Forum Moderators: open
domain.com is already listed in the correct cat but domain.com/content is another entity all on its own and needs to be in a diffrent catagory.
...also is there anyway to pay for express submission, i don't mind paying!
Please adivse...
If you're intrested, you can register at resource zone (google it) and ask about your submission status.
Re-submitting doesn't help most of the time.
you can ask on how it is going with your submission on "Open Directory Project Public Forum" (google it. #1)
As long as you don't ask it to often, they don't like it if you ask it every week ;-)
they don't like it if you ask it every week
The guidelines for that forum state *exactly* how often you can inquire.
The first time you can inquire is *one month* after you *last* submitted your site.
After that, wait *six months* between status update requests.
Actually, once you have been told that the site has been received and is waiting for review, there is no real point in asking again. Either your site will be listed, eventually; or it won't. Asking again will *not* speed up the process.
I mean really, is there any point continuing submissions?
I mean really, is there any point continuing submissions?
(But we might discover and list it anyway)
is there any point continuing submissions?
Sure. However, keep in mind that the situation is different in different parts of the directory: in some places, you will find vast amounts of spam, and editors fear to even go there without protective gloves; getting rid of all the junk (mirrors, affiliates, etc.) takes up most of the time. In other sectors, things are hunky dory, and suggestions that follow the guidelines can be processed within days. (No, I'm not kidding.)
Of all the guidelines, if your brain can only hold one at a time, make it this one: submit to the *right* category. Not doing so is *certain* to delay processing --sometimes by mere months, sometimes by years.
You sometimes see the "advice" that you should submit to some other (e.g., higher level) cat if "your" cat "does not have an editor". This is *very* wrong, for several reasons. *Always* submit to the *right* cat, period.
[majorfm] <- that might apply to you
I'm surprised this post hasn't become a DMOZ basher - yet.
It's commercial categories that are most likely to have extended review times on account of the reasons mentioned by Eltiti.
MajorFm.com is a seperate company to UKRecordShop.com, UKRecordShop.com rent branding from majorfm.com as majorfm.com has a big brand, they pay for the privilage but is a completely seperate entity and has no business realationship with majorfm.com other then the branding.
I have been doin web design for over 10 years and fully understand that mirroring sites is against rules, i do not do that and will never do that...
I can't speak to the spamfest cats, but for some areas, yeah, been there, done that, no t-shirt for it, but them's the breaks.
But my reality and the ODP reality are the same and it looks looks as though we do not share your point of view.
Normally two URLs that ODP may consider as "the same site" are marginally connected. In this case, the two "sites" [URLs] are so totally interconnected with cross links it's incomprehensible why you could continue to make the claim that are not related.
Not good for you, confusing for the customer, certainly totally unaceptable for ODP, and I have a feeling Google might not like it.
He's some recent notes I made [I'm not editing much these days or the list would be way too long] shows the date I reviewed followed by the date of submission
PUBLISHED - reviewed and accepted
MOVED - moved to another category for another editor to review
DELETED - removed from the unreviewed pile or removed an existing listing
On 26 jan <<<
24/Jan/2005 Not English MOVED
23/Jan/2005 Not English MOVED
22/Jan/2005 Not English MOVED
22/Jan/2005 Not English MOVED
22/Jan/2005 no content - email and phones on each page - repeat spam submitter DELETED
18/Jan/2005 Not found /bad URL assummed not English MOVED
Existing listing DOMAIN expired DELETED
18/Jan/2005 repeat spammer from yesterday DELETED
On 27 jan <<<
25/Jan/2005 Already listed two levels below DELETED
25/Jan/2005 PUBLISHED
25/Jan/2005 PUBLISHED
25/Jan/2005 incomplete/under construction DELETED
03/Jan/2005 PUBLISHED
19/Dec/2004 PUBLISHED
25/Jan/2005 PUBLISHED
On 28 jan <<<
21/Aug/2002 Existing root url listed DELETED
14/Dec/2004 PUBLISHED
On 29 Jan <<<
Existing listed Expired domain DELETED
19/Oct/2004 PUBLISHED
On 30 jan
28/Jan/2005 Duplicate submission DELETED
28/Jan/2005 PUBLISHED
On 31 jan <<<
28/Jan/2005 really bad DELETED
On 2 feb <<<
30/Jan/2005 garbage links MOVED to Italy
31/Jan/2005 English pages have gone DELETED
30/Jan/2005 Webmaster category change request MOVED and PUBLISHED
It isn't a business relationship, but one is paying the other?
I don't care how you reword your excuses but the fact remains that for "related content" only "one listing" can be obtained. It does not matter how many pages, folders, sub-domains or separate domains that the content is spread over (the more you spread it, the more it looks like sneaky spam); the fact is that it is related and is therefore treated as "one entity", and that "one entity" gets "one listing", or less. Period.
Good luck with your listing...Hopefully your competitor isn't your category editor or you'll wait till your death bed for a listing!
Can you publish a list of people who have died between suggesting a site they own to DMOZ and it being published (or not) where:
a) the site meets DMOZ's guidelines; and
b) the 200+ editors who can edit in the appropriate category are all competitors of the deceased webmaster.
Thanks.
