| This 44 message thread spans 2 pages: 44 (  2 ) > > || |
|Importance of Yahoo and Looksmart to PR|
Is PR of the category the only thing that matters?
| 4:05 pm on Jul 27, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I have been advised that being listed in Yahoo, Looksmart, and DMOZ are by far the most important factors influencing a site's rank in Google. I have followed that advice and gotten listed in all three.
I have noticed that Google only shows the incoming link from DMOZ, but not Yahoo or Looksmart. I have looked at the PR of each directory listing and found the DMOZ category page has PR=5, the Yahoo catogory page has PR=3, and the Looksmart page has PR=1. Google appears to only be showing incoming links from pages with PR=4 or greater.
Does the above mean that the Yahoo and Looksmart listings are not really important to my site's Google ranking? Also, is an DMOZ lising in a PR=5 category any more significant than any other incoming link with equal PR?
| 9:14 pm on Jul 28, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I believe you have sussed it out just perfectly. The dmoz listing is the best of the bunch. This is why it pays and pays again to look hard at a Yahoo listing. While the yahoo listing can provide some raw traffic if you hit your kw's, the dmoz listing will have more affect on Google than the Yahoo listing. While the ODP listing also has the potential to spawn viral children in the form of recip links, other search engines that use the data, and other sites that use the date, the Yahoo listing will pretty much lay there and produce only from Yahoo.
| 10:44 pm on Jul 28, 2002 (gmt 0)|
The question still to be answered is this:
Is a DMOZ link counted the same as a regular link? Or is there some special emphasis on the DMOZ link?
That question needs to be answered.
| 10:53 pm on Jul 28, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|I believe you have sussed it out just perfectly. |
Thanks to dictionary.com I was able to suss the meaning of sussed. I think Brett uses these oddball words on purpose. ;)
|suss (ss) |
tr.v. Slang sussed, suss·ing, suss·es
To infer or discover; figure out: “I think I'm good at sussing out what's going on” (Ry Cooder).
To size up; study: “Suss out the designers in whom you are interested” (Lucia van der Post).
| 10:54 pm on Jul 28, 2002 (gmt 0)|
The British regularly use the term "sussed up".
If you have a new site and want it to get a quick, decent rank in Google all you need are 2 DMOZ sites with that basic PR5 to link to it.
| 10:57 pm on Jul 28, 2002 (gmt 0)|
A DMOZ category --- Computers: Internet: Web Design and Development: Authoring: Webmaster Resources: Chats and Forums
Something like this becomes part of your descriptive listing.
It seems quite logical that this would add significant weight to your page and moreso than this... wouldn't you think?
The second may indeed be better for a human to read but "is for all of those ...
out there who need a question answered about anything from" doesn't have alot to with Internet, Web Design and Development, Authoring, Webmaster Resources, forum, or chat!
| 1:24 am on Jul 29, 2002 (gmt 0)|
IMHO and from experience a good YAHOO! listing can generate significant traffic in and of itself sometimes from category referrals, somtimes loads more from keywords if you get it right and get lucky. A listing in LookSmart provides a decent amount of exposure that you have to pay for unless you come up with a successful Zeal strategy.
When you get listed in ODP you have arrived. Your site is on the map. Period.
Since most every engine out there is in some way referencing ODP directly (in the case of Google) or indirectly (in the case of Inktomi or FAST), it is THE most important link out there for most sites. It's not about PR, it's not about the traffic ODP itself provides, and its not even necessarily about keywords (though they do make a big difference). It's about distribution. It puts a site in the core of the web database that anyone can use to build a Google or a guide to widget manufacturers.
| 4:28 am on Jul 29, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I don't know that LookSmart is of any value as an inbound link. I believe its "directory" is dynamic, no static pages with PR to spider, unlike the directory structure of Yahoo and Dmoz. Comment anyone?
| 4:29 am on Jul 29, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I think you are right, I have never seen a back-link show up from a Looksmart listing, but I could be wrong.
| 5:07 am on Jul 29, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Since we're on the subject...
