| This 86 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 86 ( 1  3 ) > > || |
|Google DIRECTORY Updated: 2007-08-18|
Updated on 2007-08-18 including edits through 2007-08-07
On 2007-08-18, the Google Directory was updated with new information taken from the most recent ODP RDF dump. This update includes all directory edits through 2007-08-07.
The previous Google Directory update was so long ago, that it is almost forgotten. That update on 2006-02-19 included all ODP edits through 2006-01-29 at that time.
The Google Directory has slowly become more and more outdated since then. Now it is again updated.
This is mostly visible on European servers, and not so much on servers elsewhere.
Google has at least 44 datacentres. I guess that it may take days or weeks for them all to be updated.
It is possible that they are only testing this on a very limited number until they are sure things are OK.
These five datacentres have the new version:
There are about 10 datacentres without any directory copy. The rest still have the old 2005 version. A few datacentres recently went offline.
Incomplete datacentre list: gfe-ag, gfe-an, gfe-au, gfe-ar, gfe-bf, gfe-bp, gfe-bu, gfe-bx, gfe-cw, gfe-dc, gfe-ed, gfe-eh, gfe-ff, gfe-fg, gfe-fk, gfe-gv, gfe-he, gfe-hk, gfe-hs, gfe-hu, gfe-ik, gfe-in, gfe-jc, gfe-jp, gfe-kc, gfe-kr, gfe-lm, gfe-lo, gfe-mc, gfe-mu, gfe-nf, gfe-nz, gfe-od, gfe-po, gfe-pr, gfe-py, gfe-qb, gfe-rn, gfe-ro, gfe-td, gfe-tl, gfe-tw, gfe-ug, gfe-ui, gfe-va, gfe-wr, gfe-wx and gfe-yo.
johnlim, the Google directory is derived directly from ODP, you can't submit to it directly.
>>that would keep the fly-by-night sites out
A lot of what some among us would consider fly-by-night sites pull in big bucks, and compared to the income they see, the Yahoo Directory submission fee is chump change.
So, acturally Google directory is derived directly from ODP and has no relationship with yahoo directory?
Not only the Google directory was updated but also the PageRank. The PageRank shown in the directory is newer than that shown in the toolbar.
|Web Pages Ordered by PageRank |
Unlike other directories that can only list web pages alphabetically regardless of how good they are, the web pages in the Google directory are ordered according to Google's view of their importance. This means that the most relevant and highly-regarded sites on any topic are listed first ... not buried deep within a list of other pages.
Lol, had to just quote this after I clicked on the PR toolbar in the directory.
Just wanted to make it public record for future discussions. ;)
|Its probably been over a year or so since I've browsed deep into the ODP. I'll be damned if I wasn't far enough down the cat structure yet to see the PR indicators. |
The Google PR indicators appear in the Google Directory, not in the Open Directory.
There is a green ball at the bottom right of each ODP category that links to the related Google Directory category, so users can flick from one to the other easily and see the sites organised by PR if they want to.
|Not only the Google directory was updated but also the PageRank. The PageRank shown in the directory is newer than that shown in the toolbar |
doc_z, that is disgusting! I wish you hadn't told us that; I for one am not a happy camper about it.
Denial is not just a river, and those who interfere with the mental and emotional benefits of such are not universally loved. Despite the facts, some of us would rather not know. ;)
Can anyone tell me
Is there a way off contacting Google directory directly about a listing?
You can sort alphabetically if you want to do that instead. You don't have to have the Google Directory in PR order if you don't want to.
>> Will the sites in yahoo directory also be included in Google Directory? <<
>> Can submit to Google Directory directly? <<
>> Or only sites in DMOZ appear in Google Directory? <<
>> Is there a way of contacting Google directory directly about a listing? <<
|You can sort alphabetically if you want to do that instead |
Lol, rest assured, whether it can be sorted alphabetically is not the part of the explanation I will be referring to in future threads. ;)
Let me know may we submit site to in these directries? If yes then i marked all are Submit Form are re direct to dmoz.org add url page.
|are re direct to dmoz.org add url page. |
The Google directory is a mirror of the DMOZ directory. If you want to get into the Google directory, then you must first be included in DMOZ. You should then wait a year or so more until Google updates their directory as it's not as frequent as you might otherwise suspect.
