homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.205.189.156
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Home / Forums Index / Search Engines / Directories
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Webwork & skibum

Directories Forum

    
Dmoz Praise
Submit my site yesterday - listed today
le_gber




msg:481391
 11:29 am on Apr 12, 2003 (gmt 0)

Hi,

For DMOZ hip hip - HOOOOORAY.

As the title suggested I submitted my site yesterday (at 7pm UK time) to DMOZ and today it is listed in my category.

PRAISE PRAISE ... I will be listed for next Deep Crawl ... PRAISE PRAISE

Thank you DMOZ!

Leo

:)

ps. if the editor that review my site happen to crawl WW I would be glad to personnaly thank him/her (sticky me)

 

SEO practioner




msg:481392
 12:30 pm on Apr 12, 2003 (gmt 0)

Leo. are you putting us on? I submit sites in DMOZ and it usually takes over 3 to 4 months, IF they do it!

le_gber




msg:481393
 12:33 pm on Apr 12, 2003 (gmt 0)

Sorry I didn't know. Is it true?

May be its because I submitted it into a very specific category, with only 20-30 url's

Leo
<added>categorised under my city/town</added>

jimnoble




msg:481394
 3:02 pm on Apr 12, 2003 (gmt 0)

There were several things going for you.

1. You submitted it to exactly the correct regional locality.
2. You had a proper bricks and mortar address on your website which made it easy for the editor to confirm that it was eligible to be listed there. (Why do web design companies so often think it's a good for business to not provide an address and land line phone number?)
3. A keen on the ball editor (not me BTW) lives in the area and he likes to keep it tidy :).

Make it easy to list a website in a locality and response times of several hours are not uncommon. My fastest acceptance was about 6 minutes - because I happened to be working in a category when the website was submitted there.

le_gber




msg:481395
 3:13 pm on Apr 12, 2003 (gmt 0)

You submitted it to exactly the correct regional locality.

Yep I couldn't have put it elsewhere it's where I live :)

Why do web design companies so often think it's a good for business to not provide an address and land line phone number?

I think that because they don't want their customers to be put off by a company 'living' half way accross the UK. I don't mind as long as I can have all the ones around me ;)

3. A keen on the ball editor (not me BTW) lives in the area and he likes to keep it tidy .

THANK YOU MR/MS EDITOR. He/She went to my site only about 15 min after I submitted my URL. So may be he/she was working on the category just as you did.

Thank you for the insight, BTW.

Leo

rfgdxm1




msg:481396
 1:34 am on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

As an ODP editor I've added sites before within hours after they are submitted. This can easily happen if the editor logs in just after you submit. (Or, as jimnoble stated, the editor is working on unrevieweds in that cat at the moment.)

cornwall




msg:481397
 7:20 am on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

>>As the title suggested I submitted my site yesterday (at 7pm UK time) to DMOZ and today it is listed in my category.

Whilst it is encouraging to know that some sites are added within minutes of submission, it is irrelevant to webmasters in general. (as indeed is the counter post that someone's site was added after a 2 year wait)

I am not trying to be rude, but I want to point out that what is relevant is the average wait for review (whichever of the mathematical means you care to use)

It is painfully true that most sites wait a number of months and that there are hundreds of thousands in the unreviewed queue. :(

iThink




msg:481398
 9:22 am on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

A site getting listed in a few hours after being submitted is an exception and that is for sure. Wish that exception could occur more frequently.

A site that I submitted is waiting sice last September for inclusion in DMOZ.

le_gber




msg:481399
 10:44 am on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

Hi all,

I am sorry I didn't mean to be rude at all, I didn't know that DMOZ was amongst the really slow SE to index URL's.

My appologies to all the people who are waiting to be indexed.

