Page is a not externally linkable
claus - 12:00 pm on Feb 15, 2005 (gmt 0)
This could indeed become a problem if the major SE's decide to do something about the "faux directory" problem (and i agree that it's a problem). I don't see them being hit hard right now though, but perhaps i haven't looked close enough. My primary directory site still perfom as i suppose it should, and there are still "faux directories" with me (over, as well as below) in the serps. Lately, i have seen some specific quality site rankings drop a few places, while some "faux" have risen (not only for my directory - i also have quality competitors), but overall traffic patterns do not suggest a widespread problem to me. >> can you keep a directory performing well in Google these days or are they doomed to drop in the listings I don't see a hand penalty, either now or coming, as there's simply too many of them. But, i think a distinction should involve human judgement in order to be successful. While i'm not keen on giving out specifics, the main thing that distinguishes "faux directories" from real directories is content. Content is simply different. Real directory content is high maintenance - the others have low maintenance content. Trained human eyes can see this instantly, while machines have severe difficulties recognizing the difference (eg. the "faux" might be updated even more frequently than the real ones, or have more "on topic" textual content, or have a large amount of backlinks). Imho, most "faux directory" content is either dmoz clones (not a great problem in my area, though), scraping of serps, yellow pages, scraping of other sites, or pure PPC+affiliate+adsense. Also, there's a lot of directories that are "perhaps real, but not very good" - eg. the PFI ones with lots of blank cats. Although they perhaps deserve the benefit of the doubt, they rarely add value where they turn up, imho. >> Genuine User submitted content Nono. User submitted content is not allowed with me. They can easily suggest all kinds of stuff, but never-ever submit it or have any influence on the page, the words used, or the overall priorities of the site. >> No Empty Categories Of course not - the directory is built for users, what use are empty categories to them? >> Good Category Descriptions I don't see the value of these to my users. Perhaps to search engines, but that's a trade-off i have taken. I used to have them a few years ago, but abandoned them entirely due to user considerations. Now i cut directly to the stuff my users are interested in, ie. the listings. They don't need to read a description about what "widgets" is, as they know it already - all they need is to find them. Good listing descriptions otoh, is very important, imho. But... not in all categories, only for some of them. Eg. say you link to the BBC or CNN - you don't really need text to describe what that is, as your users will probably know that already; all they need is the link. [edited by: claus at 12:19 pm (utc) on Feb. 15, 2005]
Great post!
>> as soon as they are found? (i.e. Is this a hand penalty for being a directory)
Added: A few comments on the first three points you raised.