hildea

The site has been rejected, for one or more of the reasons here: http://dmoz.org/guidelines.html#Making . I tried to take a look at it myself, but found only a "There seems to be a technical problem" notice. That doesn't seem to have been the problem when the site was reviewed, however. Regards, Hilde

There are no applications in the queue for the cat you mentioned, so you can go ahead and reapply. /images/icons/smile.gif Regards, Hilde

The site is still waiting for review, and hasn't been touched by an editor yet. There's a rather big backlog in that part of the directory, so I'm afraid you'll need a lot of patience /images/icons/frown.gif <added> hutcheson posted while I wrote - good advice there /images/icons/smile.gif </added> Regards, Hilde (For future requests: If you give a clickable link to the category, for instance like this http://dmoz.org/Business/Industries/Manufacturing/Machinery_and_Tools/Hydraulic_and_Pneumatic/ , it makes things easier for us /images/icons/smile.gif )

You have mail /images/icons/smile.gif (Hopefully you have reading access now, as well.) Regards, Hilde

Re: Stereology Site Hi! It is still waiting in Science/Methods_and_Techniques/Stereology . Please be patient a bit more. /images/icons/smile.gif Regards, Hilde

What kctipton and windharp said /images/icons/smile.gif Also, please consider the category path. All sites in that category are supposed to offer sale of exotic lingerie in plus size for women. We try not to repeat redundant information in the site descriptions. Hope that helps! /images/icons/smile.gif Regards, Hilde

Re: A whole directory vanished? I had promised myself not to post in this thread, but I want to comment on this. In his/her last post, wayfarer seems to be concerned that the removal of Gambling/Directories has been done by one or a few metas, and surmises that "certain individuals" may be abusing "their position of authority". The ongoing cleanup of the Gambling categories is the result of discussion and consensus in the meta community. A lot of metas (myself included) have offered their opinions and suggestions. There was widespread agreement about the handling of the directories cat. There is no danger of "evidence" getting lost - editing acitivity is logged and can be viewed by all editors, and meta discussion and activity is logged can be viewed by all metas (current and future) and staff. I'd like to reassure wayfarer, and all other readers, that all abuse-prone parts of the directory are under a lot of scrutiny, and that we omnipotent meta gods don't smite anyone or anything without investigation, discussion, and consensus. /images/dmoz/purplegrin.gif Wayfarer, I understand that you are upset, but can you please stop those more-or-less veiled implications about specific instances of abuse? If you suspect abuse, please report it. If you're worried about dishonest metas, report it to several of us. I personally promise you that if you send me an abuse report, I'll post it on the meta forum, where all metas and staff can see it. (Please be concrete, supply all evidence you have, and try to refrain from flames.) For what should be obvious reasons, we do not want accusations about specific instances of abuse in public fora. If there's any truth in the accusations, public discussion may make our investigation more difficult. And if the accusations are untrue (as I personally believe in this instance, unless and until I see some evidence), it's terribly unfair towards the people involved. Regards, Hilde

There's no application for the category you mentioned in the queue (and no new editor in the cat), so that means you have been rejected. The category is a good starting place for a new editor, so I assume there was some problem with the sites you suggested and/or the descriptions. If you want to try again, I suggest you re-read http://dmoz.org/guidelines.html . Since you're applying for a cat in Regional, http://dmoz.org/regionalguidelines.html may also be of use. Good luck! Regards, Hilde

There's no fjohnson in the queue, so that means your application has been rejected. Usually, applicants will receive a form letter (with or without individual comments) when rejected, but occasionally this doesn't happen, either because of email problems or because the reviewing meta for some reason does not choose to send one. I suggest you re-read http://dmoz.org/guidelines.html , take a closer look at the cat description (this one may be of use as well) and the sites already listed, and then apply again. http://dmoz.org/Business/Insurance/Agents_and_Marketers/Multi-Line/United_States/Multi-State/ does seem to be about the right size for a new editor, so I don't think the choice of cat is a problem. (Disclaimer: I don't edit much in Business/. If the cat is a spam/abuse-magnet, it will be difficult to be accepted there for a new editor. I've no idea if that applies to this case or not.) Note: This is general advice. I haven't seen your application, and don't know why it was rejected. Hope that helps! Regards, Hilde