Maybe this thread should be in the directories forum?
I am hoping a moderator will move Directory Comments to the thread that is already in the Directory forum and leave Search related comments in this thread.
|If you want to get into the Google directory, then you must first be included in DMOZ |
And you may never get into DMOZ because so many categories no longer have editors, which means the submissions are piling up with no one looking at them.
I suppose that Google has no way to exert influence/pressure on ODP, but if they could it would be useful to figure out a way to help them get their house in order. Perhaps provide them with a simple algo to help them sort through their submissions and remove the most obvious spam and/or duplications.
The status quo as it exists now is an unfortunate situation -- you can't get into the Google directory until you are first in ODP, and you can't get into ODP because it is broken, therefore you can't get into the Google directory. Isn't that the definition of a "catch 22"?
Aham, 90% of what is submitted is removed as spam.
There are no categories that no editor can edit in. The are hundreds of editors that can edit in any category.
I have a site with a DMOZ entry since August 2006. But it has never shown correctly in the Google directory.
If I do a search for it within the Google directory, it is listed in the results with a link to the directory category. But if I go to the category it's not there.
I had hoped this update would sort this out, but so far its still the same. Anyone any idea what is wrong?
I've the same invisible listing issue :)
Only about seven Google datacentres have the new directory version so far.
The other 30, or more, do not. Make sure you are looking in the right place.
My last accepted submission is from 2003. And while I know that the editors of the root and parent categories could edit the ones I'm submitting to ( in theory ), they don't. Because they have their hands full with the submissions to the major ones.
Sorry but I actually hope that with the last system crash, all pre-2006/2007 submissions sitting in the queue for 4 years were erased. A lot less people ( and bots ) submit ( spam ) to ODP nowadays, and resetting that never ending stream might have given a chance to those who actually have sites running right now, in/on the present plane of reality.
But that other reading sounds much more interesting.
I like the idea pageone and Marcia are on to...
Google might be using ODP as some kind of a factor, even if not directly, perhaps for theme, relevance and authority calculations. Actually while not sure if they use the data of the websites in there ( I don't think so ), I just can't imagine them *not* using the data structure, the categories, and associated phrases, keywords when determining themes of websites...
Perhaps them updating the virtually invisible Directory will serve as an in-house backup of the data to do further tests on, and not something that's of any use to the public or webmasters.
The PR against each directory listing - is it more accurate than toolbar PR?
I have a site that is PR 6 using toolbar and PR 6.75 using the directory. I know people don't talk about decimal places in PR but that's what the directory listings seem to indicate if you look at the source.
Just to bring the thread back in line
The fact that Google have in effect updated their copy of dmoz in my mind is of little importance.
The fact that google with all its technology keep this directory is still a complete mystery to me. Its a known fact that the web has outgrown DMOZ, a number of sectors dont get updated on a regular basis and some dont get edited at all - This is not the fault of dmoz editors its just that due to volume it simply cant keep up with it. DMOZ was even out of operation for some months this year due to technology problems so google are in effect updating with out of date data?
I dont doubt that a listing in dmoz and its many clone directory sites carries some weight in the google algo and other large directory sites like Yahoo Directory (which imo is the best directory on the net)and also the likes of Business.com possibly also carry some weight but the question here has to be why google need to offer a directory service at all?.
Do Google tell us anywhere how many searches are carried out using its directory? If the answer is that its a high number then why dont google have their own directory?, if its a low number then is the directory required at all?
In closing if google is using say the data from the title tags taken from dmoz in its algo as suggested then thats only ok if the directory data is correct. The problem is that due to the dmoz data itself not being updated in some areas google would run the risk of using out of date tags in its algo - so in my mind i cant see this being likely.
> The PR against each directory listing - is it more accurate than toolbar PR?
My feeling is neither is accurate, In the new Directory update OfficeMax is only a PR5 and Staples a PR0. Sign up for Webmaster Tools for the most accurate PR
|The fact that google with all its technology keep this directory is still a complete mystery to me. |
2) Why would Google want to accept the PR fallout from hastening the demise of DMOZ?
