Page 1 of 2 12 Last
  • Jump to page:
    #1
  1. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Good Citizen (1000 - 1499 posts)

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,179
    Rep Power
    17

    From PageRank to SiteRank


    I'll explain a little bit more for the SiteRank idea from the post
    http://forums.seochat.com/t22926/s.html

    Many sites are impacted by the Superbowl update. Both Superbowl update and Florida update are major Google updates.
    There're many things going on in a major update. iteRank may be one of two major things happened in the Superbowl
    update.

    There're lot of theories on SEM forums try to explain how search engine ranking algorithms work or the behaviors of a
    particular search engine. One theory is better than others if it can explain many things that many other theories try to
    explain. I'll use SiteRank idea to explain Sandbox, Google Penalty and Google Ban.


    What is SiteRank?

    If PageRank measures the importance of an individual page, SiteRank measures the quality of a site.


    Why SiteRank and How It works?

    When Sergy Brin and Larry Page (Google founders) weren't happy about the search results from early search engines (lycos, excite etc.),
    they tried Latent Semantic Indexing (LSI) to improve the quality of search results. SLI didn't work really well. One of things they
    noticed that was some one-sentence page ranked #1 for very competitive search terms. So they introduced PageRank from Graphic Theory.
    PageRank drastically improved the quality of search results and the performance of search. A search engine can serve majority of
    searches using a small amount of documents. It (may) work like this:

    if the search terms aren't specific, look at pages with higher PR pages (PR4 or higher?) only
    if it can't find enough matching pages, search for pages with lower PRs.
    if the search terms are very specific, search for both higher and lower PR pages.

    That was when Google had a few million pages in its index database.
    Now with billions of pages in the index database, the new heuristic algorithm may work like this:

    if the search terms aren't specific, look at pages from sites with higher SiteRanks (SR4 or higher?) only
    if it can't find enough matching pages, search for pages from sites with lower SiteRanks.
    if the search terms are very specific (more # of search words), search for pages from both higher and lower SiteRanks.


    Observation of SiteRank

    1) If your site get a lot of traffic from keywords that appear only once in a page (not even in title or anchor text), your site has
    a very good SiteRank.
    2) If your site get majority traffic from keywords that appear in title and anchor text, your site has a average or reasonable SiteRank.
    3) If Pages that link to your pages are ranked higher than your page, your site has a low SiteRank.
    4) Sandbox or Google Penalty - a very low SiteRank. Why adding many garbage words to your search terms can turn off Sandbox?
    Remember: "if the search terms are very specific (more # of search words), search for pages from both higher and lower SiteRanks".
    5) Google Ban - a zero SiteRank. Google de-indexes a whole domain, not a sub-domain, not or a few directories. The algorithm work at site level.
    If you like my ideas, enjoy reading. If you don't like the ideas, think both PageRank and SiteRank are for entertainment only.

    The implications of SiteRank on SEO? many.

    Comments on this post

    • Bernard agrees : True or not, it's an interesting theory. Thanks for sharing.
  2. #2
  3. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Adventurer (500 - 999 posts)

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    752
    Rep Power
    16
    Interesting concept,... how can one improve siterank? by links? by content?
  4. #3
  5. modulator
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    211
    Rep Power
    15
    I don't know, I think this would have to do with distribution of pagerank throughout a site, not an actual siterank. Case and point, Geocities. These free pages are subdirectories that aren't linked to from the main site, why would they rank well based upon the domain? I doubt Google would give first page placement in a competitive keyword just because it has that domain name (assuming no strong links to the site, especially from the main geocities site which is PR9).

    However, on the flip side, you could have a page (eg. from BBC News) rank well upon first indexing just based on one link from a couple pages deep. This has more to do with a strong authority status (at this point, high PR, IMO) which has been discussed here many times, especially when the sandbox filter was in place before this update.

    Just some ideas...
    Last edited by decipher; Feb 24th, 2005 at 03:54 PM. Reason: badger badger badger badger badger etc.
  6. #4
  7. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    157
    Rep Power
    15
    I'm a little bit confused, yet I understand what your saying.
    Does google or any other "official" company even mention anything about siterank? or is it something you made up?
    Also, is there anyway we can check siterank?
  8. #5
  9. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Good Citizen (1000 - 1499 posts)

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,179
    Rep Power
    17
    This is an idea or concept. Yes, it's something I made up. Google won't give anyone its algorithm for a billion dollars .

    Here's a list of things that may help SiteRank (or quality of a site)

    1. size of the related content pages,
    2. quality of incoming links
    3. regular update of content,
    4. less duplicate content
    5. age of the site,
    6. quality of outgoing links (no deadlinks and more relevant links)
    7. Pagerank.


    any addition to the list?
  10. #6
  11. Registered User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area, California
    Posts
    28
    Rep Power
    0
    I think your list is great. And I really like the idea of siterank. A few years back we were all optimizing individual pages, then Google seemed to want more theme to the site. Perhaps we over-themed and we need to tip the balance back to more unique pages within the theme.