Leo

:)

EliteWeb




msg:481400
 11:56 am on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

I just submitted my site to dmoz 6 days ago and my logs showed me first hit today -- yup added already :) not quite a day turn around but within 7 days rocks :D

g1smd




msg:481401
 4:07 pm on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

>> Whilst it is encouraging to know that some sites are added within minutes of submission, it is irrelevant to webmasters in general. <<

Many new sites are added within days or weeks of being submitted. The directory grows by at least several thousands of sites per week. In this forum, you mostly just get to hear only about the ones taking a long time; so thanks for letting everyone know that things do go a lot faster sometimes.

cornwall




msg:481402
 5:48 pm on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

>>I am not trying to be rude, but I want to point out that what is relevant is the average wait for review (whichever of the mathematical means you care to use)

You have not in any way answered the point I made above when you say

>>In this forum, you mostly just get to hear only about the ones taking a long time

DMOZ has a mean wait of months and a backlog of hundreds of thousands of sites. So I am correct in saying that if one site is added in minutes is not relevant to the average submission by the average webmaster (whoever that is)

Shak




msg:481403
 6:00 pm on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

I have had a site added within a day.

I have had a site added in 5 months.

I also had a site which I wanted removing for ceratin reasons, and my request was sent to an editor 2-3 categories up the ladder.

The site was promptly removed within 15 minutes.

from what I can tell, it depends very much on industry/category and editors.

from what I hear some editors have 100s of sites waiting to be listed, whilst others only get 2-3 submissions a month and are quite prompt in their approval/rejections.

Shak

hutcheson




msg:481404
 8:36 pm on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

>from what I hear some editors have 100s of sites waiting to be listed, whilst others only get 2-3 submissions a month and are quite prompt in their approval/rejections.

It is quite likely that you're observing a fundamental pattern here.

Your basic smalltime/freelance web development shop will develop 2-3 websites a month for genuine small businesses, which are quite easy to place in appropriate niche categories.

Your basic affiliate spammer will generate a handful of affiliate and/or doorway pages on some new or hijacked domain, call it a "website", submit to some category already overloaded with several of his own previous effusions as well as hundreds of his fellows'. Such categories are not particularly fun to edit -- or useful or productive, since 95%-99.5% of the submittals are non-recycled animal wastes.

(Side note: I don't believe there is anyone on EARTH who has more than five independent, legitimate websites for their own personal interests and real business activities. Anyone who claims to have "49 e-business sites is -- carve it in granite and bronze -- no more than an affiliate doorway spammer.)

So, yes, we hope to provide people who develop several unique sites a month with very good response, and to drive people who have "hundreds" of sites to the point of death in a paroxym of disappointed rage, freeing up planetspace and oxygen for more productive entities. We are not always successful, but it is heartening to hear we are being perceived to be partly successful.

rfgdxm1




msg:481405
 8:44 pm on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

>from what I hear some editors have 100s of sites waiting to be listed, whilst others only get 2-3 submissions a month and are quite prompt in their approval/rejections.

More commonly, there are huge areas of cat space at the ODP where the next editor(s) are well up the tree, with a huge number of cats to worry about. On the other had, there are cats where this is the only cat the editor in question edits, or just one of a small few. In cases where the submission is to the latter, review often happens very quickly. Thus, referring to "average" wait for review at the ODP is very misleading.

rfgdxm1




msg:481406
 8:55 pm on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

>So, yes, we hope to provide people who develop several unique sites a month with very good response, and to drive people who have "hundreds" of sites to the point of death in a paroxym of disappointed rage, freeing up planetspace and oxygen for more productive entities. We are not always successful, but it is heartening to hear we are being perceived to be partly successful.

The problem is those who submit hundreds of their "unique content" sites tend to bury the legit webmaster with just one site under all their spam. :( And, I have to figure that the ODP spammers are tenacious. Since I have had to deal with submissions of male reproductive organ enlargement sites to categories for substance abuse centers, I can only imagine what things must look like over in Shopping. It is of course easy to fend of spammers in cats where submissions are exceptions to the rule. However, in a cat where 95% are effluvia, it is not so easy.

[edited by: rfgdxm1 at 9:55 pm (utc) on April 13, 2003]

heini




msg:481407
 8:55 pm on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

I had the same experience, getting a site listed in less than 24 hours before. I had other sites listed in about a week. I never had to wait longer than 5 or 6 weeks, with the exception of 2 or 3 sites, which rightfully got rejected, and never made it in.
Sorry for this totally irrelevant contribution....:)

cornwall




msg:481408
 9:45 pm on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

>>Thus, referring to "average" wait for review at the ODP is very misleading.

