Is Yahoo! WebRank Dead?

5 comments
Thread Title:
Yahoo WebRank
Thread Description:

Some speculation over at the dp forums on whether the beta Yahoo! webrank has been abandoned. The thread dates back to July but has just been reopened. I cant say i've heard or bothered to find out much about WR but the thinking in the thread is interesting.

Is it just a gimmick? Is it worth anything to search marketers?

Theories ranging from it was just crap to sailing to close to the standford PageRank patent are aired in response to earlier failings in WR but the debate continues.

Does anyone have the scoop on WR?

Comments

Yup, dodo-style.

No scoop, just experience. I actually checked WR (using DP's tool) on my sites, but it seems not to be updated. Consequently, I bet they don't use it either. Or if they do, well, that could explain a lot :)

Webrank

It was put out as beta. There were some things we wanted to improve before releasing webrank into general availablility. It was decided that bundling anti-spyware into the toolbar was a more important feature to get out into general availability for users which we launched several months ago. I am positive that the beta period is no longer active so the data is probably not at all reliable or up to date as Wit seems to have noticed.

Then why serve *any* data?

It seems to be that if the beta is over and there's nothing to follow it, the service should be shut down.

Actually

I would have liked to have another ranking system to (try and) balance G PR (I'm not counting Alexa for some reason). That might explain why I checked my own WR score now and again. Shame it was discarded, but then again, if it's not used, why keep it. I'm sure some part of the Y algo can be quantified on a 0 to 10 scale, and published, but in the light of recent G PR comments, I'm not surprised they won't bother.

I liked it...

I found that it was often helpful to measure the PageRank, WebRank, and Alexa Traffic Rank for particular directories. Each one has so many flaws that I'm not sure I could list them all, but I did notice that when a site had high PR and WR and Low AR, it was generally a very good site, and sites that had good numbers in one but sucked in the others tended to be a flash in the pan.

Just an observation.

Ian

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.