Directory Journal

Directory Journal was evaluated for Web Directory Reviews Org on June 10 and June 11, 2014.

directoryjournallogo-jun2014
2

Established in 2007, Directory Journal has been in our top ten since the first quarter of 2013, when we first began conducting directory reviews. It was our #9 directory during the first quarter of last year, #5 in the second and third, #4 in the fourth, and our #1 directory in the first quarter of 2014.

Whenever a directory makes it into our top ten, it is included in the reviews that we do the following quarter, so half of the directories that we review each quarter are (usually) being reviewed for the first time, while the others consist of our top ten from the previous quarter. At some point, I might change that but this is the way that it's been done for the past six quarters.

The Majestic SEO Trust Flow for Directory Journal is 44, while its Citation Flow is 39. Its Moz Domain Authority is 56/100, and the Page Authority of its index page is 64/100, its Page MozRank is 6.04 and its Page MozTrust is 6.26. I no longer report Google PageRank or Alexa Traffic Rank because the one has been deprecated, and is seldom updated, while the other is too easily manipulated to mean much of anything.

Submission fees are $59.95 per year or a one-time payment of $159.95 for a regular listing, or $99.95 per year or $249.95, as a one-time payment, for a featured listing. Regular listings may include up to three deep links, while up to five can be included with a featured listing.

The reviews that I do for Web Directory Reviews Org are conducted from the perspective of a directory user rather than site submitter or search engine professional. From that perspective, each directory is evaluated in five areas: aesthetics (10%), content (25%), intuitiveness (20%), quality (20%), and usefulness (25%). In addition, up to five extra points may be added for content not generally seen in web directories or for useful features not covered elsewhere. There is considerable overlap in some of these areas.

Some changes are made in the evaluation criteria between quarters, so a directory will not necessarily score the same from one quarter to another. Additionally, since I am a human being rather than an algorithm, my opinions might change slightly from one quarter to another.

Aesthetics - 7/10

My initial impression of the index page of Directory Journal is that it is a bit busier than I like, and that it looks like there is a lot of advertising. As a rule of thumb, I prefer that the index page be entirely above the fold. Of course, I violate this rule myself, in my directory of directories.

However, while there is vertical scrolling in Directory Journal's index page, it is not necessary to look beneath the fold for the directory's main menu, and its advertising is to first-party products, or to internal pages of the Directory Journal site itself, which are, for all practical purposes, little more than navigational links.

Directory Journal's index page includes a header, navigational bar, and search field. Beneath that, nine top categories are highlighted, with a flat map of the world to its right, serving as an image map, and a starting point for the directory's regional categories.

Below the top categories links and image map is the directory's main menu: seventeen upper-level categories, arranged in two columns of six, and one of five. Its upper-level categories are asymmetrical. Beneath that are links to several of the directory's internal pages, webmaster tools, blogs, etc.

Its internal pages are attractive. Each category has a description, and site listings are separated from one another with a horizontal rule, providing a thematic break.

Content - 22/25

As a tool in determining the amount of content that a web directory has, I scan each directory that I am going to review with a program called Scrutiny, which tells me the number of links that are found in a domain, as well as flagging those that it determines to be bad, for whatever reason.

Scrutiny does not differentiate between outgoing directory links and internal links, such as navigational links, so the actual number of directory links is lower than the total number of links found. Nevertheless, it gives me an idea as to the size of a directory, especially as compared to other directories that I have scanned. I limit the number of links to 400,000 to reduce the likelihood of a crash, either of Scrutiny or of the server being scanned. Some of the directories that I have viewed had in excess of 400,000 links.

During its scan of Directory Journal, Scrutiny found 246,259 total links, which is a few hundred less than I found when I reviewed the directory last quarter.

Intuitiveness - 17/20

Directory Journal's taxonomy is well organized, and it makes use of several features that serve to make things easier for users to find their way around, such as @links and above and below the line capabilities.

I know I mentioned last quarter that the topical @links for Real Estate and Shopping were mixed in with the state categories in the United States section of the directory's regional tree, rather than below the line with the other topical categories, and I see that this is still the case.

I see that, in its North America category, the topical category, Travel and Tourism, is mixed in with geographical categories, and I'm not sure why that is, since there are very few sites involved.

Nevertheless, the majority of its categories and subcategories are well thought out, and executed in such a way that users should have little difficulty finding their way around.

Featured listings are listed above regular listings, which detracts slightly from the user experience, but they are easily discernible from regular links.

The directory's search feature works well when the search term or phrase is included in the site's title, description or category. For this reason, longer, more descriptive, site descriptions would enhance the usefulness of the directory's in-site search.

Quality - 16/20

Paging through the directory's categories and subcategories, I can see that site titles do not include extraneous keywords or spam, although I am seeing quite a few that use the domain name in lieu of the actual site title.

Site descriptions use a sentence fragment model, and many, if not most, of its descriptions are on the skimpy side, this despite the fact that, according to its site submission form, up to three thousand characters may be used in a site description.

Longer descriptions would add textual content to the directory, as well as allowing sites to be more easily found through the directory's search features.

I did come across some bad links, and Scrutiny flagged quite a few links as being bad, although quite a few of them were not actually bad.

Usefulness - 21/25

Directory Journal includes sufficient content to be useful as a directory, and this content is well organized.

Most of the directory's categories include category descriptions, although many of them would benefit from being longer and more descriptive. Still, several of the directories that I have looked at have no category descriptions at all, so it is good that they are in use here.

There is not a lot of content in Directory Journal's regional categories but its topical categories are well represented.

Extra Content - 3

Directory Journal includes several blogs, although some of them haven't been updated in recent months. Other content includes webmaster tools and an affiliate program.

Overall Rating - 86%

Upon my assessment of Directory Journal on June 10 and June 11, 2014, I have given it a rating of eighty-six percent for the second quarter of 2014 reviews.

Comments

Directory Journal is a well organized general directory.

directoryjournal-jun2014

blog comments powered by Disqus