What is a "Quality" directory to you? Feedback needed.

I have a website which lists quality directories. I didn't create the list, I purchased the site already established. I am very serious about the site and have spent in the high XXX on it to have a custom script, which is worth a lot more. I am rethinking the list. I will probably remove many directories listed on it, but I wanted user feedback first.

What's important to you in a directory? What makes it a "quality" directory? Can a directory with many good backlinks, which is seo friendly, etc, all that good stuff, but with little to no PR still be a "quality" directory?

Please share your thoughts, I could really use the help to make my list a very good list for webmasters.

 

Depends on many factors , You can check out the new page strength tool to know the value of web directory http://www.seomoz.org/tools/page-strength.php

 

I'll keep that in mind, Amit. Mainly I want to focus on the user and how they feel about directories.

 

Look at Strongest Directories thread, started by a member here on DP.

Also it would help more http://www.avivadirectory.com/strongest-directories/

 

Thanks, still I'd like webmaster feedback in my thread. Not references to lists, threads, or websites, but I will check them out, much appreciated.

 

something which looks good,

doesnt have loads of ads (banners on the top or on the side are fine),

not more than 3-4 footer links (apart from the powered by link, part of another site link)

quick hassle free submission process and doesnt force us to read page after page of guidelines.

 

Yes. it is not a real indicator of the future worth of a link in that directory or that directory itself.

 

Here is some feedback:

1- Attractive and professional unique design of web directory
2- The script on which a directory is based
3- Should be SEF (search engine friendly) script
4- easy navigation
5- Unique category structure
6- New categories
7- Quality incoming links
8- Solid Page Rank offcourse makes the quality directory
9- Internal Linking
10- Site Maps
11- Not full of junk
12- Objective (in case of Niche directory)
13- Selective while approving links (approving only quality links)

and so on

 

The seomoz page strength tool is a good one. My main criteria would be whether the directory gets much traffic from google. If it does then its clearly a trusted resource and a link is worth 100 times as much as a non trusted directory.

A quick test is to see how it ranks for its main title.

 

A good directory should be useful in its content. Only having links is not enough.

We should stop looking at directories only as a means of getting backlinks. It should serve as a quality advertising medium - a medium through which people will know about the site and visit it.

To achieve a high quality directory site, it must have neutral reviews. Webmasters submitting their own site reviews are rarely neutral. The reviews must help a visitor to judge the site.

Advertisements are the lifeblood of the internet and they cannot be wholly avoided. But the placement of the ads and their quantity and quality usual speak a lot about the objective of the directory. So this also becomes a good indicator about the quality of the directory.

Another important factor that should be considered is the quality of sites accepted. It is easy to forget the objective and accept all links submitted. This may be because the links are reciprocal or are paid for. But that should not be the only criterion. A quality directory is one that can also reject submissions that do not belong.

This is just my opinion but it would be interesting to see how many directories could be called 'quality directories' based on the above.

 

BOTW Guidelines for quality directory
I agree completely

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=1335021&postcount=26

The problem if you enforce this requirements 99% of directories are out, you will get a really small list.

 

Some indicators of the quality of directories are the age, the backlinks, SE friendliness, design, G indexed pages, quality of listings, lack of sitewide ads etc. All of these are nonetheless just indicators, it is quite subjective whether a directory is good or not. Of course a directory which sends traffic irrespectively of all other factors is a good directory in my book.

 

As well as the things that others have pointed out, I would mention fast loading times, an uncluttered layout, and good navigation. Also, a search box is essential.

 

In my opinion,
[1] Age of link
[2] No of categories and variety of categories
[3] No of links/Categories
[4] Page Rank
[5] Lokking of directory
[6] Pages indexed in Google
[7] Quality of links

 

I think that a "Quality" directory is one that is obvioously the focus of the webmaster's attention. There are so many directories out there that are just put up and have a scrap template on it, and then used as a link base for the owner. It's very easy to spot them and it's easy to tell who takes pride in their directory and who just wants a turnkey site.

IMO, it does not really matter what the "Strength" of the directory is, or what the pagerank is. Everyone has to start someplace, and that means 0PR and no strength. That does not mean the dir owner is not going to provide a quality directory.

Just spend about 2 minutes in a dir and you can tell if the directory is something that is going to "Become something", or if it is just going to be another directory.

 

- Age of the directory
- Quality and unique design
- no more than 10 outbound listings in a category
- good category structure
- easy submission process
- google pagerank and or categories cached
- usage of sitemaps
- important! - contact page of the directory owner
- no ads on pages with website listings
- no sitewide links
- no outbound links on the homepage

examples: http://botw.org/, http://www.site-sift.com/, http://dir.yahoo.com/, http://www.thisisouryear.com, http://directory.v7n.com/, http://umdum.com, http://www.searchandgo.com/directory/, http://dirspace.com bit of self promotion, http://www.octopedia.com/, www.massivelinks.com/, www.wowdirectory.com/, www.abilogic.com/ and much more.. I know not all directories above follow my criterias but they have come a long way..

 

Besides looking for just traffic most of us are interested in gaining PR for our sites so by #1 priority is PR on the linking page, even if it's very little PR. If it doesn't have PR I will only submit if it's a new directory

Then I avoid sites that use 302 redirects, javascript links, links in frames, rel="nofollow" on the link, too many links on the page or the page loads too slow, alphabatized listings so your link moves from page to page.

My biggest gripe is sites that put the site's title in their title on a "more details" page and then add the description and keywords so they are competing with the sites they list. Some even post the whole page text or repeat the descriptions, titles and Keywords several times--the later types I report to Google Spam and Google Adsense.

 

A few people have mentioned age of the domain as a qualifying factor. While that may prove to be beneficial for the directory owner, it should have no bearing as a prerequisite of "quality".

If my Uncle Larry decided to give me $20 million, and I threw all of that into hiring some editors. And we spent six months building a directory out. Say 500 editors, full time - just ripping through Uncle Larry's cash, like the good 'ole dot com days. So now the directory has 5 million listings, and I decide to launch it.

Is this not a "quality" directory from day one? Do I need to be around for 12 years before I am considered legitimate?

Age is a nice indicator that the owner(s) is serious about the project. It is always nice to be able to look at the history of a business before deciding if you want to deal, but I know some pretty amazing businesses that are little more than post-concept.

 

This is a subjective question but apart from all the pre-requisite technical and functional values of a directory

We personally believe that the support services offered need to be solid and reliable

 

This is really a god point, on the last version of PHPld they have the more detail page, on my directory I disconnected this featured because of this and because my main listing pages where going to supplemental i think because of the duplicated content.