As long as you state your affiliation honestly on your application, and edit fairly and objectively, without giving your own site any special treatment, there's no problem. /images/icons/smile.gif More info at http://dmoz.org/help/become.html . Regards, Hilde

There's no ahmedf in the queue. As far as I know, applications which don't pass the automatic confirmation are discarded completely - there's no way we can retrieve it and "switch it on". I'm afraid you'll just have to try again. /images/icons/frown.gif Perhaps it's worth trying with another email adress? You can change it afterwards, if you're accepted as an editor. (I don't know anything about how the confirmation process works, so this is just a wild guess. /images/icons/smile.gif ) Please post again if that doesn't help! Regards, Hilde

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr><p>What are the odds of a site going more than 3.5 months without being reviews?<p><hr></blockquote>Waiting time before review varies immensely from category to category. Sites about boardgaming in Norwegian language will usually be reviewed in a day or less, because that's my favourite hobby (besides ODP editing /images/icons/smile.gif ). At the other end of the scale: Some time ago, I went through a few of the smallest country categories in Regional, reviewing all the waiting sites and doing some searching to add more sites. Some of those unrevieweds had been waiting for two years. /images/icons/frown.gif Regards, Hilde

Re: submission status please? Haven't been touched yet, but queue is relatively short. For future requests: If you provide a clickable link to the cat in question (like this http://dmoz.org/Society/Genealogy/Directories/ ), it makes things easier for us. /images/icons/smile.gif Regards, Hilde

Re: Submission Status The site is still waiting in the unreviewed queue, and hasn't been touched yet. Unfortunately, the queue is rather long, so you will probably have to wait quite a while. /images/icons/frown.gif <blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr><p>Can someone tell me ... if we should have submitted the site to a different section that has an editor?<p><hr></blockquote>No, there's no point in doing that. From a (brief) look at your site, you have submitted to the most appropriate category - congrats! /images/icons/smile.gif If you submit to another cat, the editor there will simply have to forward the site to the right one (where it is already waiting). Shopping/Food/Specialty_and_Gourmet/ can be edited by editors listed at Shopping/Food/ and Shopping/, as well as all editors with editall permissions. Hope that helps! Regards, Hilde

It's still in the queue. I'm afraid you'll just have to wait some more. /images/icons/frown.gif Regards, Hilde

Good catch, windharp /images/icons/smile.gif The profile is here, btw: http://dmoz.org/profiles/maddan.html . As you can see, maddan was editing http://dmoz.org/Recreation/Pets/Cats/Breeds/Sphynx/ . The reinstatement form is here: http://dmoz.org/reinstate.html . If you _aren't_ editor maddan, do you remember anything about what kind of category you were editing? Regards, Hilde

First, go to the dmoz.org version of the category /images/icons/smile.gif At the bottom of the page, you can see "This category needs an editor", so there's no editor there. The page also says "Last update: 22:08 PT, Tuesday, April 16, 2002". Checking out the parent category, you'll find an editor listed, and a "last update May 3". This editor is also responsible for the subcat. In addition, all editors listed in cats above this one, as well as all editalls can edit there. It is, of course, impossible to give anything remotely guarantee-like on when your site will be listed. Perhaps the editor(s) who spend most time there go on holiday tomorrow. And the "last update" dates doesn't necessarily mean that the unreviewed queues were cleared at that time. So this is where I put on my magical editor-glasses and take an editor-side look at the category. /images/icons/smile.gif There are relatively few sites waiting in unreviewed, so you might hope to be listed reasonably soon. How soon, you ask? No idea... Congrats on submitting a good description, by the way! Informative, and free of hype - that's not something we see very often! /images/dmoz/purplegrin.gif

