

I, Brian · 01-21-2004, 11:45 AM

My understanding is that the old-fashioned Google SERPs worked on a system of general ranking elements being scored, and then this score being modified by PR.

In short:

"ranking elements x PR = ranking"

For the connection between PR and rankings: 1,000 high PR pages with a link to your site as being much more valuable than 1,000 low PR pages with a link to your site (link weight and anchor text being otherwise equal).

The point here is that if other ranking elements remain the same, the highest PR site would win out.

Google bombing I thought was seen as a more extreme manipulation of this formula - anchor text being a particular weakness that allowed elevation of the initial "ranking elements" factors to an extreme level with repetitive linking. Thus PR itself as a ranking factor becomes muted in the face of the otherwise very high "ranking elements".

I'm afraid that I can't pull any papers out on my initial perception of PR at the moment as I've a lot to do here - had to destroy and rebuild my partitions today, reformat, reinstall...and now there's a server error buggering up my business site. I'll try and find something over the next couple of days to try and support my perception - presuming that I'm not corrected with a cite in the meantime.

After all, my early days of learning SEO were done at SitePoint, reading Chris Beasley's articles and links (John has as similar high regard for him as he does for Jill Whalen.

).

Florida, of course, complicates everything. Although some of the system seems to have remained the same (or put back to similar), a certain swathe of general results seeks to require an additional "selection" criteria to even be considered for ranking for certain terms. This is where the theory of Hilltop's involvement says that experts pages and authority sites are used in some measure to "pre-select" paegs for ranking - whereas the TopicSensitive PageRank theory says that the actual context of the links is now the deciding factor.

Personally, I see issues of theme and context as issues that SEO needs to take into account now for long-term SEO projects. Even if PR alone was a ranking factor - that links were merely links without context - I don't see a long-term basis for following that reasoning anymore.

2c.

01-21-2004, 11:45 AM	#2 (permalink)
I, Brian Inactive Join Date: 10-26-03 Posts: 2,466 iTrader: 0 / 0% Latest Blog: None	My understanding is that the old-fashioned Google SERPs worked on a system of general ranking elements being scored, and then this score being modified by PR. In short: "ranking elements x PR = ranking" For the connection between PR and rankings: 1,000 high PR pages with a link to your site as being much more valuable than 1,000 low PR pages with a link to your site (link weight and anchor text being otherwise equal). The point here is that if other ranking elements remain the same, the highest PR site would win out. Google bombing I thought was seen as a more extreme manipulation of this formula - anchor text being a particular weakness that allowed elevation of the initial "ranking elements" factors to an extreme level with repetitive linking. Thus PR itself as a ranking factor becomes muted in the face of the otherwise very high "ranking elements". I'm afraid that I can't pull any papers out on my initial perception of PR at the moment as I've a lot to do here - had to destroy and rebuild my partitions today, reformat, reinstall...and now there's a server error buggering up my business site. I'll try and find something over the next couple of days to try and support my perception - presuming that I'm not corrected with a cite in the meantime. After all, my early days of learning SEO were done at SitePoint, reading Chris Beasley's articles and links (John has as similar high regard for him as he does for Jill Whalen. ). Florida, of course, complicates everything. Although some of the system seems to have remained the same (or put back to similar), a certain swathe of general results seeks to require an additional "selection" criteria to even be considered for ranking for certain terms. This is where the theory of Hilltop's involvement says that experts pages and authority sites are used in some measure to "pre-select" paegs for ranking - whereas the TopicSensitive PageRank theory says that the actual context of the links is now the deciding factor. Personally, I see issues of theme and context as issues that SEO needs to take into account now for long-term SEO projects. Even if PR alone was a ranking factor - that links were merely links without context - I don't see a long-term basis for following that reasoning anymore. 2c.