yklaw

I'm afraid that if you missed the email you would not be in the newapp queue. I suggest that you apply again.

If you replied as per the emailed request, then you may well have been rejected. Before you apply again - if you do - I strongly recommend that you read <a href="http://dmoz.org/guidelines/">our guidelines</a> and the application form to make sure that your application is good.

It's probably still in the newapp queue. How long it takes depends. Remember that metas are all volunteers, and we do what we can. We all have differing areas of interests, and some apps are more difficult to decide than others (because of the cat in question, for instance). Executive summary: it can take from minutes to weeks. Good luck.

toocynical is actually an Editall/catmv + Kmeta. Please update title to reflect that. Thanks.

As apeuro said, you've got good advice at this thread as well as in the French thread. Please either follow them or be more specific in your questions, as apeuro explained. Thank you. /images/icons/smile.gif

My French is useless, but from what I can gather, I think cmic and tloury have answered your questions adequately in the French fora. I am afraid, as they said, we can't always give personal responses - they're just too busy. It's not something that I fully appreciated either as a junior editor in DMOZ - in fact it was only after I got language level that I realised how much there's to do. Please, don't start multiple threads to discuss the same thing. Thanks. /images/icons/smile.gif

It is included in the RDF, but different directories consider them differently. I don't think Google considers it, but some may. However, I'm not sure on the latter point.

In certain cases, yes. If you show us the URL we might be able to be clearer.

Re: A whole directory vanished? A couple of observations: We do make choices like this. I would trust the metas' judgement on this. After all, if most of the sites in the directory, as observed both in this thread and in other threads here do not conform to the guidelines, and that there are few/none that do, why we need such a category is not known to me. To make a good directory, remember we must make sensible choices. Doing it based on individuals' personal vested interests is not exactly the right way. I'd re-read kctipton's commentary above. Short, and to the point. Such things have been discussed adequately, and remember, how DMOZ runs itself is its own business - no-one elses. The results of the work are open, but the processes leading to the results is our business.

>>1. Does it work through more than one change: that is, if the category moves again, are all the old URLs still redirecting to the current one? In theory, yes, if the catmv mechanism is used. >>What about categories simply killed or dismembered? Do their URLs go to the Dead Cats 404 Graveyard? Goes 404. However, we try our best not to delete categories, and there is a link on the 404 page to the parent category, where links to the new home of the sites are likely to be found.

gypsy, I did actually check out your site, FTR, and based my judgement on that basis.

Please read kctipton and arlarson's comments in context. When arlarson refers to bad sites, he has a very specific meaning - sites that do not conform to our listing guidelines. And we regularly remove listings because they do not conform to listing guidelines. Affiliate link sites with substantially the same content as other sites will not be listed. The guidelines state that: Sites that consist primarily of links to buy books or CDs, etc. and/or provide no unique content are not appropriate for inclusion in the directory. In this case my reading leads to the same conclusion as kctipton and arlarson. It is the primary focus, and hence should not be listed. It's pretty difficult catching them sometimes, so a few would slip through, through human error - but when we find out we delete those listings, as arlarson points out. Just because a few slipped through the net does not mean that others are acceptable. It's like enforcing the law - just because someone didn't get caught breaking it doesn't mean that you can as well. FWIW, making more people aware would not help your cause, I believe. We all enforce the same guidelines. Whilst you're free to ask for assistance, I don't see how this is going to change the situation. >>Now what? Well I think I'll refer back to arlarson's response. Basically as it is it's not going to be listed. Sorry!

(moved here from the General forum). Not being the editor there, and given the number of submissions those categories get, if you could tell us what site it is (posting the URL is permissible), it would help editors identify what the core issue is. Thank you. :/images/dmoz/purplegrin.gif (Added: presumably you're talking about http://www.casinogypsy.com/. Well, the issue is that it's mostly an affiliate links list, which is not allowed per our editor guidelines. Hope this clears things up.

Read this newsletter article for some reasons for why this happened. As it's explained both there and guidelines, no-one is allowed to divulge the details. Added: Needless to say that sort of communications is against guidelines. Feel free to contact a meta regarding this sort of communications.

>>Should I re-submit our web site to the original category since it was now listed in another category? No. It just gets added to the queue again, and honestly it would make no difference. Hopefully it would get added soon. /images/icons/smile.gif