beebware

There are currently around 430 sites awaiting review in that category - down from around 550 twenty minutes ago (I just went and deleted all the 'spam' and similar sites from the queue). Sites are _not_ reviewed in any particular order: yours could be the next site to be reviewed or the final site. That part of the directory does appear to be greatly backlogged so it could still be a few months before your site is reviewed - unless you know of someone that might want to be a volunteer editor and work their way up to handling a category like that...

There is already a thread about this site at - http://www.resource-zone.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=status&Number=4484 . If you previously asked about a site, please re-use that thread instead of starting new threads: this ensures that the 'context' is not lost.

Most sites have advertising of one sort or another (banner ads, pop-ups, 'text links ads'), but most search engines try to distinguish between 'paid for' results and their standard results. Indeed, I believe there is currently some sort of 'agreement' being made in the States where search engines _have to_ distingish between 'real results' and paid for. If a search engine was _just_ paid for results, they'll have to: a) have lots of them (over 5,000 different sites I would guess) b) have some sort of 'ranking' algorithym and c) have some other sort of unique content worth listing. But I'm sure you don't really want all search engines to be _just_ "Paid for" results do you - as that'll stop the common-to-honest small-business person from getting their site listed and only people that are willing to spend money to promote their site (no matter how good or poor it is) in a 'spammy method' (ie getting their site listed under keywords or categories that have nothing to do with their site) will be listed. But, would anyone find a search engine like that worth going to for search reasons?

They do have unique content though. For example, Google has it's unique PageRank algorithm for determining the 'ranking' of sites (Altavista has its own system etc etc), they offer something different (very few now only offer search engine facilities - usually image search, USENET search, news searches etc). _If_ Altavista returned exactly the same content as Google, then we wouldn't list one of them (or both). But I bet I can type a search term into Google and I'll get different results than Altavista.

Still awaiting review in that category with around 40 other sites.

If you drop me a private message with all three URLS (with details of the 2 you want cancelling and which category you submitted to), I'll try and work something out for you.

Hard hard work. Good editing, good communication (within the forum, editor notes on sites and via email), earning respect from other editors etc etc.

Your site is in the queue to be reviewed for that category with around 30 other sites.

Your site is in the queue with around 150 other sites.

A new member to this marvellous forum has just sent me the following private message: I've managed to find out that they are using Norton Internet Security, but I'm not familar with that particular product. Can any one post any advice? They can obviously log-in correctly (and the cookie being passed correctly between client and server), but what else could be preventing them from posting? And how can it be fixed...

No category is "editor-less". For example, Business/Healthcare/Products_and_Services/Protective_Clothing/ can be edited by not only staff, metas, catmvs and editalls (the kinda 'higher ups in the ODP volunteer ladder type thing') but also by editors of Business/Healthcare/Products_and_Services/ , Business/Healthcare/ and Business/. If an editor is listed at the bottom of the category, that is usually just an indication that they are specifically interested in the contents of that category. Your site is awaiting review in that category with around 100 other sites (hopefully a few less than that as I can see quite a lot of spam + deeplinks to remove from that unreviewed queue).

Re: Luxury Hotels submission problem. Your site is still awaiting review in http://dmoz.org/Recreation/Travel/Lodging/Directories/ along with around 60 other sites. It was deleted from the unreviewed queue of a category in Feb of this year due to lack of content. But if you have extended the content to ensure that the site has unique, "content-rich" content then it hsould just be a matter of time until the site is reviewed.

Aren't http://www.engagement-rings.cc , http://www.diamonds-loose.com/ , http://www.ideal-diamond.com et al just part of http://www.whiteflash.com/ ?

I've just done a partial "rubbish clear" of the unreviewed queue (removing things like deeplinks, moving some foreign language sites to the appropriate queues etc etc) and the queue size has dropped around 100 to just over 300 now... But that entire area of the ODP is very backlogged- so it will be a few months.

A few pointers about a few points you raised: >> a leader in the industrial fasteners industry << >> Has respectable traffic << We don't care if you are a leader or an upstart in any industry - it's the website that really counts not your business model or your customer profile. Plus "a leader" really falls into the same category as "the best" and "most comprehensive": i.e. extremely difficult for us to prove. >> Fast loading / under 20 sec. << >> No splash page << Good, but not really important. Most sites do load under 20 seconds for me (on ADSL), but the same site may take longer on a 28.8Kbps modem (and some editors do still have them). I've yet to see any reason for a splash page and they do just waste editors time. >> Of original content << >> Site is complete << Good, because if it was of duplicate content, it wouldn't be listed at all. Plus we don't tend to accept sites that seem to be "under construction". >> Browser cross compatible << Good, plus it doesn't look too bad via Lynx - however, it fails to validate. >> I am a professional << I'm not saying anything - my fellow editors know my way of thinking and probably know what my dirty mind is thinking when I see that statement. >> I would greatly appreciate understanding why this site has not been included << Ok, first of all: NO site is guaranteed a listing. And, secondly, we have a massive backlog of unreviewed sites all throughout the directory, but only a finite number of volunteers to review them. That doesn't include the time taken to remove spam, deadlinks, correct speleing mistokes, move categories, and approve editors (metas only). I've seen some sites sitting in the unreviewed queue since 1998 in the past 2 weeks, but sometimes I've reviewed a site that was submitted less than 5 minutes ago. >> I have requested feedback on non-listing several times without response. << How did you request feedback? Editors are reluctant to reply to submitters emails because of the backlash that many many of us have had in the past: the phrase "once bitten, twice shy" comes to mind. ============ Ok, now I've given giz enough time to finish editing his post I can have a look at the category in question myself. I can tell you that your site is still awaiting review - but along with around 400 other sites in that category. Resubmitting your site *may* move it to the 'end of the queue' (as some editors have the unreviewed queue showing in 'oldest first' order and newer submissions of the same URL overwrite old ones- hence your resubmitting just pushed your site nearer the back of the queue). It may be a few more months before your site gets reviewed - but it is nothing targeted at your site in particular, that category is just massively backlogged.

