Hedir Review : Checking Submissions (what is your process for checking)

Google Junky · SuperMOD Joined: 01 Jan 2006 Posts: 3868 286 Hedir Points

This is just a rough draft of a list I made. I would like to hear your thoughts, additions, agreements or disagreements.
Certainly this isn't all of the things we look for. So please add anything you have.

The submission itself:
URL - Subdomain(this.domain.com) or Deep linking(domain.com/deeplink/deeplink.html) English version are the exclusion to this and can be accepted.
Title - must make sense as a title would. Nothing repeated
Descriptions

Link dropping - any links within the description
Spamming - Repeated text, many keywords/phrases separated by commas, and a long vertical list of individual words phrases.

General Checking

Site must have value to the visitor. Content should be:

Informative
Accurate and truthful where making statements of fact
Time independent or regularly updated
Unbiased except where explicitly stating a point of view
(e.g. the website of a political party or religious organization.
In such cases, website should clearly and prominently state its
bias/affiliation
Intelligibly written in grammatically correct English
Well organized so that all content is readily accessible

Non english - if in another language is their an English version available
Content - Is there enough to look at to call a site.
Layout - does it flow well.
Check width - do you have to scroll horizontally
Text - Is the text legible
Theme - do all the colors work well together including checking for clashes with text color
Technical

Loadtime - self explanatory
Code Validation - Does code within the page effect the visitors experience or take away from its usabilty. Often checked at validator.w3.org and in multiple browsers for compatibility issues.
Navigation - functions, in a good and easy place to be used, no adverse effects when hovering.
Other text navigations - header and footer text link navigation works
Links check - do all links on the homepage work and function as intended.
Redirect - Does the submitted domain go to a different domain.
Pop-UP - was their a popup opening a new page or creating a small advertisement box in the page
Mirror - are most if not all content the same as another domain/site
Division - is the site simply a smaller division an associated site and having the same content, as in a child domain of their main site.

SEO and related checks

in source - a spammy title, description, alt tags, link title tags
on-page text - over used phrases and text not needed or make no sense.
Hidden text - by way of CSS. There are two ways to check.

The webmaster toolbar and Disable Styles.
View source and do a search for the word "hidden" where visibility is also found in CSS or main page source. Then follow the class or style tag for this.

Product and/or Services

Contact Information - do they offer a physical address
Affiliations - Are you redirected to buy the product on another site or many references to another domain throughout the site.
Security - Secure SSL certificate offered when ordering
Privacy Policy - does the policy ensure the safe use of the site when information is submitted. Will the site use your information for any other use than its original intention.
Uniqueness - is the site product/service being offered unique, or presented in a unique way

Señor COOL · Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:28 am Post subject:

I tend to look for the SEO/spammy stuff second, along with popups and/or redirects. Then I look at the other stuff after that.

One thing that you may want to put in there is code. Is the code solid? Does it validate? Will it cause crashes and/or browser issues?

Another one is: is the site product/service being offered unique, or presented in a unique way at the very least?

Other than that, Carlito says that's a cool list.

bret · Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:50 am Post subject:

I also check their Privacy policy and testimonial pages. I keep asking the same question, "As a customer will I use it?”

http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/jonathan?entry=defining_quality, I liked this blog entry defining quality.

Google Junky · SuperMOD Joined: 01 Jan 2006 Posts: 3868 286 Hedir Points

I agree about the privacy policy.
Testomonials can be manipulated with customers that don't exist.

Edmond Dantès · Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:32 pm Post subject:

great GJ

Google Junky · SuperMOD Joined: 01 Jan 2006 Posts: 3868 286 Hedir Points

Thanks bret, Adam, and francesco

I added 4 more

Links Check
Privacy Policy
Code Validation
Uniqueness <-- wasn't sure what word to use there. seems like an obvious pick. I quoted your phrase Adam Smile

Adam: I would like to hear any additions you have about the text on a given page.

Señor COOL · Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:36 pm Post subject:

No, you STOLE it. Smile

'Sall good, buddy. Use away.

I can't think of anything I'd like to add, but if I do I'll post it here.

kappixteam · Joined: 17 Apr 2006 Posts: 265 10351 Hedir Points

GJ and friends,

The benchmarks begun by GJ is an extremely useful tool. It ought to be added to the Reviewer's Guide imho asap.

I'm still developing a pattern of reviewing, learning from more experienced reviewers as I go. These benchmarks or checklist, if you will, is beneficial to new reviewers.

I plea for having it added to the guide (I read the guide, didn't notice an elaborated checklist -correct me if I am mistaken)

Yours,

ireneherz · Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 10:14 pm Post subject: Something missing

Almost all the criteria above refer to technical aspects. I think a word must be said for whether a site has value. Not necessarily unique value, but value. Does it serve a useful function? Does it have important information? that's what I consider first.

Google Junky · SuperMOD Joined: 01 Jan 2006 Posts: 3868 286 Hedir Points

ireneherz,

You make a great point. Do you think you would be able to come up with a list of specifics for reviewing sites from that aspect?

Is this close to what you are saying?

ireneherz · Posted: Tue May 02, 2006 6:41 pm Post subject: i'll try

Site must, first and foremost, have value to the visitor. Content should be:
1 Informative
2 Accurate and truthful where making statements of fact
3 Time independent or regularly updated
4 Unbiased except where explicitly stating a point of view
(e.g. the website of a political party or religious organization.
In such cases, website should clearly and prominently state its
bias/affiliation
5 Intelligibly written in grammatically correct English
6 Well organized so that all content is readily accessible

Google Junky · SuperMOD Joined: 01 Jan 2006 Posts: 3868 286 Hedir Points

ireneherz,

That was a very good list. It was added within the General Checking list and some of the more technical checks moved out of that heading.

If anything in your list is a repeat of what I have already please let me know so I can take any out that I had listed already.
If you also see anything that seems to be under the wrong heading then feel free to suggest where it should go.

Thanks you very much. It was a great addition and needed to be there.

ireneherz · Posted: Tue May 02, 2006 8:56 pm Post subject: one more

http://www.hedir.com/groupthink/about6051.html songrite.com
is a British copyrighting service for songwriters. Shouldn't it go either in business or music?

ireneherz · Posted: Tue May 02, 2006 9:01 pm Post subject: another

http://www.hedir.com/groupthink/about8716.html

Although the site has some of the web owner's stories, it's primarily an SEO business site.

AjiNIMC · Joined: 11 Apr 2005 Posts: 516 18600 Hedir Points

I think when we review a site we can see and list the unique things implemeted over it.

Can we do a SW (Strength-Weakness) analysis for the site?

My apologies to Hedir team as I hardly get time to do proper reviews but I keep spreading the word to others in the industry.