Forum Moderators: open
I'm torn on the issue between my own sites and other sites. I see some major sites that are getting dozens upon dozens of listings in the ODP. I don't care for that at all. I really don't care to see every page some site has built on a particular topic. (can't think of anyone offhand, but there are quite a few that really leap out at you when tossing around the rdf dumps).
On the other hand, I have some sites of clients that I've pushed the envelope on myself. I also have some of my own sites I think are worthy of deep links, but I just don't want to push it. The ODP has been so good to me, that I like to treat with the respect it has earned.
I think that deep linking should either be allowed or not. Not the halfway house that is currently in place.
I can feel my blood pressure rising, going to stop now for the good of my health :-).
I believe the "line" depends on the level of content the page is bringing to the ODP category. If straight deep-linking is allowed without some sort of editorial threshold every category will be overwhelmed with affiliate program pages conjured up just to qualify and get listed.
For very large sites, perhaps the only recourse is to try and contact upper-level editors and make a presentation of your case , i.e., what value your deep-linked page will bring to ODP users at that level.
I submitted the index page for the entire site to the appropriate local and top-level business category in ODP, and then submitted the front page of our largest informational section to the appropriate non-commercial category.
I saw it this way: people just looking for information about our subject are not going to be looking in the business and industry section... but our informational section would still be of great benefit to them, so it should be listed as it's own entity.
However, I wouldn't drill down to more specific subcategories and start submitting single pages of our site for each topic. If you have multiple site sections that could be appropriately listed in more than one area, that's one thing. Getting a directory listing for every single page on the site is ridiculous.
True if you're talking about, say, a product catalog, but that's not always the case. I know of sites that have 5k pages, and while they are logically divided into dozens of directories on the site (or categories on ODP), the user doesn't often care anything about the directory level information. All of the specific, relevant data is held in the end pages and -this is a crucial point, I believe- so are the search terms. If it is information that is, as JameR said, valuable to the directory but the user cannot find and extract that data from higher-level listings, then deep-linking is required, imo.
Then again, without seeing the sites to which you refer, I can't really say if that would work for them...
You often can't do it, there's simply not enough room. The individual listings at the higher level do not allow enough room to list even the top keywords and phrases the user will be seeking. Use "rivers and lakes" as an example. The search is going to be actual name of the river or lake, the next level up is likely to be the state or geographic region, and up another level is the country. Nowhere in the upper level categories can you list all of the rivers and lakes by name, so the lack of deep-linking to specific pages about them causes the user to have to drill through tons and tons of online guides trying to find the ones that have the good info.
For the most part, this is what ODP's guidelines are as well. There are some trees where that does not apply, and there are some other guidelines, for instance:
If you have a listing in Computers/Software/Internet/Clients/Chat/IRC you cannot be listed in Computers/Software/Internet/Clients/Chat/IRC/mIRC as well.
Laisha, part of the problem with ANY edited directory is the submission process itself. When the lower-level editors see 10, 20, or 150 submittals come in, their first instinct might/should be Sheilds up! Incoming spam attack! I've been successful in contacting upper-level editors prior to attempting deep-linking only once out of four tries. Is there a good way to go about approaching this with ODP?
But the thing that really grates, the editor that rejected my deep links has her 12 page site listed in 3 seperate categories, one for each breed she owns.
Hypocrisy.
Your golden retriever example is an excellent one, btw. Mine was lame.
There aren't too many sites on the web that IMHO deserve to have each section listed. Each forum here has more valuable information on a particular topic than virtually any resource on the web I'm familiar with.
I would think Search Engine World, The SEO World, and Webmaster world would each merit a listing. A description for each of the three could be crafted in such a way, so as to include a number of the most relevant search terms.
Each individual sub-sub forum, contains more information than most authored (non-forum) sites. Would each individual forum (such as this one - Directories: ODP, Looksmart, About.com, and Snap-NBCi)merit a listing? I'd be interested in guidance on that.
The plot thickens...
If I was to produce a 1000 page destination guide for the USA I would expect to submit that site in its entirety plus I would also separately submit each of the individual states. They are unique, contain plenty of useful content and in a case like this deep linking to each state seems pretty logical. The end result is an expanded information resource that fits neatly into the ODP regional structure and is beneficial to Joe Public.
But what if I produce a 1000 page "Catalogue Of Exotic Car Parts". Would I be improving the quality of the directory by having deep links to 229 ( I made that up!) different makes of vehicle? Do the cats exist to accommodate such deep linking, does Joe Public gain from the exercise, does ODP become a better resource or it just being filled with low-value clutter?
Of course real life examples are seldom this clear-cut and even if they were, different editors would have different responses. I think deep linking or not has to be linked solely to "does it improve the directory".
I personally (not that anyone asked!)lean towards a scenario of no deep linking at all unless the submitter can demonstrate the site meets certain predetermined criteria. This gives the reviewing editor some framework to work in and sites that are genuine deep linking material should get consistent treatment.
That just leaves all the existing cats with deep linking that will need to be fixed up.... was that screaming I just heard!!
"If I was to produce a 1000 page destination guide for the USA I would expect to submit that site in its entirety plus I would also separately submit each of the individual states.".......In a case such as that it's more of a judgement call. From a user point of view, i would think it's better to just have the one main site listed, and maybe a few of the best subsections deep linked.
There are some areas, like travel, or vacation oriented sites, that could fall in the same category.
Is it better to just list sites that originate from those tourist areas? Should a huge travel site providing information get deep linked in all areas in which it provides information? When there are tons of similar, big travel/recreation sites, at what point does having very similar deep links fil the category with redundant information and make it more difficult to find info? As long as the big sites are not sales brochures, and they do more than just aggregate the local sites that are already in the category would they get listed? Hmmmm.....
