09/03/14 16:21 Filed in: Directory Journal
Directory Journal was evaluated for Web Directory Reviews Org on March 9, 2014.
This is our fifth review of Directory Journal. Directories that earn a place in our quarterly top ten lists are reevaluated during the following quarter, and so on. DirJournal was rated number nine in the first quarter of 2013, number five in the second and third quarters, and number four in the fourth quarter.
In recent years, Google has deprecated its PageRank, and rarely updates it anymore, but still it is a matter of importance to a lot of people. The index page of DirJournal has a PageRank of five, and its second-level pages have a PageRank of four. I haven't visited each of its third-level categories, but I didn't come across any with PageRank.
Its Moz Domain Authority is 61/100, and the Page Authority of its index page is 68/100. DirJournal's Alexa Traffic Rank is 24,854.
Directory Journal has had 17.902 StumbleUpon stumbies, 639 Google+ clicks, 331 Twitter tweets, and 604 Facebook likes.
Sites may be submitted to the directory as a regular link at a cost of $59.95 per year or $159.95 for a permanent listing, while the fee for a review of a featured listing is $99.95 per year or a one-time payment of $249.95.
Three deep links may be added to a regular listing, and the permanent plan allows links to social profiles, as well as a telephone number and physical address. Featured listings allow up to five deep links, and will appear above regular links.
The above information is provided for those who may be interested in it. For the purpose of a rating, however, the directory will be evaluated from the perspective of a potential web directory user, so issues such as metrics and submission fees do not enter into the review.
Rather, I'll be reviewing the directory in five general areas: aesthetics (10%), content (25%), intuitiveness (20%), quality (20%), and usefulness (25%). Up to five extra points may be awarded for content outside of the ordinary directory content, or for extra features not covered elsewhere.
Aesthetics - 7/10
Although I prefer an index page that doesn't require vertical scrolling, both the main menu and interactive map are above the fold, so it isn't really necessary to scroll in order to access the directory.
For the most part, the content below the fold of Directory Journal refers to its extra content, which includes several blogs and webmaster tools. There is some advertising, but it's in the footer, and not at all obtrusive.
I don't think it's changed considerably, if at all, since I last reviewed it, but I think I like it better.
Its main menu consists of eighteen top-level categories, which are arranged in three columns of six. There is a lack of symmetry, in that some of its top-level categories are one word, while others are two or three. However, there is ample space between the categories, so that it does not appear cluttered. Its internal pages are well organized, with its subcategories also arranged in columns of three.
Content - 20/25
I used a program called Scrutiny to scan each directory that I am going to review, in order to give me an idea as to how large a directory is, at least in comparison. The number that it returns is not a perfect number, in that the program does not differentiate between outgoing site links and internal navigational and other links.
This quarter, I am allowing Scrutiny to scan as many as 400,000 links because, beyond that point, it will sometimes crash. Plus, the time involved is too long. Some of the directories that I have scanned have topped out at 400,000.
Scrutiny completed its scan of Directory Journal, finding 246,668 links. It flagged a large number of links as being bad, but fewer than a fourth of them were actually bad; most of them were whois.domaintools.com links within its webmaster tools area, and they weren't really bad. Scrutiny has trouble following some types of links.
While there may be some, I clicked through a lot of the directory's categories and subcategories, and didn't find any empty ones, as I did during my last review.
Intuitiveness - 19/20
The taxonomy of Directory Journal is well thought out and intuitive, including the use of @links and above and below the line capabilities. Category name choices and placement make sense.
I did notice that, in the United States category in its regional tree, the @links for Real Estate and Shopping are mixed in with the states rather than being displayed below the line, with the other topical subcategories. I assume that this was an oversight,
With the exception of its regional tree, all of the categories that I visited at Directory Journal had descriptions, which is also an improvement from the last time that I evaluated the directory. I should mention that some of its regional categories have descriptions, so it may well be that this is a project in process.
Featured listings are placed above regular listings, but they are easily discernible from the regular links, and I didn't come across any sites that were placed inappropriately.
Quality - 16/20
Directory Journal allows up to three thousand characters in a site description, which is great, although very few of its listed sites take advantage of this.
The directory uses the sentence fragment model for site descriptions, but it does so very well. I came across no site descriptions that included misspellings, promotional language, or grammatical errors, other than already stated.
It is clear that the directory staff is actively involved in adding content to the directory, rather than only adding paid submissions.
I found no empty categories in the directory. Although there were a large number of categories with only one or two listed sites, I do not view this as a major quality concern, as I would empty categories.
Despite the fact that Scrutiny flagged quite a few false bad links, there were nevertheless a fairly high number of bad links, which is not unusual in a large directory.
Usefulness - 20/25
Directory Journal includes enough content for it to be useful to a directory user, and the content is well organized and displayed attractively. Except for its regional tree, category descriptions are in place, and site titles and descriptions are reasonably descriptive. I did not come across any empty categories.
There is, however, not a large amount of content in its regional tree. There are very few categories for cities, towns, or other municipalities.
Extra Content - 3
Directory Journal includes several blogs, most of which are regularly maintained, and featuring well-written, unique content. A variety of webmaster tools are also featured.
Overall Rating - 85%
Directory Journal was reviewed for Web Directory Reviews Org on March 9, 2014, and given a rating of eight-five percent.
Directory Journal is a well managed, active web directory. With more content, particularly in its regional tree, and the use of grammatically correct, complete sentences in site descriptions, it would come close to being perfect.
Directory Journal is a fairly new directory, first appearing in the Internet Archive on May 21, 2007, so there are other directories that have had a head start of nearly a decade.