MSNBC and http://news.emailpinoy.com/horoscope/ do, in fact, have different horoscopes even though the inital description of each sign is the same word-for-word. However, http://news.emailpinoy.com/horoscope/ does not have any unique content (and hence will not be listed) as all the data comes from http://www.eastrolog.com/horoscope/ and http://www.eastrolog.com/ is already listed in the ODP.

It does help if you incldue details of the category you submitted to.

The search system is currently under heavy load, so I can't confirm this: but it looks like the search was last updated around the 17th of September. While your site _should_ have been included in that search database, I am aware of a few problems that have caused search to 'hiccup' last month, but hopefully it should all be cleared within the next week or two. You are searching via http://dmoz.org/ though aren't you? http://directory.google.com/ et al normally take around 2-3 months to update.

Your site is still awaiting review in that category with around 4 dozen other sites.

As this question could be interpreted in different ways, here's three scenerios: [*] You are not an editor and you have never been an editor - In this case, please re-read the editor guidelines, ensure you pick a small category (less than 50 sites in the category and any sub-category seems to be the recommendation), spell and grammar check your application, ensure there are three URLs properly described (and _any_ affiliation with those sites or any other site is declared - see conflicts of interest) and then reapply. We don't mind non-editors reapplying, but please consider leaving a period of a few weeks between applications to allow metas to process your requests. [*] You are not an editor but you have been an editor in the past (i.e. you are an ex-editor) - In this case, please see the account reinstatement form. For obvious reasons, editors removed for abuse related reasons stand a very low chance of being reinstated, but editors that have 'timed-out' (for example, you didn't make an edit for more than 4 months or within your first month) usually stand a high chance of being reinstated. If your account was removed for abuse-related reasons, do not think about reapplying: we have a multitude of checks that the meta editors do (hence the reason it takes around an hour to process each 'new editor' application), and people found re-applying under different editor names or aliases will _not_ be accepted. Please do not waste our time or yours trying to "beat the system" as it will not work and will incur the wrath of the metas : and, believe me, if you've ever met one in person you'll know what I mean (I swear - those guys are not human, more Deity like - and plagues and droughts are not my cup of tea thank you very much....) [*] You are already an editor - DO NOT even consider applying for another account - the rule is one account, one person . Multiple accounts _are_ ground for removal from the ODP. [/list:u]

Ah, I see the problem - have another look at the URL you posted MsDetta: http://www.geoities.com/dian_hildebrandt/index.html MegaGo have obviously brought the missing spelling Geoities (no _c_) and when giz checked the URL you posted, he was taken to the MegaGo site. [added] I cannot see the proper URL of http://www.geocities.com/dian_hildebrandt/ sitting in the queue for http://dmoz.org/Society/People/Personal_Homepages/H/ (I blame HAL or Dave myself). You may need to resubmit (avoid adding the index.html section of the URL though as it isn't necessary).

Re: Status of site. *DELETED* Post deleted by vbman

Re: Status of site. We do not deal with Adult-orientated sites within the standard "Site Submission Status" - only within the Adult forum : see http://www.resource-zone.com/guidelines.php . I'm sure a kind moderator or administrator will move this thread to that forum (and give you access to it) shortly, and your question will be answered as soon as it is. [edit] Everybody: Please please please include the category the you submitted to (for example: http://dmoz.org/Arts/Celebrities/R/Rogers,_Lisa/ ) as without the category, it is nearly impossible for us to check the status of your submission.

I guess you are referring to http://dmoz.org//Health/Women%27s_Health/Sexuality/ . Yes, that category is showing the message 'This category needs an editor', but I would guess (looking at the category) that it is too large for a new editor (there are 15 listed sites and around two dozen unreviewed sites for that category). The message you received from a 'meta editor' (who reviews new editor applications et al) sounds like the generic one that they have the option to send out: so it may have no direct reference to the category in question. I would look for a slightly smaller category (maybe your home locale under http://dmoz.org/Regional/ ) and then complete the application form to become an ODP editor by following the editor guidelines http://dmoz.org/guidelines/ . Please feel free to contact current editors if you have any questions about any part of the application form, parts of the guidelines or things like that.

Yes, your site is still awaiting review in http://dmoz.org/Arts/Crafts/Quilting (along with two dozen other sites) and no it wouldn't help you by resubmitted. If anything, it may slow down your site review (as some editors have the unreviewed queue in 'sort by date' format - oldest first, and new submissions 'overwrite' old ones).