| 4:42 am on Nov 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|My question is, wich is the maximum number of submits you can do before to be penalized or ignored? |
It depends on the site, the content, the categories, and the editors.
While there is nothing "against the rules" about submitting in appropriate categories, as long as you're reasonable, I will repeat myself saying that editors are human. Some read the forums, most do not. Some interpret the guidelines one way, others another.
| 6:02 am on Nov 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|We offera lot of diferent services and I'm sure it would be probably accepted in three or four. |
From my experience, services pages are generally not sufficient to get listed. A business will generally get a topical and a regional listing and may get more if it has useful content pages or sections that are there for the benefit of a visitor, any visitor, and are not trying to sell that visitor something.
| 6:43 am on Nov 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|and may get more if it has useful content pages or sections that are there for the benefit of a visitor, any visitor, and are not trying to sell that visitor something. |
Yes, and very much so.
DMOZ is primarily about research, on any and every topic, any and every geographic location, all interests, all age groups, all professions, and personal sites.
To be legitimately accepted in multiple categories and or have deeplinks you must have a point of view that adds to the quality "research-ability" for which DMOZ is associated with.
Commercialism in itself has limited research value, a sellable product(s), service(s) and associated web sites have only one real topic "to sell". All of the research value is not immediately available (you must purchase first) and thus the guidlines state a "single" listing. DMOZ is not a commercial directory to promote your wares.
In addition, guidelines are just that -- and opened to personal (editor) intrepretation therefore should any editor define their category as the guidlines "verbatim", they are quite correct, while others define as case by case, "site quality", or "site uniqueness" (and they are quite correct).
In my experience, if you spent significant time planning, writing and designing content which promote phyiscal and immediate research value to a specific topic that adds a unique flavour (or visitor value) to a particular category -- you will likely have a favorable response.
| 6:46 am on Nov 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
What if you offer a detailed guidebook that covers the entire world? For the regional considerations, should one expect to get listed in the cat for each "continent", then in each country, and then each city for which you have information?
| 7:08 am on Nov 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|What if you offer a detailed guidebook that covers the entire world? For the regional considerations, should one expect to get listed in the cat for each "continent", then in each country, and then each city for which you have information? |
Yes and no, it depends.
Geographical/Regional location listings usually refers to a physical location (of say a storefront) or in the case of a virtual site with no real storefront -- the "point-of-presence" (POS) also define by the delivery point or where virtual products/services are distributed from. Generally speaking a distribution point is normally one location and therefore entitled to one listing.
With products and services for resell - the destination isn't relevant. (e.g. - even though I "distribute" internationally to every country, and city, I am still only located in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada and therefore all products and services are routed from this location, and thus my listing).
Look at this from Mars. I have subject matter on Mars and if there was a "future" geographical listing for Mars because we now have a settlement there - I would need to be phycally located there, wouldn't I?
A topical listing on Mars would be possibly though since I have information on Mars.
If however the "detailed guidebook that covers the entire world" is a free resource available directly online with no need to purchase or subscribe to view the entire world (of the guidebook - this is informative research of the location vice a product/service being distributed) then I would say... yes it may be possible, depending on depth of discussion for each location as well as each individual category's editor's view of DMOZ guidelines.
If the guidebook is just a page per location (probably unlikely) at least by city anyway.
| 1:04 pm on Nov 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|What if you offer a detailed guidebook that covers the entire world? |
I think the CIA Factbook is a good example of this.
| 3:15 pm on Nov 22, 2002 (gmt 0)|
When I said "diferent services" I was not talking about "things to sell" unless about content (and, IMHO, offer contents is offer a service).I will try to get the listings and let you know if it works fine.
| 4:48 am on Nov 24, 2002 (gmt 0)|
assuming that someone creates a site about lets say
the philosopher Hegel - and makes all the texts
of this thinker available on this website -
am i understanding you right that every text
would constitute unique content and deserves an
(i see this in some dmoz categories)
Or would the one listing of the main web page be
(not trying to blame someone - more interested in
identifying the appropriate strategy for my own
| 6:48 am on Nov 24, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|am i understanding you right that every text would constitute unique content and deserves an individual entry? |
No we would simply add one link that points to your main Hegel page, in the Hegel category [dmoz.org]. OTOH, if you had texts of works written by other philosophers, then those pages would definately be considered for deeplinking in the philosophers' respective category.
