Most directories are crap because they do not follow these 5 simple rules....

patrick berry · 10-02-2006, 10:17 AM

This is my first attempt to define what makes a good directory. So as a first attempt I think I am going to just list a series of factors that should not be overlooked.

Published editorial/submission guidelines.
Editors that stick to these published guidelines (aka editorial integrity).
Unique category structure (clearly if your a geographic directory thats near impossible)
Quality sites in the directory (whether submitted by site owners or included by an editor)*
Quality unique descriptions that help a visitor to understand what the site offers without having to click on the link.

to read the rest of this post

bb99 · 10-02-2006, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patrick berry

This is my first attempt to define what makes a good directory. So as a first attempt I think I am going to just list a series of factors that should not be overlooked.

Published editorial/submission guidelines.
Editors that stick to these published guidelines (aka editorial integrity).
Unique category structure (clearly if your a geographic directory thats near impossible)
Quality sites in the directory (whether submitted by site owners or included by an editor)*
Quality unique descriptions that help a visitor to understand what the site offers without having to click on the link.

to read the rest of this post

I agree with what you say ! Which are the directory which you think is able to do that ???

patrick berry · 10-02-2006, 12:50 PM

To be honest I do not have a list.

But I do believe the best list available for free directories is Dans over at Info.vilesilencer.com.

For me what makes that list stand out from the rest, is that he has limited it to 500. The only way to get in is the have a better quality directory. So as directories change from free to paid, they fall out of the list, and only the highest quality free directories will replace them. Its a clever idea.

Its the only list I know of that has firmly gone towards quality rather than sheer numbers.

kiviniar · 10-02-2006, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Its the only list I know of that has firmly gone towards quality rather than sheer numbers.

Agreed...

Nice read patrick

patrick berry · 10-03-2006, 12:26 AM

Thanks Kiviniar.

**sizzler_chetan** · 10-03-2006, 11:52 PM

Nice read patrick...

Well i do follow few of the rules but not all, will have to strictly follow these, these are meaningful

patrick berry · 10-04-2006, 12:07 AM

Cheers Sizzler.

Its a lot easier to list them than it is to follow them. That is a LOT of work, and is not a quick riches road.....

John Scott · 10-04-2006, 02:13 AM

Good points indeed. The only one I would have issues with is

Quote:

Unique category structure (clearly if your a geographic directory thats near impossible)

We create our categories uniquely for V7N Directory, but I do see a lot of overlapping with other directories and I do not think it devalues the directory one bit.

For example, "Shopping/Whatever" is a category type you will find all over the Internet, and it is fine as long as the content of those pages is unique, IMO.

It's just like millions of websites have domain.com/faq.php or domain.com/about.php or whatever. Those pages aren't devalued if they have unique content.

patrick berry · 10-04-2006, 02:21 AM

Hi John,

yes I understand you view.

But I cannot help but be very doubtfull of all those directories with the exact same structure.

phpld has a famous456 categroy structure that is used by litteraly 1,000´s of directories.

Of course some overlap will occur. That is natural. But to start with the same 456 categroies and simple try to fill those ... well I think thats very different.

So John, when are you gonna have time for a thought proking interview for my blog?

John Scott · 10-04-2006, 02:25 AM

Quote:

So John, when are you gonna have time for a thought proking interview for my blog?

As soon as I get more staff and get caught up. My ad on craigslist ain't done nothing for me so far

Quote:

But I cannot help but be very doubtfull of all those directories with the exact same structure.

I agree, but I think it can be overcome if the content is 100% unique. That's why the we rewrite the descrioptions and titles of all user-submissions that get approved.

pnelson · 10-04-2006, 07:18 AM

I think you can add that a lot of directories (and some forums!) use php type addresses that are not easily read out by the search engines :-D

patrick berry · 10-04-2006, 03:48 PM

what do you need staff for?

John Scott · 10-04-2006, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patrick berry

what do you need staff for?

V7 offers a lot of services and managing those projects is kind of a daunting task.

olddocks · 10-05-2006, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patrick berry

This is my first attempt to define what makes a good directory. So as a first attempt I think I am going to just list a series of factors that should not be overlooked.

Published editorial/submission guidelines.
Editors that stick to these published guidelines (aka editorial integrity).
Unique category structure (clearly if your a geographic directory thats near impossible)
Quality sites in the directory (whether submitted by site owners or included by an editor)*
Quality unique descriptions that help a visitor to understand what the site offers without having to click on the link.

to read the rest of this post

Not necessarily always..

1. i believe most directories would publish submission guidelines. it is upto to the user who reads those guidelines. what i have found is most people who submit give a blank eye to read. All they want in to rush in and submit for free.

Editorial integrity is followed by most of directory owners. i dont think there is any problem with that

2. unqiue classification of directories depends on script used and editor who proposes the directory structure.

3. Whats important than quality is maintaining a directory which is spam free sites. Adding high quality sites is possible but for that you need good resources (editors and funding) who search www and pick quality sites.

4. Most of directory owners are small scale and want to support themselves in terms of money. The key for this is accepting free submissions on long term basis. but, the real problem is most directory owners look for money to keep their directory atleast alive.

5. Most of directory owners are themselves editors of directories like dmoz, joeant and skaffe and this shouldnt be a problem for those in directory business either.

patrick berry · 10-05-2006, 11:25 AM

1. actually the majority of directories do not publish guidelines. Use any list you like and feel free to check, ...

2. unique categories does not depend on script used. They princiapl scripts run of a mysql php database. there is particular 456 category structure that seems to be used in almost all the directories ...

3. ..

4. by selling site wide links on pretty much any subject, downgrading the trustrank of that site, and therefore downgrading the value of a bacnklink for any site listed in it.

5. Not so. I know lots of directory owners that are not editors elsewhere. The majority of directory owners are those that you mention in 4. i think.