motsa

As far as I can see, you only submitted it a month ago (at least, that's when you submitted to Oregon Guides and Outfitters (which isn't the place for it so it was moved to await review in Coos Bay Tourism). That's not very long ago. Judging by the content, the site really only qualifies for a single Regional listing somewhere under Coos Bay and no listing in a Topical category. Other than a couple of brief mentions that you're available, you don't actually provide any outfitter information; you say you do web design but in most places you're pointing people to other web designers; you appear to provide some computer support but don't really supply much in the way of information about it; you provide some tips for web design but that is also minimal in terms of content and isn't enough to warrant listing in a Help cat. To be honest, most of the site looks like a personal home page, not a business or even a tourism site, and as such doesn't have enough unique content to warrant listing anywhere outside of Coos Bay in Regional. I'd say that the category you are currently waiting in (Coos Bay Travel and Tourism) is about the best you're going to get.

Please remember that you should be reusing your original status request rather than starting a new one.

Re: http://www.geocities.com/format_data_conversio I've kickstarted the public page for that category. You should see it now.

Submitters are very rarely contacted regarding the status of their submission.

The internal forum isn't the place for editors to ask for changes to be made to their sites, uzs980. Since the about.com page even says it's an outdated link and the Venice content there isn't adequate for continued listing, I've gone ahead and deleted it. I've also deleted your update request (since there is no longer a site to update). Regarding veniceforvisitors.com, well, as an editor you should know better than to submit a vanity URL -- you should have used http://europeforvisitors.com/venice. Personally, I would avoid listing your deeplink to Venice or any of the other city/country guides you have (since they are all intertwined and are all deeplinks of europeforvisitors.com) and just list the main europeforvisitors.com site in http://dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/Travel_and_Tourism/Travel_Guides -- I would recommend that you resubmit the main URL as noted above to that category.

It's only been about 3 weeks since you submitted. You're still awaiting review, along with less than a dozen other sites.

Yup, you definitely submitted more than once. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> You're currently sitting waiting for review in ../United_Kingdom/Business_and_Economy/Computers/Consultants (where your Computers/Consultants/Databases submission was moved and where you also submitted). Given that the queue there is over 450, it could take awhile to get reviewed (on the plus side, that's half the size of the queue in the original category). Please don't resubmit.

The fact that the category doesn't have a listed editor doesn't mean that there are no active editors there. Use the Update link to submit your update request.

Please include a clickable link to the category: http://dmoz.org/Regional/Asia/India/Delhi/Business_and_Economy/Manufacturing Your site is still waiting for review.

If you look at the date at the bottom of the search results page, you'll see that the search index hasn't been updated since Sept. 28 (due to technical problems).

Please don't start a new thread to check on the status of a site you've already asked about. Please reuse your original thread.

Please don't start a new thread to check on the status of a site you've already asked about. Please reuse your old thread.

Your site was rejected. note: you should have asked in your previous thread.

He meant come back in another month (i.e. in late December) if your site still hasn't been listed by then. It can take anywhere from several hours to a year or more to get your site reviewed. On average, it's several months at least. It depends on where you've submitted (how active editors are there, how much spam/abuse the category gets, etc.).

Actually, donaldb, the Regional category he should submit to is North Sydney's Internet category, not the Sydney CBD one (since they are located in North Sydney, not the central business district).

I've already gone ahead and moved it into unreviewed in Atlanta.

You have to give us a little more than that. What is the category that's "missing"? The category was probably moved or merged with another and the search just hasn't caught up (ODP's search is a couple of months out of date).

Actually, it looks like you submitted to http://dmoz.org/Business/Arts_and_Entertainment/Fashion/Modeling/Portfolios not http://dmoz.org/Business/Arts_and_Entertainment/Fashion/Modeling/Portfolios/Individual/S. I've moved you into unreviewed in the "S" category (note: you weren't there already so if you resubmitted, it wasn't anywhere under Modeling Portfolios -- you're awaiting review in the right place now, though, so don't resubmit).

Do not continue to resubmit the site.

What do you mean by "when the directory will update"?

It's still waiting in the queue.

Re: Opinion on site/possible categories for site n uzs980, the problem with suggesting Society:Relationships:Advice is that that category is meant for sites that actually offer advice, not sites that just point users to other sites for advice. rbacal, I'm not saying that such a site wouldn't be useful to some surfers but that doesn't make it ODP-listable. I can think of many sites/pages that I've personally found useful and/or entertaining that wouldn't meet the guidelines for listing in the directory.

The site just seems to be a collection of links to articles on other sites and affiliate links to Amazon.com, with virtually no content of its own. Not sure it would get listed anywhere (I would definitely avoid submitting deeplinks). BTW I don't see that the site has been touched before by an editor so wherever you originally submitted it, it is probably still sitting there.

I think that's because the catalogue is zipped up in an .exe (rather than being viewable online via that link).