It's easier and less controversial to simply keep the directory (and the increasingly irrelevant toolbar PR gauge, which was discussed in another thread).
|The fact that Google have in effect updated their copy of dmoz in my mind is of little importance. |
I think we should all sit back and watch what happens over the next 90-120 days after this directory update has fully propogated.
|The fact that google with all its technology keep this directory is still a complete mystery to me. |
I'm going to step out on a limb and say that Google uses the ODP Dump for quite a bit more than what is discussed at the public level.
|Its a known fact that the web has outgrown DMOZ, a number of sectors dont get updated on a regular basis and some dont get edited at all. |
I'm sure all of that is taken into consideration. While dMoz has its faults, its strengths far outweigh those faults.
|This is not the fault of dmoz editors its just that due to volume it simply cant keep up with it. |
Very true. But, I think that is getting ready to change. From my perspective, this is a rather large event for Webmasters.
|DMOZ was even out of operation for some months this year due to technology problems so google are in effect updating with out of date data? |
Do you think that dMoz and Google communicate with each other? I mean, if Google is using an ODP Dump, you have to think that everyone is aware of whatever issues are present. If some of the data is out of date, big deal. Google can compare that to what it has and then do its thing.
|But the question here has to be why google need to offer a directory service at all?. |
If you'll notice, Google has slowly taken away airtime for the Directory. That is what leads me to believe that it is being used for a lot more than we know about. Where else can Google gain access to human reviewed data on the scale of the ODP?
|Do Google tell us anywhere how many searches are carried out using its directory? |
Hehehe, the user has to find it first. I'm sure the numbers are low and then of those numbers, most are probably not your typical web surfer.
|If the answer is that its a high number then why dont google have their own directory? |
|In closing if google is using say the data from the title tags taken from dmoz in its algo as suggested then thats only ok if the directory data is correct. |
The title is but one element in the ODP listing. The editorial guidelines insure that the titles and descriptions are accurate and follow a strict set of conventions.
|The problem is that due to the dmoz data itself not being updated in some areas google would run the risk of using out of date tags in its algo - so in my mind i cant see this being likely. |
Not likely. As I "assumed" above, Google can easily filter out those areas where it knows there are problems. Or, it can unleash its 10,000+ human editors on those areas to do a little clean up.
|I think we should all sit back and watch what happens over the next 90-120 days after this directory update has fully propogated. |
Are you saying that you know something we dont? If so can you let us in on a few more details because i just cant see why this update should be any different to any other directory update google have had over the last few years?.
|Are you saying that you know something we dont? |
No, not at all. But, for Google to do an update like this after all this time "means something". What it means we just don't know yet. That's why I say we sit back and let the changes propogate and see what effect it has on Google's index.
Just imagine, Google has access to all this ODP human edited content, don't you think that has "enough" value to utilize as maybe a comparison dataset or something along those lines?
Add the Wiki into that mix along with the other resources that Google utilize and you've got a pretty solid map of the top level web. Of course there is no one "ultimate resource". But, a combination of the resources they do have available along with their computing power, what else am I supposed to surmise? ;)
P.S. That Directory can be used for many other things. This isn't just about search. Think of it as Bait.
|But, for Google to do an update like this after all this time "means something". |
It could simply mean that somebody at the Plex said, "Hey, isn't about time that we got around to updating the directory?"
As the old expression goes, the simplest explanation is usually the most likely.
Here are 57 patents that you are welcome to read to see how Google "may" be using the ODP data...
US Patent Collection for AN/Google: 57 Patents [patft.uspto.gov]
P.S. The depth of the ODP dataset is unmatched.
I doubt that Google anymore attaches much importance to DMOZ listings. So many of the listings are outdated, dead, or (the worst scenario) now point to MFA type sites.
I am sure that Google knows all that, so I suspect that anymore it is just treated as would any other inbound link.
>> DMOZ was even out of operation for some months this year due to technology problems so Google are in effect updating with out of date data? <<
Once back online, several ODP tools were run to clean out most of the dead listings, so the dataset is quite healthy.
| This 86 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 86 ( 1  3 ) > > |