Presumably by the "Google" directory, you're talking about Dmoz, the open directory project.
This is run by volunteer editors so it can take a very very long time to get in there, depending on your category. There genuinely is a lengthy delay for legit sites, but a lot of the people complaining create sites that don''t meet Dmoz standards. Dmoz emphasizes useful web sites. So that eliminates 90% of the new sites created these days.
Also, there are clearly faster editors and categories than other ones, but if it were publicly known in a forum like this - which is read by a lot of Dmoz editors - which editors would quickly allow somewhat off-topic links into their categories, they wouldn't be editors any longer. Not to mention that they would be so swamped with work that they would no longer be fast.
If you are in DMOZ, but not in Google's clone of it, then the timing is 100% the responsibility of Google.
Google updates its copy of DMOZ every few months, but it is erratic, and doesn't always seem to update every part of the tree at once. For problems there, contact your Google rep.
If the site is not in DMOZ, then much of what Diamondgrl says applies.
The fastest way to get listed is: Have a listable site
Suggest its URL to the one most relevant category -- suggesting to multiple cats or to an inappropriate one is the easiest way of at least doubling the time for review
Write an accurate and guidelines compliant description of the site.
There is plenty of anectdotal evidence of editors visiting the unreviewed queue for categories they edit to pick the low-hanging fruit. Make it harder for them, and they'll leave you until after the easier ones.
Thanks for the responses. Yeah, I was referring to DMOZ. I submitted about 5 months ago and figured it was time to start thinking about it again. Although my site was compliant before, it is vastly improved now, and even looks pretty ;-) So after readin various recommendations, I resumbited to the same category. We'll see how it goes.
>There is plenty of anectdotal evidence of editors visiting the unreviewed queue for categories they edit to pick the low-hanging fruit. Make it harder for them, and they'll leave you until after the easier ones.
Makes sense. For an ODP editor reviewing a queue, the easiest sites to deal with are adding the obviously worthwhile ones (say, a .gov), and blowing away the blatant spam (say, an e-commerce affiliate site submitted to personal home pages category.) Leaving the remaining sites last, to be got around to whenever they can. Guidelines compliant titles and descriptions also is a plus. When the submitted title is a string of keywords, and the description a bunch of promotional hype, this doesn't make a good first impression.
|Guidelines compliant titles and descriptions also is a plus. |
In anything other than the smallest most insignificant category with an editor that vists 25 times a day, it's a must.
Uh I hate to say "me too", but it's a point many submitters ignore - that of writing a compliant description. Spend some quality time reading the guidelines and writing it - if you do there's the outside possibility it may be reviewed quicker, but there's a much greater probability that the description will go in unedited with the description you want.
Hrmmmm... I figured my description was fine but now you people have me thinking. I offer a free web-based solution for something others in the category are charging for. So my description is pretty normal other than it has FREE in caps mingled in there one-time. Perhaps if I don't get into DMOZ after a month or so, I'll resubmit with the term "freeware" (lowercase) instead.
Timing is everything, it took me less than 3 weeks to get in DMoz
Everytime you resubmit, you go to the end of queue. For example, suppose you are at 5 out of 30 in the queue. If you submit again, you will be at 30.
Which would be cool if the editor starts editing from the bottom of the queue. There is no order in which the editors must review sites.
|If you submit again, you will be at 30. |
Nuttzy- I think it would be safe to say that 'FREE" would qualify as promotional hype unless your site were about the 'Financiers Required Entrance Exam'. ;)
Yeah, order doesn't so much matter. You might get lost if you're too far down but there's no correct order. Editors will go for the easy pickings first.
When you write your listing, think of it this way: 98% of the benefit you will likely get from this listing is not that someone will actually read what is listed but that you get listed at all and get the attention of search engines. So be as low-key as can be, even boring. Just the straight unvarnished facts and leave the marketing language behind.
Does the category list an editor, and if it does, do they seem to be actively adding new sites?
If the answer to either of those is no, it might be worth your effort to bring it to the attention of an editor higher up the tree.
Sometimes they are not aware that a section is being ignored or that there is even a new worthwhile submission.
Agreed with all the above advice on getting listed in DMOZ.
I'm in the frustrating position of being an editor of a very obscure Regional category that hasn't had one submission since I took it over, and currently has the only five sites I can find that are worth listing. It's rather ironic... I read regular posts on how to get into the ODP and I'd be happy as a pig in sh*t to have something to review occasionally.
<Added>And no, this isn't an invitation for sticky-mails asking me to get you in. If it doesn't fit the category, it ain't getting listed.</added>