    I have to say my site is better since I have varied the text. I was a little horrified when I poodled my site and realized my title text had a lot of repetition.

    Begrudgingly admitting that maybe Google has a point...
  12. #7
  13. Not a Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Delhi
    Posts
    475
    Rep Power
    15
    Am a bit confused.. as all i can make is that is this site rank is the basis for the ranking then i suppose it will be much more difficult for the new players to rank it will take years for new sites to crack top50... the sites with higher SiteRank will most probably will be dominating the results as this is all i can make out...

    any coments... ?
  14. #8
  15. SEO Consultant
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hyderabad, India
    Posts
    173
    Rep Power
    15
    the concept sounds ok to me.

    Is there a tool to check the site rank? or just estimate as the place for the main keyword?
  16. #9
  17. Not a Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Delhi
    Posts
    475
    Rep Power
    15
    As such Site Rank is not yet being launched neither officially nor unofficially this is just a theory that is being developed by dejone ...... so there is nothing official about DiteRank as of now
  18. #10
  19. http://tinyurl.com/cz56g
    SEO Chat Mastermind (5000+ posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    D0RDRECHT NL
    Posts
    6,063
    Rep Power
    31
    It's almost the inverse of rand's sandbox tool score... only that one is relative to your direct competition rather than an absolute Rank.

    Fact is that the signs are building that Google looks at sites "as a whole" more and more.

    It's no longer sufficient to have a high pagerank homepage. Have PR spread across your site instead (note: the deep links/ total BLs ratio could be an additional indicator...)

    Google's related: command looks at sites, not just pages. And of course there's the (loss of) value of the sitewide backlink...

    I'm sure some parts of the algo consider page-by-page factors, and some site-by-site. Some even look at your TLD or country of origin. It would be nice if we could catch the site-by-site factors with one SiteRank value...
    ...please help me w/ the real Redscowl Bluesingsky...how2 check backlinks...now postin' @ SEO Refugee ...
    <`)~ LOL now that I finally have a paypal account, I'm charging 19,- for SEO advice via PM. Seriously...
  20. #11
  21. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    304
    Rep Power
    15
    right now the only thing that matters to google is site age, link age and content...
    anything else is just optional...
  22. #12
  23. Not a Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Delhi
    Posts
    475
    Rep Power
    15
    yeah Xart is right... right now even in my domain top 20 sites are one of the oldest domain... ranging from 1998 to 2001 there are couple of 2002 site but no 2003...2004 so this clearly indicated that google love old sites... cannot really comment on the link age yet.. as i have not seen any solid proof of that... yet to figure out the link age thing..
  24. #13
  25. No Profile Picture
    Registered User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5
    Rep Power
    0
    Nice explanation by dejaone.

    I have been experiencing changes in some of my sites that support his "Observation of SiteRank" .

    A new site (update, rich content) which was doing well with a common keyphrase (approx. 15-20% of all google traffic), is nowhere with that phrase. But the traffic from "specific search" seems to be increased. Another site, older one, still survives with keyphrases.

    Do you think that the number of hits a site gets in general or having clicks from SERPs have anything to do with rankings?
  26. #14
  27. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Good Citizen (1000 - 1499 posts)

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,179
    Rep Power
    17
    It's possible to wrire a script to check SiteRank value (using Google API).
    I'm in the process of doing some test. I plan to write the SiteRank script after the test.

    Wit has a very good point for "related command". I was thinking the results from "related command" measure relevance and quality of
    links.


    For mecrasun's comments: "Do you think that the number of hits a site gets in general or having clicks from SERPs have anything to do with rankings?"
    The answer is probably no. But I think the CTR from SERP should be the key and most important factors in ranking search results. That's
    what users evaluate a page, not a few guys from a search engine company doing the jobs for everyone else.

    I wrote a little piece on what factors I think search engines should rank the rsearch results.

    http://www.4th-media.com/research/ranking_factors.php
    Last edited by dejaone; Feb 25th, 2005 at 10:45 AM.
  28. #15
  29. afkf
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    England. UK
    Posts
    182
    Rep Power
    15
    lol
Page 1 of 2 12 Last
  • Jump to page:

Similar Threads

  1. Link weight
    By Rogue in forum Google Optimization
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: Jun 12th, 2003, 06:06 PM
  2. Latest Updated Analysis Data on PageRank www.www2003.org/
    By Guest in forum Google Optimization
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: May 15th, 2003, 01:37 PM

IMN logo majestic logo threadwatch logo seochat tools logo