Why the sudden penalization on Directories?

Those are NOT "authority sites", or at least the site links you see in those listings do NOT signify that they are authority sites. There has never been any evidence that this ever was true, other than some guy on a webmaster forum got excited, made the suggestion, and it got picked up and propagated as truth, the way so many things do.

The best guess as to why some sites get those extra site links is PR to internal pages.

Possibly true. On the other hand, I think you also need to evaluate what's happening in the context of Google's announced stepped-up war on link selling and artifical link schemes. And let's be honest here: A lot of the existing newer directories (and I don't mean yours, CanadianEh) are nothing more than "SEO" link farms and money grabs.

 

Thanks minstrel.
Yes I know exactly what you are saying. There is no official word from Googleplex about it. But it has become a popular and accepted term.

I have always been fascinated with those sitelinks shown for certain sites and not shown for others. So I have been studying them for close to 3 months now ( no wonder I want to have them).

As an old-timer you know where it was started and I reckon there is someone called GoogleGuy who used to have special sessions with webmasters on that forum where the term was introduced first. My study shows that- GoogleGuy (not webmasters) was the first one who used the term Authority Score to describe the status of a site. Hence came the word- authority site.

You also know who that GoogleGuy was -- who frequented the SEO blogs and SEO forums till the last part of 2005- are not you?

I am sorry- I have to disagree here. I have seen PR2 sites with those sitelinks --(sorry forgot the URL of that site, but can give you some example of PR3 sites with those sitelinks ). So PR has nothing to do with those sitelinks.

On the other hand high PR sites don't have them.

stpt.com PR8
lii.org PR8
accessify.com PR8

These high PR sites don't have sitelinks. These sites have high PR on their internal pages too

 

I agree with you. If that is the case every PR8 and PR9 sites would be authority sites.

 

I'm not saying that authority sites don't exist. I'm saying that those extra site links in Google's listings don't tell you whether a site is an authority site or not.

It's not PR per se. I think it's something to do with internal pages. Perhaps it has more to do with "deeplinking" from incoming links than PR per se... the more internal pages with incoming links, the more likely it is that you'll get a site links listing.

 

Maybe they have done that to improve the quality of results... As more and more directories are going online... link spam is increasing... so people try to increase the PR of their website throught these websites....

 

If they were a trusted authority site, why doesn't google have confidence in showing their own names for search results? Getting sublinks doesn't make it an authority, only that other pages from that site are relevant for the search above and beyond the #2 result.

 

No problem with this point. There is no proof either way.

Have problem with this point. Any big corporation with a fat buck can get all their pages linked. with so many deeplink directories available- and most directories using them to get many of their deeper pages linked- there would been many more directories with sitelinks.


So far - I have only a list of 25 directories (including Google/Yahoo/Dmoz/Botw/business) that have those sitelinks.

 

My best guess at this point is that G is targeting the more popular directories that are really selling PR. I know, who is to say that they sell PR versus traffic?

Well, when there are dozens of links in form sigs that read "PR 6 - ABC Directory" that's a pretty strong indication that they are trying to cash in on the PR craze. I'm sure that there are other signals as well, but the point is, older established directories that promote their uniqueness seem to fine, whereas those promoting PR seem to be getting hit.

/*tom*/

 

Minstrel, Google site links are definitely a sign of authority. They show that a site has been around for a while and get's a descent amount of Google traffic. The reason some authority sites don't get them is because they have an unsuitable site structure .

 

With respect - this is b****cks - sitelinks have never been "defined" authority by Google - it is a myth

Unless you can "PROVE" otherwise.

It has been misused as a term - by link mongers

If I am wrong - please show me PROOF - ie - statement from Google

 

http://www.bigweblinks.com/

This site got effected as well..

It is sad to see that there are people paid well over $2000 and up to $3000

So, we need to find some way to help each other and get out of this mess.

 

Uh-huh. That's the popular myth all right.

Show me some evidence. Any evidence.

 

Speaking of myths brought about by some random bloke thinking out loud on webmaster forums. Here's a thought.

Competition Reduction: Google / Dmoz Directory is being updated!

It almost makes sense to douse a few smaller competitors to give your own directory a boost *shrug*

 

I've seen a client get the expanded links and now they are gone.

They still hold #1 position for the keyword term.

It has been at # 1 over a year for a very popular tourist destination and had the expanded links for two months.

I would say its an authority site... but if I go by Googles actions I would say Google is schizo....

I did not think the expanded links designation was an automatic issue but something Google did by hand....how is this done if anyone knows?

 

Matt Cutts posted that "it’s all algorithmic. The algorithms pick the queries where [sitelinks] could be helpful."

 

So let's be honest to the end:
Who's the biggest farm and money grabs?
Mr. G no doubt.
And he's too greedy to share it with others.

 

Yes. And there's nothing there to even hint that they have any relationship to "authority sites", is there?

Still waiting for any evidence whatsoever to attach site links to authority sites. I've been asking for quite a while now, and so far no one has stepped forward holding any.

 

No. Nothing about authority. Just that the sitelinks are algorithmic.

 

Whatever the case maybe those sites that are in limbo and most of them don't deserve the comeback status unless they fix the defects of their deceptions or manipulations if any.

 

Thank you for the answer even if someone else felt you needed a knock for it.