Again, it also depends on how "unique" the content is. If there are five other sites that provide the same texts on the same philosophers, then that content would most likely not be deeplinked.
| 2:05 pm on Nov 24, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I really find it helpful to view DMOZ as a collection of Bookmarks rather than a traditional directory.
Imagine that DMOZ is your own bookmarks folder and you came accross a site about Hegel, you would add that as a site and not the individual articles. If the site had other philosophers you *may* add a few bookmarks to them OTOH you may move what was the Hegel site to your general philosophers folder.
| 3:07 pm on Nov 24, 2002 (gmt 0)|
thank you for the prompt answers -
this will hopefully help me.
two questions left:
@rafalk - going back to hegel and assuming that someone
(lets say an hegel archive) can upload ALL the texts of
hegel (in true open source/gutenberg archive fashion) how
can any other website produce unique content?
(ok ... they might be able to write something about hegel
but the mayority of the "unique content" would/should
certainly come from hegel itself - right?)
@nffk - using your bookmark example - and taking into consideration the comments given above - isnt then the real
problem that all bookmarks have the "same size"?
i.e. what can be done to identify such a content
heavyweight in my bookmarks/dmoz?
(comment: after realizing that i didnt even bother to look
into the dmoz section i took a look at hegel - other
sections will certainly look similar - the mayority of the
listings seems to focus on writing "about" while the (few)
listings "of" hegel sources might get buried - and eventually offer the same texts ...
is this problematic?
comment two: for me its more a general problem - im not particularly interested in hegel. it could also be any
other thinker, writer, starlet, etc who could create a
exhausting hub/resource/archive ... despite the fact that
most of them dont understand the implications of such
a hub ...)
| 3:19 pm on Nov 24, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>what can be done to identify such a content
heavyweight in my bookmarks/dmoz?
By writing a good title and description, remember they are not really your bookmarks but everybody's. Your idea of a content heavyweight will not always be the same as anybody else.
| 3:34 pm on Nov 24, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Very nice analogy, NFFC.
Of course, thinking of bookmarks is just a trick to get your brain away from thinking about the benefits for your own site, and instead to focus on the benefits for the directory users. Since you're the end user of your own bookmarks, comparing the directory to them is a very effective way to adopt this user centric perspective.
same size (or importance)
The ODP can't really decide which site is more "important" for any individual user. One user will be looking for the original texts, the next one will be more interested in relevant commentaries. That's why it is important that the editor listing the sites writes good descriptions, which actually tell the users what they will find on each one. And if there are enough of them, then they will get sorted into respective subcategories for easier navigation.
If there really is a site that servers as the "ultimate authority" about a topic, then that may be given a cool mark, but this should be used very sparingly (a site presenting the complete works of an author might be a valid candidate, if there are no others offering the same).
| 8:11 am on Nov 26, 2002 (gmt 0)|
One way to get several Dmoz listings is to translate your site to several languages and submit in each language. I could get 4 Dmoz listing so far, the site is in 6 languages, we are still missing 2 but the French editor won't list it since it's already four times, I am just guessing that that his way of understanding the guidelines.
I am not sure if you would need to translate the whole site or not. But I don't think just a few pages would do.
Sorry if this is a bit off topic, but this is for sure a way to get several listings.
| 3:19 pm on Nov 26, 2002 (gmt 0)|
It's slightly ironic that tightly-focussed sites with well-defined content will generally only get one listing, whereas sites that cover a variety of topics might get multiple listings because their main URL is basically uncategorisable.
Now, every editor will work slightly differently. In some cases you'll find deeplinks to your content that you didn't submit because editors do actually sometimes build categories, especially Regional ones..
..but, *if* your mail URL is listed in an appropriate category then it's less likely that any deeplinks would get approved. If your main URL *isn't* listed then you're more likely to get deeplinks submitted.
If you genuinely have diverse content then go ahead and submit the deeplinks, but I'd recommend submitting each URL no more than once. Also, I'd suggest that going for more than 5 or 6 listings spread throughout unrelated categories. You'll find that multiple listings in related categories will generally be condensed into a main URL link.
The key advice I would always give is to look at your submissions from an editor's point of view. Make sure you submit to the most relevant category with the best description you can write and that the listed actually adds value to the DIRECTORY.