PR 1 but really bad website

[bober]

Hi,

Ive been looking some website that are page rank 1 but have no content, meta tags, seo at all. how is this?

Would I right in saying it's beacuse they are live a couple of years?

 

[Satanta]

Ive been looking some website that are page rank 1..

If you're only looking at 'page rank', you don't need to look at the website. Unless a website has onpage factors that cause a drop in page rank or penalty, the onpage factors aren't that relevant as page rank is concerned with analysing the linking to a page.

 

[bober]

page rank is concerned with analysing the linking to a page.

Thanks For the reply, I didn't know that Here's one though > I've been looking at a website with SEO quake. It has a PR2 although it has no site map, no links, no google index, It literally has no SEO. It's also made from Flash with no content.! How can it be PR2? The only thing I think of it's a couple of years old, am I correct.. Please see seo quake image. thanks.

View attachment 321

 

[Satanta]

Thanks For the reply, I didn't know that

PR is probably one of the most common (and easiest) areas for someone to get confused. It's very common for it to be overweighted in importance and commonly gets far too much importance. Even the very name (the 'Page' refers to Larry Page, the creator of the original algorithm, not a page as you'd assume) is slightly misleading.

It has a PR2 although it has no site map, no links, no google index, It literally has no SEO. It's also made from Flash with no content.! How can it be PR2? The only thing I think of it's a couple of years old, am I correct..

Age - wouldn't cause a PR increase (you'll find plenty of 10 year old PR0 sites), although it may (many say does, which I agree with) help in other areas.

Flash - SE's are getting better at reading Flash, but still an unwanted hurdle that should be avoided where it's not required as it may hurt the ability for the content of a page to be determined. But not important for PR.

Sitemap - helps ensure easy navigation of a site, for both users and SE's (so potential to help ensure more pages get indexed, which can help PR), but not important for PR.

There's something odd going on with that site alright. It's hard to comment not seeing the site in question, but one 'potential' reason is that you're looking at TPR (toolbar PR - the one that is made available to the public) isn't the same as the actual PR used by Google in real time. It's a snapshot, that is out of date minutes after it has been released (and it's only released a couple of times a year). It's also a very crude measure, giving a 1-10 point indication of page rank, where the actual PR used by Google is far more detailed. Potentially the site had a number of links (either internal or external - although there only appears to be 7 links pointing at the entire domain so hard to believe it has any internal link juice worth talking about) that used to point to the page which have now been removed (I'm not saying that is the case here, but it's something that 'could' cause it. It's also possible that there's simply a small glitch in the information, either from the datacenter providing the PR or in the SEOQuake info).

 

[brabazon]

really nice information. its new for me.