Does anybody remember the URL of a massive list of web directories that
was posted here some time ago?

The directories were listed alphabetically and had their Google PR next
to them.

I had it in my bookmarks but I've managed to loose it. Any help would be
fantastic.

Thanks,
Dan

Danniel - you ever lived in Southowram UK?

Mark

for the more seasoned hacks out there many of the directories below will be
very familiar, but for the newbies here's a list of, on the most part, free
to submit directories (posted 19thJuly http://www.seroundtable.com/)

The list includes:
http://www.dmoz.org/ (base page PR9)
http://dir.yahoo.com/ (base page PR9)
http://www.earthstation9.com (base page PR6, it uses frames, but it is SE
friendly)
http://www.geniusfind.com/ (base page PR6)
http://www.re-quest.net/ (base PR6)
http://www.qango.com/ (base page PR6)
http://www.wowdirectory.com/ (base page PR6)
http://www.directoryarchives.com/ (base page PR6)
http://www.gimpsy.com/ (base page PR6)
http://www.smartlinks.org (base PR5)
http://www.josh.nu/ (base PR5)
http://www.blakkat.com/ (base PR5)
http://www.webworldindex.com/ (base page PR5)
http://www.yeandi.com/ (base page PR5)
http://www.turnpike.net/directory.phtml (base page PR5)
http://www.websavvy.cc/ (base page PR5)
http://www.webworldindex.com/ (base page PR5)
http://www.worldwidewub.org/ (base page PR4)
http://www.thedirectorysite.com/ (base page PR4)
http://www.seekon.com/ (base page PR3)


this one?
"Daniel Ruscoe" <danruscoe@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d066065a5f12e8b7c@news.btopenworld.com.. .
> Does anybody remember the URL of a massive list of web directories that
> was posted here some time ago?
>
> The directories were listed alphabetically and had their Google PR next
> to them.
>
> I had it in my bookmarks but I've managed to loose it. Any help would be
> fantastic.
>
> Thanks,
> Dan
>
>

In article <429c53e2$0$322$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com>, mark | r
says...
> Danniel - you ever lived in Southowram UK?

Always been in or around Manchester.

> for the more seasoned hacks out there many of the directories below will be
> very familiar, but for the newbies here's a list of, on the most part, free
> to submit directories (posted 19thJuly http://www.seroundtable.com/)

That'll do nicely. I found a couple of good links through the above URL.

Or this bit, specifically:
http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/0006**.html

It isn't the site I had in mind, God only knows where that is, but I
think I've got enough directories to make a decent start with now.

Thanks,
Dan

mark | r wrote:

> Danniel - you ever lived in Southowram UK?
>
> Mark
>
> for the more seasoned hacks out there many of the directories below will
> be very familiar, but for the newbies here's a list of, on the most part,
> free to submit directories (posted 19thJuly http://www.seroundtable.com/)
>
> The list includes:
> http://www.dmoz.org/ (base page PR9)
> http://dir.yahoo.com/ (base page PR9)
> http://www.earthstation9.com (base page PR6, it uses frames, but it is SE
> friendly)
> http://www.geniusfind.com/ (base page PR6)
> http://www.re-quest.net/ (base PR6)
> http://www.qango.com/ (base page PR6)
> http://www.wowdirectory.com/ (base page PR6)
> http://www.directoryarchives.com/ (base page PR6)
> http://www.gimpsy.com/ (base page PR6)
> http://www.smartlinks.org (base PR5)
> http://www.josh.nu/ (base PR5)
> http://www.blakkat.com/ (base PR5)
> http://www.webworldindex.com/ (base page PR5)
> http://www.yeandi.com/ (base page PR5)
> http://www.turnpike.net/directory.phtml (base page PR5)
> http://www.websavvy.cc/ (base page PR5)
> http://www.webworldindex.com/ (base page PR5)
> http://www.worldwidewub.org/ (base page PR4)
> http://www.thedirectorysite.com/ (base page PR4)
> http://www.seekon.com/ (base page PR3)
>
>
> this one?
> "Daniel Ruscoe" <danruscoe@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1d066065a5f12e8b7c@news.btopenworld.com.. .
>> Does anybody remember the URL of a massive list of web directories that
>> was posted here some time ago?
>>
>> The directories were listed alphabetically and had their Google PR next
>> to them.
>>
>> I had it in my bookmarks but I've managed to loose it. Any help would be
>> fantastic.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dan

Apart from DMOZ, I am not sure that any of them is of significance. Yahoo
have charged for inclusion for quite some time (I last checked 2 years ago)
and the rest are too weak to be worth the time investment.

