Forum Moderators: open
I have no banners, affiliate links, or products on the site at all. It has about 100 pages, with one contact page the provides a free "consulation" to website users.
I have read and re-read the looksmart guidlines for commercial sites 1000 times trying to find something that makes the site commercial, but can't.
Does anyone know if it is possible to submit the site to a specific editor to get a "second opinion"? On the Zeal message board people have been complaining all over about this editor saying sites that are not commercial whatsoever are commercial, and deny listings based on that.
Is it possible to email a "supervisor" to look into this?
It is very frustrating for me and everyone else who has good, non commercial sites that should be listed, but are not.
Thank you very much
You'd have to take off all of the contact & about us information, but I think you'd still be pushing it with that domain name.
I set my Looksmart bid to the minimum & use keywords that I rank poorly on on Ink/MSN to maintain a Zeal listing for my commercial sites.
I dont' know their guidelines but that form provides you with a lead right? - That must be what they mean, though it sounds a little over the top on thier part...
Nick
The homepage of a "media" site is considered commercial, however articles within the site may be considered non-commercial.
It might be worth submitting internal articles if there are any on the site.
This editor, and the looksmart guidlines, define a acceptable site as a site containing "substainal educational or non-commercial content compared with the commercial aspect". Out of roughly 100 pages, 3 or 4 of them have anything to do with contacting information. (on my site) Thats about 97% -96% non commercial content to anything that might be considered commercial content.
In my opinion, 96-97% is "substantial educational content"
If you were to look through the proposed catagory in Zeal, almost all of the sites are similar to this one, with far less educational pages and far more information about the widget replacement practice as a whole. Some of the sites contain about 5-10 pages, and 4 or 5 of those are about contacting, making an appointment for widget consultation, etc. I would think that pages with 50% commercial content should not be included, and a site with about 95% commercial content should be listed.
A few sites that are towords the top of the catagory are loaded with affiliate links along the sides. Obviously clicking through this to go to Amazon to buy something generates profit for the site owner. Our site has nothing like this at all, but it is denied while these other sites are accepted? It seems very inconsistant with me, and if they are to say "absolutly no commercial content" rather than "substantial educational or non commercial content" then i would accept the fact this my site is denied, but to include sites that are loaded with affiliate links and banner ads, and have about 50% commercial content, is very inconsistant with the reasoning they gave me.
How much does Zeal charge for a listing?
A few sites in the cat. i would LOVE to be in are sponsered by a organization , (a widget replacement manufacturer, etc) and have logos all over the site with links to the company site.
I would think that our site, with not as blatent solicitation to visitors should be included as well, if these other sites are included as "non commercial"
So if a "get your child to read" campaign website with ideas to promote reading in the home that is sponsered by a book publisher should be conisidered commercial because it is sponsered by a company whose goal is to make profit?
The big changes within "true" directories is that intent is now one of the critria. Nice try ChrisKud5 but you were aiming at a moving target and missed.
"If the primary purpose of a site is to generate revenue or promote the sale of goods or services online or offline, then it is considered commercial."
But that is not the primary purpose of this site. The index page clearly states that, and the 97% educational content compared to the 3% of pages that could be called commercial because they have a contact form and a phone number illustrate that.
So, if the primary purpose of the site is not to generate income, which is the case with this site, what is it considered?
This widget practice already has another website that is aimed at being the commercial site for the practice.
NFFC- You really are not making any sense. Address the fact that this site has "substantial" educational content, and that it is not ment to sell anything, as made very clear by the content makeup. The editor has said many times that he judges sites on the non commercial to commercial content ratio. So if the intent of this site, as stated on the index page, is to provide educational content for people undergoing widget replacement, why would it apply to that statement. You are obviously trying to discount it as something that it is not.
Exactly what "moving target" am i aiming at?
I will ask again,
"So if a "get your child to read" campaign website with ideas to promote reading in the home that is sponsered by a book publisher should be conisidered commercial because it is sponsered by a company whose goal is to make profit?"
If this is Zeals policy to not accept any sites that have a commercial sponser, but are non commercial sites, they are depriving the internet searching world of a lot of wonderful content.
If Zeals policy was not to accept sites with ANY commercial content that is fine, but to be so inconsistant with adding sites, adding some with commercial content, some without, some with affiliate links, baner ads, etc and not a site that appears to have far more educational content than what can be considered commercial content doesnt make any sense.
Getting a listing on Zeal for this specific site is not a big deal, because we are not getting anything from it, but it is irritating that Zeal has such inconsistant guidlines for adding sites.
That's neither here nor there. It's up to the editor's discretion as to the primary intent. It's subjective, and no one likes subjective criteria (when they don't get in), and that's why directories draw such fire.
Getting a listing on Zeal for this specific site is not a big deal...
eh, time to move on then...
OK :)
The big changes within "true" directories is that intent is now one of the critria.
But an editor can work towrds being more consistant in what sites he or she accepts for the directory. Saying that a site with any commercial content cannot be listed no matter what is fine, but being very inconsistant in what sites do get listed is where i have a problem, and indeed is why directories draw such a fire.
Beyond the specific instance of my site not getting listed, many others have complained about the makeup of this catagory and the inconsistancies the editor creates. This catagory this specfic editor edits is quite popular, but listings are very inconsistant. If Zeal were more concerned with making money, as many for profit ventures are.......I would think they would try to make the listings as consistant as possible, improving the image people have, driving in more users, and making more profit.
bcolflesh-
"eh, time to move on then..."