I still don't quite understand how DMOZ decides which sites are actually listed in the directory under "web sites" and how one can get there.
I have a listing, but it, like most others in our industry is a regional listing under the appropriate catagory. Only "1" company is listed as a "web site" when you search by one group of keywords, and only "5" are "web sites" in the directory for our other search term. The rest of the companies and those "web sites" as well can be found after you go to the regional link. Why is that?
Also...approximately how long does it take after you submit to DMOZ to get listed? on the average?
Thanks in advance,
| 9:42 am on Jul 29, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Good points Fathom. If you instead distill the entire page you mentioned, and just look at the top kw's on a
density [searchengineworld.com] chart, it makes more sense than looking at just the category name or the descriptions. This is probably a place someone should mention the word _theme_. There is so much you can do with those odp cats to define a site that how Google really is breaking down that data is unknown, but the effect is there.
>Is a DMOZ link counted the same as a regular link?
All pages on the net are treated the same. It all comes down to pagerank value. It doesn't matter if that page is on Dmoz or on CNN. A pr5 is a pr5 anywhere.
So the simple answer is no a link from the ODP doesn't specifically count more to Google. The longer answer is, yes it is _worth_ more because of the viral nature of an ODP link. While a Yahoo link just lays there and produces traffic from Yahoo, a Dmoz link goes on to spawn many children. Some of those links turn out to be special (Teoma, Wisenut, AllTheWeb...etc).
>how long does it take to get listed
Every cat is different. Some times a day, sometimes sixty days, sometimes longer.
A case of our UK friends slang wearing off on me.
Skibum with your quote for the day:
|When you get listed in ODP you have arrived. Your site is on the map. Period. |
| 9:59 am on Jul 29, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Could there be just a slight chance of a possibility that a Dmoz listing counts "twice"?
Once the link from DMOZ and once from the Google directory?
(they show both on the back-links - probably just wishfull thinking on my side though)
The "theme" thing, both Fathom and Brett are talking about, could be something.
If your site has multiple listings within DMOZ, hopefully Google will take into consideration more cats then what seems to be the just the oldest one, when you type in a search for "mysite" in Google.
| 1:28 pm on Jul 29, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Hi. It is true that a listing in all three is important for traffic, but is it the case that the only one that has a potential influence on link popularity and a Google ranking would be the DMOZ listing? My reasoning for this is that the links in Yahoo! and LookSmart are indirect links (routed through their proprietary trackers before ultimately sent to the final destination). By the way, is there an official/unofficial name for these intermediate links? Tracking URLs?
Zeal, though, unlike LookSmart, has direct links that could be valuable for link pop purposes. Right?
| 1:34 pm on Jul 29, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Actually, wooden, Zeal links appear to be direct links, but upon close inspection, turn out to be redirect links.
| 1:40 pm on Jul 29, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Google will follow the redirect. It's also Yahoo - it's worth Googles time to adjust for them. If your google listing shows a backlink from Google ... then 1+1 still equal 2 :-)
| 1:52 pm on Jul 29, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|Google will follow the redirect. |
But will it be factored into PR? The reason I ask is because I've never seen a redirect link show up as a backlink in Google.
| 3:25 pm on Jul 29, 2002 (gmt 0)|
"Zeal links appear to be direct links, but upon close inspection, turn out to be redirect links."
Ah-ha. You're right. Good catch. So is there any consensus on whether or not a redirect link has any value for link pop? Brett thinks so . . . haxorize thinks maybe not . . . any other opinions?
| 3:45 pm on Jul 29, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I would highly suspect that the LookSmart directory listing does count in Google's PR calculation. Although LookSmart's PR is greyed out by Google, the LookSmart listing is in the directories of Zeal, MSN, AltaVista, InfoSpace and over 200 other ISPs.
