Civil War rocks! has been rated a 4 out of 10!

This makes me sad!

I recently had Goggle's Page Ranker installed on my computer, and I checked it to see how our site rates, and it said only 4! How sad! After all we have done to. *sigh*

What criteria do they use for determine ratings?

I personally find the level of discourse below Armchair General, for one thing.There is a distinct lack of supporting references to discussion points--the cause of the war, and the Battle of Bentonville thread for instance. Also, the site doesn't seem to be attracting a lot of participants--many threads have been dormant for a while and few new ones are being created--at least Civil War threads.

There isn't any.



<BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE>

You complain, you fix it. You must be being called

I cite references, and the replies I get usually don't cite references or there are no replies--maybe some people can't track them down.

How do you fix those situations?

I don't post refrences, for I usually recall everything to mind what I have learned. Can't source my brain. lol.

References are needed--re was it a corps or divison routed at Bentonville? Or what caused the war? etc.

After all, saying it doesn't make it so.

Hey, Armchair General got only a 2. So much for it being about the reaserch. Perhaps it is the other way around. Maybe.

Since no one has any criteria, it could be a bout the colors of the website, or the font or whatever--maybe Google likes the diversity of this site, since it's not just Civil War material.