Nothing is more ridiculous than your competitor being the directory editor and sitting on your site review for years and years. I even emailed the editor once and got back a reply that he just didn't have the time to get to all of the submissions. Well if he doesn't have the time maybe he shouldn't be an editor and obviously other competiting companies in my business felt the same way as now the directory has no editor! :>~
And btw this is all a matter of opinion. Nothing more, nothing less! Take it like a grain of salt! Until DMOZ takes steps to improve their disservice I will continue to have the same thoughts!
If I was running a company, and a staff member failed to perform, I would fire the person, and hire a replacement. But in the real world, there are almost always people to hire to fill a position.
ODP relies on volunteers that hopefully improve with time and become better editors. But it's hard to find good editors - so you can't just fill a spot with a waiting candidate.
I just noticed an editor disappeared from a sub-category under my control. When I checked - it turned out that the quality of his edits was very very poor. So that means I have to take over editing that category, there is no editor outside the door ready to take over. NOt only that, I have to go back and review all his edits and fix them. That means other sites I would have reviewed will get delayed.
If you have proof that a competitor is interfering with your site review, then without question file an abuse report. It does happen, it is investigated, and we don;t wnat that kind of editor.
On the other hand maybe it's only backlog.
Until DMOZ takes steps to improve their disservice
BTW - LOL - your site was listed on the 12 Feb! It might have got listed earlier if the editors did not have to spend time deleting all your multiple and deep link submissions.
What service does DMOZ actualy owe you?
If you are disatisfied with the service, maybe you should ask for a refund.
BTW - LOL - your site was listed on the 12 Feb! It might have got listed earlier if the editors did not have to spend time deleting all your multiple and deep link submissions.
Actually DMOZ owes me nothing of course. Nor does it owe me money because it's free. What does DMOZ owe the community? How about eliminating editors that can give the yes/no for a site when they are competitors? Editors that sit on submissions because they see their competitors submissions should be the number one thing addressed! And don't tell me this doesn't happen! My category editor at the time sent me email from his domain and what do you know...It was my #1 competitor! Also why does it take 3 years to get a simple "site review"? You would think DMOZ would get a clue and put sites that are still waiting in a priority list due to the length of time they have patiently waited!
Funny you should also say that my site was listed on Feb 12. Yeah right, stop blowing smoke up my a$$! Which site? I have over 20 websites! Only two have even been submitted to DMOZ and neither has a listing yet! Nor did I ever submit the two sites multiple times! That is posted quite well that multiple submissions would of course slow your site review! Of course maybe it has been listed and if it has I will take back everything I say about my particular sites not getting a fair shake, but I will not refrain from addressing the issues associated with DMOZ for the sake of the general public! Every site should be reviewed at the very least within a years time! You ask the general public to be patient and not ask about the status of their submissions for 4-6 weeks but yet the general public has to accept the one line quote "Site is still pending review" for as long as it takes for an editor to review it? DMOZ should investigate a point system for sites that are pending review or something....
For editors that do review sites in a timely manner my hat is off to you! You are truly providing a service to the community and are the only thing that keeps DMOZ alive.
Of course this is just a matter of my opinion, nothing more and nothing less!
Why?
Because I do not review sites in the order in which they are suggested. So a site from 3 years ago, may sit untouched while I review several sites submitted this week.
I understand this may be shocking to some, but we have no rules or guidlines that say to review sites in order. When I was new to editing I though it was important also, and tried to review sites in order. Well for an editor with one category, maybe that's ok, but once you are working with several hundred categories, it not only becomes technically unfeasible, but by that time you realize there is no reason to do it.
I don't expect anyone who has not been an editor to understand that. But think of this, a site submitted three years ago advertsing an event in 2002 vs. a site submitted yesterday adversting an event that happens next month. It's clear which should be reviewed first, but that only becomes clear when both the sites have been reviewed. It's impossible to say which is more important until the review has been finished.
Yesteday, in one day I reviewed sites ranging from Jan 2003 - which was in a the totally wrong category. There was no excuse for that - the site owner had failed to read the very clear instructions on that categry that excelude his site and told him wher to submit it.
I also reviewed a site submitted two days ago - it's description looked interesting and made me want to look at it, so I reviewed and added it. It was for a manufacturing company that provide a unique service - so it got added in front of the hundreds of hotel booking clone-spam-sites waiting in the pile.
In the same day, I went and reviewed some sites that had been listed in the past - remember it's not just reviewing suggested sites, there are many other tasks. I found a site that was added in 1999 advertising a hotel, all that was there was a picture of the hotel, no phone no address - no value - so it was deleted.
In the last two days I reviewed 53 sites, of those only 4 were accepted into the directory. 27 were moved since they were in the wrong category, 22 were deleted as being under construction, spam, unaceptable, or duplicate submissions.
Could you explain how that excludes any of the other editors reviewing and adding the site? The listed editor isn't the only one who can edit a category.
In fact even though I'm a very active editor, I'm never surprised when another editor comes into one of "My" categories and edits a site waiting for review.
There are plenty of editors that rove around in different areas doing spot checks.
I do the same for categories underneath my "named" categories which might have a named editor, but in some case those editor are not very active, and I end up reviewing sites in "their" category.
(We have a rule - no editor owns a category. Thats why I use "" above.)
