Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.104.22.168
Following discussion by, and consensus of Moderators and Administrators of this forum, we have chosen to discontinue site status checks effective May 21, 2005. Closure of the existing Site Submission Status forums will happen by this date, and we will not be accepting any new status check threads after this time. The submission status forums will be archived.
It seems that some ODP editors have had enough with thousands of people going to the resource zone every day asking when their site will be included or demanding explanations of why it hasn't been included. The resource zone comprising of some 20 forum subcategories, each of which had 20 to 10,000+ posts with the exception of the Site Submission Status forum which made it to just over 120,000 (!) before it became read only. No wonder it was discontinued;)
My personal experience, when tackling a new category, was that, on average, nearly a third of the site submissions were over two years old. Add another third in the 1-2 yr category, and another third in the less than one year category.
That should give you some idea why the site status checks were cancelled.
I would estimate that only 15% of site submissions ever get looked at within 6 months. Looked at. Of this 15%, some are listed, some are discarded.
Continuing to estimate, perhaps only 10% of sites are listed within 6 months.
My experience as an editor matches my experience as a "submitting webmaster."
Ten percent of sites are listed within 6 months.
That's probably a large part of why the forum was originally discontinued, as well. It was giving people the false idea that their submissions were being processed according to some inexorable timeline they just weren't privy to. Then they'd get mad that so-and-so's site had gotten listed before theirs, when an editor might have found so-and-so's site through a link or an advertisement or news article rather than a site submission anyway. I just don't think it's a productive way to look at it.
Having a look at your statistics though it makes little surprise to me, as in my case, the category I submitted my site to, hasn't changed for a long time (no sites added/removed). I was starting to wonder whether there is anyone moderating that subcategory - until a week ago when I checked my site's logs and I found this:
I almost had a heart attack thinking that the site was approved in such a small period after being submitted (less than a month). I know I shouldn't be so optimistic, as nothing was changed in that category when I went and checked later on.
By your experience, do you know what usual steps are for an editor while reviewing a site. For example, in my case I got the log that 'proves' that at least my site is at least successfully placed in the ODP queue. Could that mean that it might have been rejected already, or could the editor just clicked on it for any reason and that he/she might go back to it later for properly reviewing it? The log shows that whoever clicked that link, did not went any further than the homepage. Surely they would check the rest of the content prior rejecting a site - right?
Get the champagne flutes and let's celebrate.
Yes - you might have been already rejected! Or the chainsawing editor has deemed that your site need not be rejected out of hand (like, it's not a parked domain), and should be lovingly examined by an expert editor at a later date. Oh noOooOoO! Later date? That's right. At a later date.
Oh, and by the way, my calculations above only apply to LISTABLE sites. The 10% figure applies to sites that are listable, ie, not useless deeplinks, affiliates, portals, etc.
But you won't be able to guess anything from the server logs. Your site could have been moved to a more appropriate category (either published there directly, or moved there to be reviewed later), or it could have been checked by an editor and left in the same category to await further review, or it could have been deleted (though that would only happen if it was an unlistable site by our guidelines, or if it was already listed under another URL. Flagrant spammers often can be spotted from the homepage alone, but if it's just a question of a site not having enough content for a listing, you're right, I have to look around the site a while before coming to that conclusion.)
Anyway, I can't speak for other editors, but for my own part, I do frequently go through the site submissions pools and delete spam and unlistable stuff, move misplaced submissions, and so forth, leaving the 'real' submissions for an editor whose specialty the topic is to review. But on the other hand, sometimes I'm going through site submissions in a category and publishing the good ones myself, but one particular site doesn't work with my browser or requires Flash or something, so then I have to leave it for somebody else to review.
It could really be anything, and I think any minute you spend worrying about it is probably a wasted minute. (-:
What you both mentioned it was close to what I believed already. I know I can't really determine what happened. The only thing I got for certain is that despite the size of the site (really small at the moment) it could be a genuine resource for the category that I suggested it in. In fact I could point out a few sites already listed that are comparatively inferior from many aspects. I know of course that this wouldn't count as everyone would say the same for their own sites. I would definitely be disappointed if the site is rejected by just looking at the homepage, as the homepage in that case doesn't tell anything bad about it.
Apart from the traffic and PR factor, the most important for me seeing the site listed there is recognition for my efforts and to what I believe is a worthy reference for viewers of that category, as I know that ODP is really eclectic in most cases. As far as I am concerned, I will continue to improve the site and hopefully, if that didn't happen now, maybe someone else would see it in the future and then I will post back here for celebration!
Hmm, maybe I should just buy these domains myself since they already listed in DMOZ? >:-)