The reason I say this is because three of my sites were included in LookSmart before they were included in Yahoo, and they have not even been reviewed by the ODP editors (in 45-90 days, depending on the site). Anyway, two of my sites were PR4 and PR5 with JUST a LookSmart listing. The third site was added to LookSmart and to Yahoo at the same time and it is a PR6. Also, when the PR4 site was added to Yahoo, it became a PR5.
It appears to me that the LookSmart / Zeal listing is important. However, an important distinction between my listings and many others are that my listings are free listings. Paid listings on LookSmart typically have a redirect on them and may or may not count in Google's PR.
Just my thoughts....
| 12:43 am on Jul 30, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Has anyone looked at the LookSmart robots.txt file. When last I looked they disallowed all spiders.
| 12:55 am on Jul 30, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Looksmart does disallow all spiders. Zeal however allows all. As I understand it, the Zeal listings go 100% into Looksmart. In other words Looksmart is essentially Zeal plus the ads. So the thing to do is join Zeal and get tons of listings in there. This will help your PR and should help with anchor text. DMOZ, at least in my category is a waste of valuable time as it can take a year just to get one page in!
<edit>Let me elaborate. If my category were widgets and DMOZ had a category for Pink Widgets with one link in it and I submitted my site which happens to be the best site in the universe for pink widgets, I would wait months and not get a listing. Then I would resubmit, wait several months and then resubmit. I know there are editors in my category but it can take a ridiculously long time to get them to put up a link for the best site in the universe for any particular category. Zeal on the other hand is only to happy to have my link provided that it is written properly and is for a site about Pink Widgets.
One other thing, "sussed out" is common in my neck of the woods - East Coast.
| 3:59 am on Jul 30, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I would say one yahoo listing + one dmoz listing = pagerank 5 and occasionally pr 6 if your dmoz/google directory listing is near the top.
More links from other places can help or hurt too..
| 9:03 am on Jul 30, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Just my tuppence worth,
In another thread, I have said I am working with a site that has PR2, A 3 year old Yahoo listing (greyed out), and a DMOZ listing, (only PR3). So a DMOZ and a Yahoo listing does not guarrantee a PR5.
In the UK Midlands, "Sussed out" is rarely used, but "sussed that out..." or "sussed you out" More.
| 10:08 am on Jul 30, 2002 (gmt 0)|
What an idiot I am! I meant to say Sussed out was common use where I am - East Coast of the U.S.
| 11:30 am on Jul 30, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I'm not certain how Google uses directories to affect pagerank, but I know certain areas where it DOESN'T. My site is very large - a million pages or so - and at PR5, Google seems to index about 17-18K of them. (And despite my efforts to nudge google to index the pages that I want it to, it still rather crawls what IT wants to and that is that).
My main category for the DMOZ is very competitive and busy. My site has yet to be reviewed there. But, as all of my three major competitors have "deep-link" listings for pages within their sites, I figured I'd give it a shot and try to get in there while I waited. (The cats are less busy and get faster attention). I managed to get about 7 or 8 (it's hard to tell exactly as the search results haven't been updated in nearly a month over there) "deep-link" listings, though about 3/4 of my submissions were rejected out of hand. (Don't even get me started on the inconsistencies here, some of my better/most information laden and unique-to-the-web pages were rejected, while some others which have the same drivel as you can find on 50 other sites were accepted).
I've also developed a very effective Zeal strategy which is providing 10 times the traffic from MSN that I'm getting from Google.
Alright now, to the Pagerank question. My first DMOZ listing was for "X Page" and finally appeared in the google directory in the dance 30 days ago. It was listed there with no PR (i.e. Google hadn't actually crawled that page). Another interesting thing was that if you searched the directory for "My page's exact title," it didn't appear in the search results. That page had been in Looksmart/Zeal for at least 30 days prior to that.
So, last month, I'm thinking, okay, the page didn't make it into the DMOZ soon enough for the June crawl, but it did make the June directory update. Now that it's in, I can be certain that the bot will hit that page that's listed in the DMOZ. Right? Nope.