In the case of WebmasterWorld it's unique, it's very valuable, and non commercial....
>>Ok, then consider what if I get wild card dns and make a third level domain for each forum? <<
I personally would not have a problem with it, and if I was just geting started, or simply looking for more resources on SEO/WebMaster topics/How to top a particular engine or directory it would come in really handy to have each forum listed, and be able to find them very easily. I don't think even a 30 word description could do justice to searchengineworld or webmasterworld, considering the depth and breadth of information each covers.
Edited by: skibum
I have had direct experience with this example re deep-linking in directories. I have a travel guide with 4000 individual town pages. Each town has a page with unique destination content specific for that town and that town only, followed by state information. Each page is built from a database of edited links and <forms> so that the end result is composite guide of the town drawn from MANY online resources. There is some unique content, such as a database of the nearest airports located within a radius around the town. There are also some affiliate links directly related to the destination research theme of the site. Overall, affiliate links comprise around 10% of the information. Without going into more content detail, suffice it to say that the site is becoming popular as a destination "utility" -enough so that it's been picked up by some major sites like Allstate Insurance, MonsterMoving, and a national birding guide as a supplement to their own destination information.
I've laid out all of the above just to show how messy this deep-linking can get from the directory's viewpoint. They have a category for every single page, i.e., the town name. My page fits, but has some affiliate links, which are (even more confusing) beneficial to the visitor. There are banners, too. BUT, it's also a site that the public likes and uses as a reference, so it must have some redeeming qualities. What's an editor to do? Well, here are the responses of 4 major directories regarding the very same site:
When I developed the site, I considered it to be a spiders-only site. It plugged along and did reasonably well with the spidering engines, but it wasn't until Allstate picked it up that I started considering deep-linking in directories. In late 1999, I emailed Yahoo, ODP, and NBCi and asked if I could deep-link to their "local" categories...
Yahoo answered "Maybe, it's a close call. Then again, maybe not -try it and we'll see." (No thanks, it takes a solid 2 man-weeks just to submit a site of this size. I need something a little more definite.)
ODP answered "No, it's deep-linking. Please submit once under the USA category." Their judgement on this has apparently changed somewhat over the past 9 months. Now, regional meta editors and several lower-level editors have said it fits and should be deep-linked, particularly the small towns where I have content and their directory is sparse. (I haven't attempted submitting yet, so exactly what will happen is unresolved.)
NBCi answered "Sure, we've looked at a few of them, put them in LiveDirectory under 'local.'" I did, and more than 25% of the individual, deep-linked pages have been reviewed and promoted by the editors.
I also applied to GO some time later. No one answered from the higher ranks of Go guides, so I submitted about 10 towns to each of 3 states. Interestingly enough, one or two were accepted, then I believe the old "editor is competitor" problem kicked in and I was notified that I was spamming. I noted that this was odd, since some of their guides had already deep-linked some of my pages to their categories without my having to submit them. No reply.
Edited by: rcjordan
To the webmaster or SEO professional, the goal might be to get as many listings as possible.
To the ODP editor, the goal should be to assemble the most comprehensive directory of useful web site pertaining to whichever category or categories s/he edits.
Usually, there is nothing particularly useful in adding each page of a site in a separate listing. Thus, we consider deeplinking to be the exception and not the rule.
We recognize, however, that in some cases, a deeplink is a separate site, distinct from its parent. We also recognize, most of us, that there are times when a deeplink might enhance the categories we edit even when its subject might relate to its parent.
As a human edited directory, staffed by thousands of volunteer editors, the degree of consistency sometimes asked for by SEO professionals is perhaps impossible, and unrealistic. Falling back on fairness, we hope and expect that editors will edit their categories fairly, not granting deeplinks to one domain while denying it to others, without clear and objective reason.
The ODP does permit a degree of latitude to its editors, allowing variations of interpretation as to what constitutes a reasonable exception to the rule that would otherwise discourage deeplinking.
The interpretation of the guidelines relating to deeplinking won't be the same from one category to another but, while it would be unreasonable to expect the degree of conformity that is sometimes demanded of us, it is fair to expect that they be interpreted similarly within each category. In other words, if my site is listed in the same category as your site, it is reasonable for you to hold us accountable for ensuring that your site is listed under the same rules that govern the listing of my site.
Have I succeeded in confusing the issue further?
I would recommend reading it through once or twice, sloooowly. ;)
Here's what I'd like to highlight
As a human edited directory, staffed by thousands of volunteer editors, the degree of consistency sometimes asked for by SEO professionals is perhaps impossible, and unrealistic.....So, if we publishers find a deep-linking precedent, and we wish to present that and get pre-approval, how should we proceed?.....The interpretation of the guidelines relating to deeplinking won't be the same from one category to another but, while it would be unreasonable to expect the degree of conformity that is sometimes demanded of us, it is fair to expect that they be interpreted similarly within each category. In other words, if my site is listed in the same category as your site, it is reasonable for you to hold us accountable for ensuring that your site is listed under the same rules that govern the listing of my site.
First contact the listed editor, if there is one, with an assumption of error. If that doesn't work, or if there is no listed editor, contact the editor of the category above it -- or at the top of the tree.
A spider may not be able to determine whether third level domains are separate sites or subsections of the same site, but with a human-edited directory, one would think it would be easy for them to determine whether one provider is providing sub-sites to individuals, or the provider is using the subsites to expand their own web presence...
[edited by Brett_Tabke]