You are more than welcome to contribute in other threads if this one does not satisfy you.
Especially troubling to me was the fact that out of 9 prominent links at the left, most led to the doctor, form, office location, doctor's research area, contact address et cetera. (Links to non-commercial info was to the right and is in smaller fonts!)
I think revamping the link structure so that information is easy to navigate and links to commercial aspects are somewhat less prominent (small fonts on the right etc.), mostly hidden or some of them omitted, and deeper links might do the trick.
On the other hand if I had hip problems I would love this site. Very informative, well designed, easy to navigate. Exactly the type of site that should get listed in directories. Nice job.
I think the consensus here (and note that this isn't a Zeal appeals board) is that the site is commercial to some degree. What else is there to talk about?
Or, this is a Zealot that reviews lots of submitted sites, and has to reject many that are commercial. Followed by people whining about this. The general rule at Zeal is no commercial content. Looksmart wants commercial sites paying. The Zeal guidelines do allow some commercial content, but basically the idea is when that is a minor and insignificant portion.
I would agree that at first glance it appears the a lot of content (link map on the left) includes commercial content.
I will focus my energy on getting listed in the ODP first.
Thank you for all your suggestions and reactions to my inquery.
I will sit on it for a few months, try to get my ODP listing, and see if i am still wishing to want to be a part of zeal.
Thanks everyone for the replies
(And also keep in mind that the other sites in the category might have paid to get there through Looksmart.)
If you were to look at the date that thread was posted, it was far after i had numerous correspondence the with Zeal editor who denied the listing.
He said to him, and most editors, it looked like a site advertising a medical practice, and he suggested submiting it to Zeal for a fee into that catagory.
I also got an email from a ODP editor who told me that would be the best catagory match for that site.
Since then it has been moved around at ODP to whatever catagory the editors think it fits best with.
I also heard at R-Z to submit it to the local town name where the practice is located, so i did that as well.
I took the advice of the editors who have far more experiance with this than I do, and i was being very consistant by listening to the recomendations they had for me.
I'm sure you, and all the other editors at DMOZ see many sites daily and can tell what fits where. I was only following the recomendations of the editors. Im not trying to spam this site into any catagory or have it listed multiple times, i just would like it listed once to a catagory that the editors of the directory feel it fits best in.
Fair enough, so far as the ODP goes.
Now, as to Zeal, I'd recommend um, taking the advice of the editors who have far more experience with this than you do, and consistently listening to the recommendations they have for you.
I'm no Zealot, and their rules are not our rules, so I can't speak to them, but for a borderline site, the editor has to make the call.
I'd consider removing all the "links to self" except for a small footer on each page "this information provided as a public service by Dr. John Doe" linking to one "clinic information home page. I bet it wouldn't be much worse at Google page rank, and it would LOOK much less commercial. That might make the difference for a borderline case. (Even noncommercial PBS allows the "sponsored by" commercials!)
My last post stated clearly the fact that i was listening to the recommendation ("who has far more experiance with this than you do") of the editor and submited it to the site at the ODP as per their recomendation.
One of your posts told me how it made no sense that i was submitting to a medical practice catagory, and your next post tells me that i should just go ahead and "be consistant" and submit the category that the editor "who has far more experiance with this than you do". (which was the medical practice category)
Im having a hard time following your reccomendation when you are saying one thing, then the next post saying the exact opposite.
I spoke with a Zealot who is a friend of mine, who explained to me the basis for judging commercial / non commercial sites, from his point of view. Take this for what it is worth,
"Zeal wants sites where the vast majority of content consists of educational material. In the case of this editor, it sounds like he judges sites in a similar manner. After reviewing your site Chris, the vast majority of content certainly does contain educational content. It looks as if the this volunteer did not see that (or look through the site at all). Volunteer editors sometimes jump to conclusions as to what they want included in cats. they edit, as much as we try wo push the importance of "fair and balanced editing" (see the looksmart style guidlines). Zeal certainly wants to generate income from commercial sites, but also wants to provide a comprehensive index of non-com sites. Many of these "boarderline sites" are sites that the owners will not pay to be included in the com. directory. Looksmart takes a hit for these sites, since they are obviously not going to be generating money from these sites, and Zeal is not adding to it's directory by not including them."
The lesson from this discussion i think is to make it obvious the sites intent when desiging. If the site is non-commercial, make it have little or no commercial content attached to it. Perhaps a small "banner" on each page saying the sponser will work for some editors, but it certainly will not work for others.
Anyone have any luck getting a "boardline" site into Zeal?
Thanks for the fruitful discussion
I would imagine that the editor would just say
"yeah, i've seen this site 5 times already, and no, i am not going to include it this time, it is commercial"
I would love having some part of it included, but i would think that submiting one page (to an editor who has already had enough of "reviewing" this site) is like pissing in the wind and expecting not to get wet.
Any Zealots / Zeal editors think otherwise?
If you're a webmaster looking for a listing, the search engines and directories are like your customer/distributors. They're going to be selling your content to their customers, and they have their own notion (which may not be exactly correct) of what their customers want. For this particular site, you're getting different advice from ODP and Zeal editors--that's fine, each one knows what they want, they just don't want the same thing. Google has a well-known list of food it won't eat -- which is not the same as Inktomi's.
You can either focus on one customer, or try to come up with a design that will please everyone (in different ways). So far, it sounds like their requirements are different, but not incompatible. And so what if the ODP wants a varnish stripper and Zeal wants a recreational beverage? Just make sure the alcohol content is high enough, and make two labels for the bottle.