What's more, I wanted to mention that Google exclude (or are about to
exclude) directories from their engine. Who knows if Yahoo and MSN will
soon follow. I find it hard to believe that more than a handful of people,
real people, will actually /follow/ links from these directories.

Roy

--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com

> What's more, I wanted to mention that Google exclude (or are about to
> exclude) directories from their engine.

Roy, would you mind quoting a source for the above information please?

That would be a very dramatic U turn for google as it seems to prefer
directories above all else in some SERPs.

Jez.

Jez wrote:

>> What's more, I wanted to mention that Google exclude (or are about to
>> exclude) directories from their engine.
>
> Roy, would you mind quoting a source for the above information please?
>
> That would be a very dramatic U turn for google as it seems to prefer
> directories above all else in some SERPs.
>
> Jez.

It took me like 5 minutes to find the URL for you, but here it is:

http://tinyurl.com/dets4

I honestly think that while moderated directories are excellent, they have
often been exploited and misused. The whole culture of "link exchange",
"addition to all possible directories" and "ping all possible feed
services" is time-consuming, bandwidth-consuming and eventually noisy.

Roy

--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com

On Tue, 31 May 2005 16:04:04 +0100, Jez <j.ez@virgin.net> wrote:

>> What's more, I wanted to mention that Google exclude (or are about to
>> exclude) directories from their engine.
>
>Roy, would you mind quoting a source for the above information please?
>
>That would be a very dramatic U turn for google as it seems to prefer
>directories above all else in some SERPs.
>
>Jez.

I've heard it too. In the beginning, itr made sense for Google to give
weight to directory inclusion as sites were checked by hand and
included if they were deemed to be of merit. That hasn't been the case
for some time so it makes sense to dump directory inclusion weighting.
Hilltop and on-page seo here we come!

BB
--
www.kruse.co.uk/ seo@kruse.demon.co.uk
seo that watches the river flow...
--

On Tue, 31 May 2005 19:26:31 +0200, Big Bill <kruse@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:

> I've heard it too. In the beginning, itr made sense for Google to give
> weight to directory inclusion as sites were checked by hand and
> included if they were deemed to be of merit. That hasn't been the case
> for some time so it makes sense to dump directory inclusion weighting.

DMOZ still checks sites by hand. Or rather doesn't check and doesn't
include them for quite some time.

Best,
Borek
--
http://www.chembuddy.com - chemical calculators for labs and education
BATE - Base Acid Titration and Equilibria
program for pH calculations
CASC - Concentration and Solution Calculator
program for solution preparation and concentration conversions

"Big Bill" <kruse@cityscape.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8b7p919uta92l4tve9k1l3tscajbcg890b@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 31 May 2005 16:04:04 +0100, Jez <j.ez@virgin.net> wrote:
>
>>> What's more, I wanted to mention that Google exclude (or are about to
>>> exclude) directories from their engine.
>>
>>Roy, would you mind quoting a source for the above information please?
>>
>>That would be a very dramatic U turn for google as it seems to prefer
>>directories above all else in some SERPs.
>>
>>Jez.
>
> I've heard it too. In the beginning, itr made sense for Google to give
> weight to directory inclusion as sites were checked by hand and
> included if they were deemed to be of merit. That hasn't been the case
> for some time so it makes sense to dump directory inclusion weighting.
> Hilltop and on-page seo here we come!

Take a look at a few SERPs right now. For mine I am not seeing the
Google/DMOZ directory listing in it. It was normally in the top 10 for rag
rugs. Also, I had to work hard at bringing it up in a SERP. It will come up
for crocheted rugs, needlework(Yahoo directory did), crochet, crochet crafts
etc.

At first the directory was a grayed out PR now it has a white PR.

Stacey

On Tue, 31 May 2005 20:11:59 +0200, Borek
<borek@parts.bpp.to.com.remove.pl> wrote:

>On Tue, 31 May 2005 19:26:31 +0200, Big Bill <kruse@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I've heard it too. In the beginning, itr made sense for Google to give
>> weight to directory inclusion as sites were checked by hand and
>> included if they were deemed to be of merit. That hasn't been the case
>> for some time so it makes sense to dump directory inclusion weighting.
>
>DMOZ still checks sites by hand. Or rather doesn't check and doesn't
>include them for quite some time.
>
>Best,
>Borek

I've said this before - DMOZ is an idea who's time has gone. No-one
seems to care over there any more.

BB
--
www.kruse.co.uk/ seo@kruse.demon.co.uk
seo that watches the river flow...
--