PR - Just a Basic Explanation Please

Hi all,
Okay this is a really basic question by the usual standards found here, so here we go:

as a rule of thumb what sort of page rank should a page get if it has:

1,000 PR4 pages pointed to it?

We have approx that many pointed at our main page as well as a few hundred PR5's some PR 6's 7's etc.

I got quite excited when I found on here that there was a new update of PR coming. Problem was that our back links went from a stunning 26 to 24! With no change in PR SERPS etc....
The site is: http://www.keep-talking.net

Three links point to www.keep-talking.net/home.htm instead of www.keep-talking.net. All links must point to same page, preferably to domain name, that is- www.keep-talking.net. Otherwise the Pr will be distributed since google will consider the two urls as two different pages.

PR assigned from one page to the other will also depend on the number of links on the linking page besides the PR of the linking page.

Thanks for taking a look.

After going through our link exchanges it would appear that most of them have removed our link from their sites
Talk about bad manners!

where they link exchanges? Or purchased links? Seems like a lot of links to recieve and then lose all of a sudden

Hi,
Link exchanges, alot via linkpartners.
They have been building over the last 3 months.
Yes I was quite shocked as well, when I started clicking through the sites and finding the link to ours absent.

There is another post about this very topic, just scroll down the list of posts.

Managing links through linkpartners is not as easy as they claim or as it might seem at an outer surface. The biggest problem is that you never know how trustworthy are the people you are swapping links with. If you opt to be choosy in acccepting link exchange requests or in asking people for the same, it's going to be as much hard work as a traditional link exchange campaign.

In other words, link exchange campaign is never going to be a walk in the park; it'll always give you a pain in the neck. Tools like Linkpartners might help a bit, but you can't rely on them too much. Patience and discretion are always required. That's what SEO is all about, and that's why it's so rewarding in the end when you see your site at top of the seps.

Did I say in the end?

"in the end" - yes you did.

The trouble I have with it (exchanging links) is that if you agree to exchange links and then afterwards remve the link then it's breaking an agreement in a very underhand way.

We all make mistakes - such as forgetting to put the link up, maybe overwriting a page - but there appears to be some sort of mad consistancy amoungst certain nefarious people to remove links afterwards. It really is of no benefit to them as after a while people do find out. Okay for me, as I'm a little gulible, it did take 3 months with some, but in the end the exchange is broken.

Do that to a few websites and word soon spreads:-o

Don't forget that websites and webmasters and policies change. Just because a site agrees to swap links with you now, doesn't mean that they will continue to do so in the future.

This is why it is helpful to have an automated tool that scans for your reciprocal link on other your link partners sites. That way, you know if your reciprocation status has changed.

I've had excellent success with LinkPartners. Its a huge directory, so as expected, you'll find some unethical webmasters in the bunch. I do know that their staff has Editors that manually check each new site submission for quality, and they have a number of technical quality controls in place.

True, things change.
An e-mail explaining things have changed would be nice.

Linkpartners isn't a bad tool. I hope I haven't given the impression that I think otherwise.

I don't think we said that linksmanager is a bad tool. But regarding the 'changes' you discussed, I would say it's disgusting and I hate it. It's so selfish that you link to someone as long as you need the link and then you withdraw the link later, though I often wonder how come one can assume that one doesn't need a particular link any longer. Links are always required. The only reason I can think of is that some people go for any links to start with, be the links on PR 0 page or whatever, and when they buid some PR and start getting links from higher PR pages in return, they start to ditch the old links partners.

What I said, and still say is-
1. You can't blindly rely on linksmanager or any such tool and hard work and patience is always required. So the tool doesn't really 'take the burden off' considerably, as many believe. It only helps a bit.
2. Links partners who 'change their linking strategies' are odious people, even if they notify that the 'things have changed'. To hell with such link partners.

Not really relevant here, but kind of funny... here's Google's 'Official' explanation of PR ;)

http://www.google.com/technology/pigeonrank.html

lol I never knew pigeons are so much intelligent. But if google relies so much on pigeons, isn't that dangerous? I mean, if some one let the cat into the pigeons..?:grin: