We’ve discussed the importance of descriptions and the part they play in the efficacy of a successful directory and also looked in brief how we would create that description, but how far does the editor go to maintaining the editorial integrity of that description?

Well, we’ve looked at 7 keypoints on a good description in the previous blog, but can we go even further to strengthen the creditability of the description and ultimately the creditability of the directory as a whole? The answer has to be yes, for you will never get penalized for quality, and the higher the quality of your directory the better; so how do we achieve this? How far can we go?

We’ve already gone through the 7 keypoints by providing an accurate description that matches the site it is linking to so what more can we do?

Let me start by asking the question; ‘how much time and effort do you really put into reviewing the site your describing?‘ Are you really being thorough enough? or is the fact that the front page of the site linked matches the description you gave it, so what more do need to do? Well to be blunt, quite a lot. How deep do you delve into the inner workings of the site your reviewing?

Do you do what most directory owners seem to do, namely taking a cursory glance at the index page (front page), and then perhaps quickly clicking on a few random links on the front page to make sure they aren’t under construction? Do you look through the text on the submitted site for any keyword spamming, do you look for accuracy of content, that the site is legitimate itself and that if it it sells products of any kind that it does so in a secure manner?

In my tens years and then some of reviewing sites covering just about every conceivable topic imaginable I concluded that you can never be too careful, because what might at first glance appear to be a legitimate site might well turn out to be something totally the opposite. The best designed site could actually lead to the worst content imaginable, and vice versa the worst designed site could lead you to the best products and or content around! You really can’t tell unless your thorough with your review. So to help, I’m going to share at least some of the key methods I use to review a site.

This first three are related to Source code review.

1. When loading a page I always look for url redirects and why they may be in place, most sites won’t use them and it’s pretty easy to check for black hat techniques. (I’ll discuss how to deal with these in another blog, until then if in doubt, leave it out!)
   
2. Source Code - No matter what site it is I immediately go for the source code to check for any sneaky tactics, such as hidden links, spammy keyword methods, hidden images, malicious javascript, and so on. (Never take for granted what you see on the front page is what the site actually contains!).
3. Meta-tags - I always feel good when I see the meta title of a site matches if not identically, then at the very least closely to the site title and actual site content. e.g, autodealers.com should have a meta title like or similar to Car Dealers in XYZ Town. and or be selling cars. (You’d be amazed at how many use misleading meta titles to gain higher rankings in the search engines for a given key search term.)
4. CTRL + F = Best Friend - Use it to search for hidden words in the source-code, you will be amazed at what you can find!

Some SEO experts suggest that meta titles are not necessary, I don’t follow that line and think they are an intrinsic part of a site and should always be as accurate as possible.

Assuming the site passes the Source-code test we now move on to the site itself, and after the cursory glance shows you that it ‘does what it says on the tin‘ you start analysing.

1. Design - Important enough to merit an entire subject on this matter which will be Phase 3
2. CTRL +F - This will help detect unwanted words and spammed content. (Should be done is Sourcecode review as well).
3. Link checking - Obvious but essential, each link on the main page should lead to a qualified page even if the page is under construction or contains very little content. A 404 page not found is not good.
4. External ‘Links’ pages - This is one of the most difficult tasks for any directory review, because in reality there is a limit to how many links you can actually check as a viable option either in a free directory or paid review. Our initial recommendation is that any external links pages should ideally be relevant at least to the site content itself, for example if the site being reviewed sells cars, then any ‘links pages’ should be to Car related sites. Spurious and random linking reduces quality. Again an entire thread will be dedicated to this later.
5. About Us - We’re of the view that any self respecting website will at the least have an ‘about us’ page, even if it’s just a brief one.
6. Contact page - Again, any self respecting site will provide a contact us page, or at worst an e-mail address.
7. Sitemap - If a submitted site has a sitemap they’re already on to a winner because they are doing two things, firstly they are showing they have nothing to hide, secondly they are making it easier for the editor/reviewer to navigate and review.

Finally for this phase we go onto how deep into the site being reviewed you go? Well in theory you should review even if just briefly every page on the site. It’s clear that on many sites, such as shops, directories, and very large sites, you couldn’t realistically be expected to check every single page, certainly not thoroughly, but you should at least get to as many as you can.

For shopping carts, a random check on say a dozen pages should allow you to formulate an opinion on the quality of the site, the same can be said of directories and article sites.

For large sites that are neither shop or directory we recommend that you check every link on the index page and every link on the sitemap page, by doing that you are going at least three deep into the site which should reveal any dark secrets if they have any.

If you want to go that extra mile as we do you can always write to the submitting site owners advising them that the submission has been preliminarily passed for acceptance but will be subject to further review at a later date which could lead to a reversal of acceptance.

It’s an exhaustive topic when it comes to reviewing a directory and we would be very surprised if many out there go anywhere near the levels we’ve demonstrated above, and in truth we haven’t even touched the surface on how far you could potentially go if you really wanted to be thorough. We will be covering this in greater detail when we discuss family safe sites in another post one of our team is currently writing.

So how many directory owners who claim to own ‘human reviewed directories’ after reading this post can honestly say, ‘we do all the above and more’ when checking our submissions?

Do you really think your doing enough to consider yourself worthy of the submission fees you charge, or to even advertise yourself as a ‘quality directory‘ reviewed by humans, as seems to be the vogue? Does ANYBODY?

How to maintain your directory - Coming next….