Talk:PageRank/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz |
imported>Hayford Peirce (→Blather: danke) |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
::Maybe not complete blather, but with no hard sourcing, it should probably be merged into PageRank, with a redirect. It's fair to say it's a jargon term for SEO. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 17:29, 3 May 2010 (UTC) | ::Maybe not complete blather, but with no hard sourcing, it should probably be merged into PageRank, with a redirect. It's fair to say it's a jargon term for SEO. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 17:29, 3 May 2010 (UTC) | ||
:::Thanks, Howard. Who can do the merge? [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 17:45, 3 May 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:45, 3 May 2010
Created.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 12:21, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
title
Shouldn't this be called Google juice? Although I can see that it can be argued either way. Hayford Peirce 02:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Blather
What the...? Is this serious? Just redirect to PageRank... –Tom Morris 08:02, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Howard appears to be the only active Computer Editor left. I am going to ask him formally to decide whether this is blather or not. I myself have been dubious about it since the start. Hayford Peirce 17:20, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Maybe not complete blather, but with no hard sourcing, it should probably be merged into PageRank, with a redirect. It's fair to say it's a jargon term for SEO. Howard C. Berkowitz 17:29, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, Howard. Who can do the merge? Hayford Peirce 17:45, 3 May 2010 (UTC)