Directory@v7n

Directory@v7n was evaluated for Web Directory Reviews Org on December 4, 5 and 6, 2014.

directoryv7n-logo-dec2014
Directory@v7n was in my top ten during the first quarter of 2013, which is the first quarter that I began reviewing web directories, holding the #6 spot that quarter. However, it dropped out in the second quarter after my review criteria was changed considerably. Since I haven't taken a close look at it in nearly two years, so I thought I'd give it another chance. Regardless of where it might stand in the ratings, Directory@v7n is a good directory, and one that you shouldn't be ashamed to have your site listed in.

Directory@v7n is a general web directory that first appears in the Internet Archive on April 17, 2006, which makes it approximately eight years and seven months old.

Its Moz Domain Authority is 59/100, the Page Authority of its home page is 57/100, the Page MozRank is 5.73, and the Page MozTrust is 5.50. Its Majestic Trust Flow is 48 and its Citation Flow is 44. The Alexa Traffic Rank of Directory@v7n is 8,038.

The submission fee for Directory@v7n is a one-time payment of $49.95. A discount may be available for purchases of twenty or more links.

Unfortunately, it would prove difficult to evaluate Directory@v7n because it went down during my review. Before or during my review, I scan every directory using a program called Scrutiny, which gives me the total number of links while flagging those that are bad.

During my scan, it began giving a large number of timeouts and, at the same time, the server went down. Because Scrutiny can be demanding of a server, I often scan the directory a day or two before I begin reviewing it but, since Directory@v7n is a relatively small directory, I didn't anticipate a problem.

dirv7n-timedout


On closer inspection, I found that it had banned my ISP during my scan of the directory. Looking back, I can see that it did that the last time I tried to scan the directory too.

I do not rate a directory on its SEO metrics or submission fees, however. Directory reviews are done through the perspective of a directory user, evaluating directories in five areas: aesthetics (10%), size (20%), intuitiveness (20%), quality (25%), and usefulness (25%). Additionally, up to five extra points may be assigned for useful content not otherwise assessed during the review.

Aesthetics - 7/10


The design and color choices of Directory@v7n are nice, with its upper-level categories alternating font colors within the main menu, all of which contrasts nicely with the overall design of the site. Its index page fits above the fold too, and that's always nice.

The main menu could be improved if each of its upper-level category choices were either one word, two words, or three words, rather than a mixture, which yields a lack of symmetry.

No third-party advertising is in evidence, with advertising constrained to its own products and, even then, tastefully done.

Size - 0/20


Directory@v7n is a smallish directory, from appearances. Before my ISP was banned, Scrutiny had found 13,019 links. While the directory may be larger than that, each directory has to be evaluated by the same standards, and 13,019 is the only number that I have to work with.

Given 13,019 links in 8 years and 7 months, that calculates to fewer than 4.2 links per day, or 1,502 links per year. According to my criteria, that doesn't score any points in size. In fact, the criteria calls for a subtraction of five points if my ISP is banned, so that would be -5 points, but I won't go there.

Intuitiveness - 12/20


Directory@v7n's taxonomy is sensible but shallow. Given the low number of sites listed in the directory, an overly deep structure isn't called for but there are some categories that have multiple pages of listed sites, and which might benefit from subcategorization.

Directory@v7n is a general web directory, which includes a regional tree; however, several of the sites listed in its topical categories would more appropriately be placed within a regional category. For example, rather than listing "Baltimore Mesothelioma Lawyer" in Government and Politics > Law, why isn't it listed in a regional category? After all, its title and description identify it as a geographically oriented site.

Additionally, its search feature doesn't seem to fare well in multiple-word searches. While there are several listed sites that use the phrase "web directory" in their title or description, and there is even a category for "Web Directory Lists," a search for "web directory" returns no results.

Quality - 15/25


Directory@v7n uses the sentence fragment model for descriptions, but it seems to so fairly well. Descriptions are reasonably descriptive, although there are some that are too skimpy to serve well. I am not seeing any misspellings or capitalization errors, but there is some mildly promotional language.

Usefulness - 10/25


As far as usefulness goes, the comparative low number of listed sites in Directory@v7n is minimized by the fact that it doesn't have any empty categories. Because of this, any category that a user clicks into will have content.

In contrast, some of its categories have multiple pages of listed sites, and the directory would be more useful if these categories are subdivided. Moving regional sites to regional would also be helpful.

Also, I should mention that there are no category descriptions, at least beyond a few words. Every web directory script that I am aware of includes category descriptions as a standard feature, and the inclusion of well-written, unique category descriptions could provide information or directory users, confirmation of appropriate categories for site submitters, and textual content for search engine spiders. The lack of useful category descriptions is always unfortunate.

Extra Content - 2


Besides its directory, Directory@v7n includes an active forum, and a less active blog.

Overall Rating - 46%


Upon my assessment of Directory@v7n on December 4, 5, and 6, 2014, I have given it a rating of forty-six percent.

Comments


Directory@v7n is an attractive directory, and one in which some quality control is maintained. Despite its low rating on this evaluation, it is not among the several junk directories that pollute the Internet. Its rating is largely a reflection of a low level of outgoing links and my inability to fully assess its content due to my ISP being banned. Other contributing factors to its low rating include the lack of category descriptions and the poor results that I received when trying to use its search feature. Nevertheless, I have sites listed in Directory@v7n and wouldn't hesitate to submit others of my sites to the directory.

directoryv7n-dec2014

blog comments powered by Disqus