To answer your million dollar question /images/icons/smile.gif , Axacta, size doesn't matter when we decide where to place categories. Compare, if you like, the placement of: - New York City (6,938 links) and Newark (4 links) - general board game resources (47) and chess (974) - Jesus Christ (105) and Catholicism (22171)

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr><p>Well, for one thing the hierarchies are not implemented as straight forward as one might initially think.<p><hr></blockquote>That's correct. /images/icons/smile.gif We use these kind of links (called @links) mainly when a category belongs in several different places. We put the cat somewhere, and link to it from other relevant places. A couple of examples: Zimbabwean literature is placed in Arts/Literature/World_Literature/Zimbabwean, and is @linked from Regional/Africa/Zimbabwe/Arts_and_Entertainment. Dalai Lama is placed in Society/Religion_and_Spirituality/Buddhism/Tibetan/Dalai_Lama, and @linked from Society/Religion_and_Spirituality/Spiritual_Personalities/Buddhism and Society/Issues/Secession/China/Tibet/Government_in_Exile. The Alternative Medicine example you cited is probably one of those - the category logically "belongs" in more than one place, and is therefore @linked. <blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr><p>If Alternative Medicine can be listed under Medicine as a third tier, but actually resides as a second tier, and is listed as a second tier on the Home Page, this suggests that it was selected on some criteria to be important enough for this treatment. I would suggest that it was selected because of its relative size (and probably popularity) compared with the other third tier listings.<p><hr></blockquote>In a very few cases, we use @links because of (presumed) popularity. (We never do this based on size.) To take one example: World/Deutsch/Regional is the category for regional sites in German language. Germany, Austria, and Switzerland (Deutschland, Österreich, and Schweiz) are @linked directly under W/D/Regional to make these categories more accessible, while their actual placement is in W/D/Regional/Europa (since they obviously belong in Europe). In this case, the reason for special treatment is pretty straightforward and uncontroversial. It makes sense to assume that to people who read German, the categories for countries where German is spoken might be more interesting and/or relevant than cats for other countries. (And before you ask: No, we don't do this for the English version of Regional/. English is pretty much a de facto global language on the web these days.) However, in most cases it's far from uncontroversial to single out specific categories based on presumed popularity. ODP is a global directory, for a global audience. We do our best to be impartial, to base our category structure on logical placement, and to list sites without taking sides. (We're far from perfect, of course. I'm sure you can find many instances of bias in our category structure and listings. We try to correct problems when we find them.) To give a specific religion more visibility than other religions would be to imply that ODP sees this religion as more important than the others. For a global directory, which aims to serve people of all beliefs, this would be highly improper.

Not cool /images/icons/frown.gif I tested the editor application form myself, and got an error message too. I've posted a bug notice in the internal ODP forum. Let's hope it gets resolved soon! I'll post here as soon as I know more about the problem. <added>Actually, I'll post in the "Becoming an editor" thread about this problem when I know more.</added> Hilde

Great! /images/dmoz/purplegrin.gif Quoting from http://dmoz.org/help/become.html : "Is there a time commitment for editors? There is no time requirement. We appreciate any time you can commit to improving and developing the directory." Good luck with both editor application and getting a new job! Hilde

The Regional tree is for all kinds of sites which are related to a specific place/country/region. I see you submitted your site to Regional/Europe/France/Society_and_Culture/Expatriate_Life in February. That does indeed look like the best category for it - congrats for submitting appropriately! /images/icons/smile.gif There are only three unreviewed sites in that category, but the closest listed editors are in Regional/Europe/France/, which has over 4000 unrevieweds waiting. /images/icons/frown.gif Can we entice you into applying as an editor? Hilde

Good luck! Hope to see you on board! /images/dmoz/penguin.gif Hilde

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr><p>To be listed in Shopping, an online shop must deliver to several countries, or to all of USA (ref. Shopping FAQ 1.3).<p><hr></blockquote>Just a quick correction to what I wrote above: It's now "...or most of USA." (Shopping guidelines have been updated.)