That page wasn't touched by the Googlebot last crawl. Interestingly, a few of the other pages in the DMOZ showed up in the directory this month and 1 (count 'em - 1) of those pages - which happened to have made it into Google's seemingly randomized tour through my site - actually shows up when you search the directory. It's got a pagerank in the directory, too. Oddly, it was one of the more recently accepted pages into the DMOZ and it is the ONLY page of the 5 - 6 that I'm finding listed in the current Google directory that does NOT have a specific listing on Zeal/Looksmart.
And so, to summarize my findings. If you have deep-linked pages in the DMOZ, it guarantees nothing in regards to getting that particular page crawled by Google. It doesn't even guarantee that someone can do a specific search for the page in the directory and have it appear in the search results.
If you have pages at Looksmart/Zeal, it guarantees nothing about getting that page crawled by Google.
If you have a big site, you can "nudge" the googlebot with only very limited results. The "Page A" listing has a direct link to it from my homepage. The "Page B" listing - the one in the directory that DID get crawled - takes 2 clicks to get to from the homepage.
Suffice it to say, after having at least one listing in the DMOZ for three months, now, I've seen ZERO pagerank benefit from it (though remember, my homepage itself is not listed - though it is and has been on Looksmart).
Now, don't get me wrong. There is PLENTY of benefit to my DMOZ and Looksmart listings. MSN gives me about 70% of my hits. My 6 DMOZ listings that have actually made it into the updated DMOZ search (when are they going to update that thing?) are generating about 100 - 150 hits a day from the satelite DMOZ carriers (Roughly 8-10% of my hits).
| 11:49 am on Jul 30, 2002 (gmt 0)|
interesting reading Grumpus,
I assume you are talking about the site in your profile with 18.000 pages listed in Google.
Your findings would fit well with this thread as well:
What is your lowest PR page still indexed?
Are you using the same asp? linking structure as other databases getting fully indexed?
| 3:14 pm on Jul 30, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|Your findings would fit well with this thread as well |
Yeah. I've been reading that one, but the number of pages crawled is not so much at odds as "which" pages get crawled. I have about a million ways of getting to the information on the site, so my robots.txt builds a sort of "queue" for bots to follow getting listings sorted by "newest first". And then, my front page has about 20 links to the most popular pages coming out of MSN hits so bots will obviously hit those - which Google doesn't necessarily do. Anyhow, that's off topic for this thread. Maybe I'll start something later on in a new thread...
|What is your lowest PR page still indexed? |
Interestingly, every one of my pages has a PR that matches the following structure - regardless of whether there is a link or not from dmoz, looksmart, other sites, etc.
HomePage (/) PR5
News/Current Information Pages (/sompagename.asp) PR4
Browsable Results Pages (/Database/browseSomething.asp?offset=X) PR3 (or, PR2 if you are on the first page and there is no ? - it's just /Database/browseSomething.asp)
Detail Pages (/Database/somepage.asp?ID=X) PR3
SubDetail Pages (/Database/somedetailpage.asp?ID=x) PR3
I have yet to see a page with a PR1 (estimated, nor real).
Now, if you look at the difference in PR between the Results pages and the Detail pages, there's an interesting difference. Every "/" in a URL brings the pagerank down by 1 from the homepage. BUT, if you add a ? to it, it goes up 1 from where it should be.
I know for a 100% fact that there are exactly 0 sites linking to my subdetail. I know for a 100% fact that there are 130-something Looksmart listings going to "Detail Pages" and Probably 3 DMOZ listings that should be getting credit on this most recent update.
I've got 46 inbound links to my homepage, according to Google (though it's listing 1 of the DMOZ listings that points to an inner page).
I have know way of checking exactly how many, but I'd guess that some of my detail pages have as many, if not more, general web based links coming to them as my homepage. (These links come from specific interest or fan sites who link to the specific related information on my site - not uncommon for sites like mine).
So if that's the case, you'd think that either
a) My Details pages would get a boost from the links to them or
b) My subdetails pages would get a drop from the lack of links to them.