I do not think it is. If one submits say 100 different sites to different categories, then statistically one is likely to find the whole spread of wait times to get listed (or rejected ;) )

That spread has an average (mathmatically you can work out various means)

As a webmaster, that is the figure that concerns me, not whether one site is listed (luckily) in 15 minutes, or that another is listed after a year.

its like the infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of word processors, sooner or later one monkey will write the complete works of William Shakespeare. But that does not prove anything about the monkey's literary ability. On example is immaterial

heini




msg:481409
 9:56 pm on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

Cornwall:
>As a webmaster, that is the figure that concerns me

as a webmaster, what concerns me is the situation in my cat. Statistical spread doesn't interest me at all.

As a SEO, I'm interested in my experiences so far with dmoz submissions. Again, statistical spread doesn't interest me at all.

Only as someone generally looking at the ODP, talking about the overall state of this giant organisation, I am interested in statistical spread.

rfgdxm1




msg:481410
 10:00 pm on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

>As a webmaster, that is the figure that concerns me, not whether one site is listed (luckily) in 15 minutes, or that another is listed after a year.

The problem is that as a webmaster, you should not be concerned with how long the average is, but how long it is likely for your specific site to be approved. It wouldn't make a difference to me if the average wait in Shopping is over a year if I am submitting a site to a cat in Science that has an editor which has never let a site go unreviewed for more that a week over the last 3 years. Basically, the problem with looking at an average here is the standard deviation is huge. Odds are very good that the review time for a specific submission will be much different than the average.

Added: heini beat me to it. ;)

steveb




msg:481411
 10:19 pm on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

"As a webmaster, that is the figure that concerns me..."

The you need to rethink your concerns because they are worthless.

If you submit two sites, and one is listed in aday and the other is listed in a year, "six months" is a ridiculous thing for you to consider important.

Some categories are well maintained and updated regularly. Some categories have no one at all interested in them and they are unattended for extended periods. Jumbling concepts of those two together is worse than pointless.

g1smd




msg:481412
 10:39 pm on Apr 13, 2003 (gmt 0)

>> its like the infinite number of monkeys typing on an infinite number of word processors, sooner or later one monkey will write the complete works of William Shakespeare. But that does not prove anything about the monkey's literary ability. <<

... and a famous variation of that quote continues and all the millions of people using the Internet have shown that to be untrue.

Dynamoo




msg:481413
 3:51 pm on Apr 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

If you get the "pet category" of a senior editor you can get in the same day. There *are* some parts of the directory which are relatively free of unreviewed sites.

rfgdxm1




msg:481414
 8:35 pm on Apr 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

You also can often get a quick review if you submit to a cat where this is the only cat of an active editor, or if you submit to one of the cats of an active mid-level editor. I just reviewed a small handful of sites that were submitted to cats I edit since I last did so yesterday. The good news was one webmaster got a site added the same day it was submitted. The bad news is the other two submissions I had to send over to the related Shopping cat where I can't edit, where they are now in a pile along with 380 other greens in cat space with just 360 listed sites. Obviously submissions have been accumulating there for a while. Although, it may be that some kindly editall or top level Shopping editor will go through that cat space shortly if they spot that many greens.

hutcheson




msg:481415
 1:23 am on Apr 16, 2003 (gmt 0)

>"As a webmaster, that is the figure that concerns me..."

Hey, you can choose your own myths and misconceptions, whether or not you are a webmaster. But it's a bit like saying "what's the average number of tickets you have to buy to win the lottery?" Someone who is determined to be rich will not care about the answer to that question.

And someone desiring to be listed in the ODP will not find the "average wait for review" figure useful. Anyone who submits enough sites for the "average value" to take on any practical meaning, will by then have attracted maximally negative attention from the editors.

markusf




msg:481416
 6:12 pm on Apr 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

You guys are lucky, i've tried for days to submit a site and all it does is times out. I can't believe such a crappy site is so big.

cornwall




msg:481417
 6:20 pm on Apr 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

It tends to take an hour a time to submit a site at the moment, which you may or may not feel is a good investment of your time...

...however [webmasterworld.com...] they claim the cavalry are coming.

g1smd




msg:481418
 9:45 pm on Apr 27, 2003 (gmt 0)

The servers have been undergoing an upgrade over the last few days. Even the editors were encouraged to take a break from editing for a few days so that it could be done without too much risk. It has been flaky for a while, hopefully we will see improvements in the coming days and weeks.

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Search Engines / Directories
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved