Having now gone through the basic stages of how we deal with link descriptions, we’ve noted the main points about what constitutes a good description and how to get there, so where do we go from here?

It would have been easy for me to go by memory on what directories make me cringe and to actually name and shame them, but that’s not the purpose of this blog, so before I started on this next phase of editorial standards I trawled through literally hundreds of directories checking out their standards; to help me in this I used possibly one of the most comprehensive directory lists currently available at info.vilesilencer. A big thanks goes out to Dan the owner of this resource which proved invaluable in my research.

The one thing that hit me immediately when looking through the list, was the Pandora’s box of designs that directories now have! What happened to good old fashioned design? Sure, most of these were as basic as anything, Dmoz, and The Orange Pages are two that come to mind. Both these designs could never be called ‘interesting to look at’, in fact, ‘boring’ comes to mind, but they do exactly what they claim to do, and that is, they present results in a structured order. However, there’s a massive difference between both of them, this being one maintains their content, the other doesn’t.

So without running the risk of digressing to design just yet, lets move back to maintenance. I’m going to deliberately pick on dmoz as the classic example of a directory that doesn’t show the level of housekeeping it should; After all, it is arguably the largest and most used directory on the planet! Because of this fact, and that it is apparently manned by an army of volunteers, not forgetting it’s owned and funded by a large corporation, there’s absolutely no excuse for any bad housekeeping. Even if each editor was allocated just a thousand links a year to maintain, that wouldn’t be overly difficult to manage? So why don’t most directories update their descriptions or check for their accuracy, is it too much to expect?

The problem I see is that even if directory owners do start off on the right track and adopt at least some of the methods mentioned in previous posts they really will need to maintain them to stand any chance of long term credibility. I’m often baffled why so much fuss is made of Dmoz because in reality it is pound for pound the worst maintained directory out there barring a few. You can go to virtually any category and find a link that is either given a poor descriptive tag or find the link obsolete or worse, (the unchecked link now going to a site that might offend the visitor, I don’t need to go into detail here.)

No doubt an argument could be given that because Dmoz has many millions of links that need maintaining the task is always going to be an uphill one, and I have to agree. But that’s they have no-one to blame except themselves! They created a monster that was not nurtured correctly from the beginning. They failed set their stall from the start and to adhere to a strict code of practice, instead choosing to try and run faster than anyone else in their quest to be the biggest so called ‘independent directory’. But what point is being the biggest at anything if what you offer is poor quality? People can claim what they like about dmoz being the best, but I haven’t written this blog without fist doing my homework. They are nowhere near the best, and I can back up why I think this if needs be.

It’s inevitable that sooner or later Dmoz will get universally seen for what it truly is, nothing short of a very poorly maintained directory. And with the Google’s of this World striving for ‘Quality’ they simply won’t want to associate with anything that conflicts with their aims.

It would be so easy to concentrate on dmoz as they are easiest to pick on, but let’s not, as the point of the post is the directory industry as a whole. So coming back to the not so big directories, (and there are many of them these days). What excuse do these have for bad housekeeping? Many only have a few thousand links at best so it really isn’t that difficult to monitor, and that’s even taking into account new submissions.

I’ve spent many an hour reviewing submissions in my time, and always made time to dedicate to housekeeping. I made a strict promise to myself that even if it was only ten or twenty sites a day that were getting re-reviewed, it would be at least ten or twenty more that would go to making my content of a higher quality and more accurate level than those who never. You’d be surprised how quick those ten sites add up.

My premise from as far back as the late 90’s was that quality will always beat quantity, I haven’t changed my mind on that one.

The thing I find frustrating is that with the smaller directories there really isn’t any excuse for this lack of housekeeping, there’s even software out there that detects whether a link is dead, changed it’s content, and more, which makes the directory owners job a lot easier than it was in the early days. Add to this the fact they have far less to housekeep than the Dmoz’ of this World there really is NO excuse. A simple set of rules to stick to, will help with housekeeping and would avoid a whole lot of problems down the line, ref Dmoz.

Here’s a simple guide on how we would do our housekeeping;

1. Categorize submissions in a separate list from the directory, a simple excel spreadsheet will help on this, or in some cases you might actually have these features built into your control panel.
2. Low Maintenance Links - Sites like government sites and alike don’t need to be put on a ‘priority’ list for re-review, they are unlikely to change in a short period. They should still be checked, but less frequently and with less urgency.
3. High Maintenance Links - These are sites likely to change in a short space of time. Directories for example are one of the fastest turnarounds in the business, you should check these regularly.
4. Set time aside each day to re-review your content; don’t let this get out of control like dmoz have, before you know it you’ll be so far behind you simply won’t be able to catch up.
5. Domain name Monitoring - We look at a domain name and its potential for change. Many other services do as well. A good domain name is like gold dust, they change hands quite often.
6. Put a ‘Report a Site’ facility for users to point out a site’s content has changed, (even if it’s a simple e-mail address), you can go that extra yard on this one by offering an incentive such as a free listing as a way of gratitude for someone reporting a dead or inaccurate link, it can prove very cost effective and also helps you build your directory at the same time.

If you do offer an incentive program you can employ strict terms on this, for example the reporter should own the site he submits as a reward. Alternatively you can offer a free for all reporting system where site monitors get a discount on submissions if they are helping you to maintain quality.

There are any number of methods you can employ to constantly monitor and manage your directory, it can also help on what script you use, for example some of the better scripts will have certain ‘link status’ systems put in place for this. (see below) If you are going to use any of these methods always tell the submitter of any change to their status this will avoid any complaints such as ‘why is my site not there?’ type thing.

Based on my experience of editorial integrity and the need for good housekeeping I actually developed my own script which took all of this into account and gives us the following options so we know exactly what the state of play is. I’m not going to advertise the script here because this post isn’t about advertising, its about lessons I learn on editorial integrity and how I used these lessons.

The features I thought were vital for good housekeeping were these.

1. Pending -The most powerful tool in your armoury, we’ll cover this below.
2. On hold - Pretty much the same as pending but we use it while we are waiting for the site owner to contact us on a given point.
3. Active - Depending on the software you use this can tell you whether any link is live or not.
4. Rejected - An excellent facility that will allow you to match up re-submissions with past rejected sites.
5. Suspended - Another excellent way to housekeep, you know that anyone put in this status has been advised that the site suspended has to take some form of action to get re-listed. These are just a few of the simple but very effective methods to manage the content of a directory
6. Expired - This will remind you that sites who’ve paid for a yearly listing have expired, a good script will then put this link into either a deleted status or into pending which allows you to contact the owner to see if they want to renew.
7. Edited - This is my personal favourite. It tells me that any site in this status has been re-reviewed and when, possibly the best management your likely to get.

I’m absolutely confident that if you adopt even some of the methods mentioned above then your well on your way to creating and managing a good directory which will need little or no catchup maintenance. It doesn’t matter what script you have because I’ve already said, you can easily use a spreadsheet to do this, although it does help if you already have an automated system in place.

The ‘Pending’ method I mentioned above is the most important tool in the directory owners armoury, it will do a number of things for you, it can keep a submission in limbo while waiting for a review fee to come throgh, it can be used to set any link to this status while your re-reviewing and so on, its really just that simple if you people only knew. That’s why I decided on diving into the blog world and write on my experiences of how easy it is to maintain a good quality directory which ultimately will lead to submissions and better and probably more qualified traffic.

It’s little wonder seo writers condemn directories as being a waste of time, in their current state of play they are, by improving your editorial integrity and management of your directory you can quickly turn this around. One thing I’ve learned if anything, is that the Google’s of this world recognize this and reward accordingly, the trick is to work with them, not against them, the points above will help you do just that.