Another odd thing is that I'm having a hard time finding "Detail" pages that are listed in Looksmart/Zeal, DMOZ, or pages that I KNOW have links from other web sites in the Google index AT ALL. Yet, Google has indexed the same asp page with a different ?ID=X value all over the place. (1,780 people and 1,370 movies to be exact).
So, as I say, in regards to PR, I don't see how a listing anywhere helps unless it's for your front page, and even then, the value is debatable. In answer to your question, the lowest ranked crawled page is 2. The lowest ranked "didn't get around to crawling" page is 4.
And, as far as link structure as other databases getting fully indexed, yes, and no. My structure is very similar, but I do not know of another one getting fully indexed, either. Most have a much higher pagerank than I as they have been around for ages and people have had time to think of linking to them on their own when they build their links page. That explains depth of crawl.
To be honest, the only thing I'm worried about as far as depth goes is if Google does the inexcusable:
1) Google crawls my site and reaches the limit they've decided upon.
2) Google finds a link from another site to mine.
3) Google says, "Oops - can't look at that page, we've already indexed as much of that site as we're going to this month".
That would crank my stones.
| 9:32 pm on Jul 30, 2002 (gmt 0)|
My site has a PR of 7 - I attribute this to being listed at DMOZ in 9 different categories:
I paid to be listed in Yahoo and my PR went up by one, and my visitors via Google doubled.
Without getting into complicated formulas, to me a good plan of attack would be to:
1) Get listed at DMOZ as many times as possible. Being an editor of a category definitely helps, but the workload can be great. Creating new content unrelated to the rest of your site is a trick rarely seen (ie an article, not linked to from other pages, except the site map).
2) If doubling your Google traffic will return you much more than $299 a year in profits, pay to get listed at Yahoo. (It won't be double if you already have a number of high-quality incoming links)
[edited by: NFFC at 9:36 pm (utc) on July 30, 2002]
| 8:36 am on Jul 31, 2002 (gmt 0)|
"That would really crank my stones"
Oh, I like that phrase, it sends a shiver down my spine! :)
This is the first time I have heard of the ? being not only OK, but having a superb PR,
and not being buried. Do you think that perhaps it is not the ?, but the "on page" set
up of databases that gets poor results for people? IE, a database page will tend to
have the same meta title, description and keywords (if any at all), because it it too
much trouble to set it up differently? It is something I have suspected for a
I am still not convinced that directory depth drops a PR. I might not be understanding
you correctly Grumpus, but could it not be linking that makes the difference still?
On my key site, (PR5 only) I have:
With a PR4, I believe because it is linked to from several PR5/4/3 Pages, one off site.
(I have strong interlinking on the site). It is not linked to from the home page however.
I use the directories for organisation, as someone else mentioned. It seems unlikely
that google would use such a variable to rank, as a poorly orgainsed site would do well.
I agree, it seems a convincing argument if you look at:
As each directory step is about 1/2 PR. But then isn't is more likely to be linking,
or am I missing something?
Where is the paypal donate button these days please Brett? I feel I am ready for a small one?
[edited by: ciml at 9:51 am (utc) on July 31, 2002]
[edit reason] Edit to reduce sideways scrolling. [/edit]
| 9:56 am on Jul 31, 2002 (gmt 0)|
> But then isn't is more likely to be linking
Yes, that's how PageRank works.
> donate button
It looks like the buttons are taking a holiday, but you can still donate [webmasterworld.com].
| 11:04 am on Jul 31, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>Yes, that's how PageRank works.
I agree, So why all this confusion with directories? I have tried both and cannot compare accurately, but it seems to make little or no difference. Indeed I see more advantage in:
Never mind, must be over my head :).
Derbyshire born, Derbyshire bred, strong in the arm, thick in the head.
Thanks for the donate button. I have been looking at it for months, and then....
| This 44 message thread spans 2 pages: 44 (  2 ) > > |