Description Update Request

Hi,

I submitted a request to update my site's listing on dmoz :

the listing is: Living Trust Network, LLC - Introduction to living trusts and estate planning.

in the section: /Society/Law/Legal_Information/Estate_Planning_and_Administration/

We would like to update this listing to correctly reflect our organization so that the title and description gives users an honest idea of what we do:

this listing should be:
Title: Living Trusts and Estate Planning: The Living Trust Network
Desc: The Living Trust Network provides information about living trusts and other estate planning topics. Attorney referrals available nationwide.

I am not sure if this is the correct place to post this request, however I have submitted a request to our section's editor and it has seemingly gone unanswered.

I respectfully request that you change our site's information, otherwise users are not getting an adequate descripition of what we do, which is provide a ton of great information and services, not just an introduction to living trusts and estate planning.

Thank you very much,

Stephen Pan

It's best to go to the category and use the update listing link at the top of the page.

You should know that your proposed title and description given above don't comply with our editorial guidelines and are likely to be declined.

The existing listing's title is, quite correctly, the name of the organisation.
The existing listing's description describes what the surfer will find on the website and does not repeat the title.

jimnoble said:

It's best to go to the category and use the update listing link at the top of the page.

You should know that your proposed title and description given above don't comply with our editorial guidelines and are likely to be declined.

The existing listing's title is, quite correctly, the name of the organisation.
The existing listing's description describes what the surfer will find on the website and does not repeat the title.

Click to expand...

Ok, Thanks for replying.

I used the update listing for the section, and it has not been changed. If the proposed description doesn't comply with the your editorial guidelines, can the title just be removed to say:

Provides information about living trusts and other estate planning topics. Attorney referrals available nationwide.

The existing listing's description describes what the surfer will find on the website and does not repeat the title.

Click to expand...

We want to change the description because we find that the current description does not adequately represent what the surfer will find. The current description of "Introduction to living trusts and estate planning." is not complete because it does not let the surfer know that we provide a good amount of information than just an introduction. We have around 50 pages of detailed, professionally written content by our CEO.

Is there a time frame or any way to contact the editor directly?

Thank you very much for your time,

Stephen

The title is, and will almost certainly remain as, the company name. Any proposed description should conform with our editor guidelines at http://dmoz.org/guidelines/describing.html . I suggest that you study them before making further change requests .

We don't make changes as a result of posting here BTW.

Thanks for the reply,

I have read your guidelines and it appears a new description of:

"Provides information about living trusts and other estate planning topics. Attorney referrals available nationwide."

Is adequate and consistent with other descriptions of other sites in the same section. And also provides a very consise and accurate depiction of what our site's content entails.

My reason for posting here on this topic is that I know of no timeframe regarding either having this change approved and implemented, or declined.

If this change were to be approved, could you give me a length of time in which I may see a change in my site's description?

Thank you very much,

Stephen

>My reason for posting here on this topic is that I know of no timeframe regarding either having this change approved and implemented, or declined.

There is no such timeframe. That's why we haven't told you one, and can't tell you one. The timeframes are supply-based (that is, what editors are available and choosing to work) rather than demand-based (for any simplistic definition of "demand")

>If this change were to be approved, could you give me a length of time in which I may see a change in my site's description?

This change won't be approved, because a post in THIS forum isn't subjected to editorial review, and editors don't typically read this forum while editing in the same area (not that they could if they wanted to--this forum is not topically arranged to the necessary level of detail.) I presume you made a suggestion over at dmoz.org also: if so, that would be "reviewed on some indeterminable timeframe".

could you give me a length of time in which I may see a change in my site's description?

Click to expand...

That would mean predicting when some volunteer might decide to visit the category and do some work there. In other words, we can't.

However, most, but not all, editors give some priority to update requests.

jimnoble said:

That would mean predicting when some volunteer might decide to visit the category and do some work there. In other words, we can't.

However, most, but not all, editors give some priority to update requests.

Click to expand...

Thank you both for your replies.

I have submitted a few times over at dmoz.org in my section, and I will stop doing that and just wait until the editor of the section takes a look at it. I want to thank you both for the information and for your time.

You can understand my concern, however, in getting this claim processed. An editor is a volunteer, and I thank the editors at DMOZ for their time and contributions.

An editor has a supreme amount of power allotted to them. If MSN continues to use DMOZ descriptions in their search results, and, even worse, if Yahoo! and Google follow suit, then the DMOZ editors have the enough power to make or break a website. Our website, http://www.livingtrustnetwork.com, is an informational site. We do not make money at this point, as we are trying to build a community of users and professionals who are interested in living trusts, estate planning, finance.. etc... however, if our success as a website is directly related to search engine results, and if MSN or others use the DMOZ description in providing these results, and DMOZ leaves the descriptions up to the whim of volunteer editors with no stake in the site's future, that is an EXTREME amount of power.

As an example, our site rank #3 with our old description on MSN, with the DMOZ description we moved to 15, our traffic dropped and we are struggling. We currently no where to be found on MSN. Who knows what will happen.

We are a well designed (both graphically and structurally) site providing a large amount of information not found anywhere on the web, and our ability to get to individuals who need that information is dependent on search engines, being that we have no budget for PPC adverts or similar methods.

My reason for posting this is so that the people over at DMOZ understand that they are doing a phenominal job, but that you also have a great deal of power that you might have not realized.

I respectfully request that you over at DMOZ look into this situation further and with a closer eye. Please inquire to my editor about my description change submission.

Thank you very much,

Stephen

We cannot respond to one individuals pleas or else we would have to in fairness respond to everyones. By requesting an update you have done what you can. Eventually an editor will review your request and take what action they deem necessary. I am sure you would not wish your update to be delayed because an editor side-tracked to deal with someone else's special request?

No editor owns a category - so there is no 'my' editor to speak to. There are many editors who can check up on the category (amongst the many that they look after) and process that particular update.

The vagaries of Google, MSN and other search engines have nothing to do with the ODP despite what many people believe. I am afraid it is a situation not of our making and you are not the only one who feels that the ODP should somehow respond to what a third party does. Unfortunately we cannot and there is no reason for us to do so.

regards

Thank you for the information and your reply,

stephen

You can understand my concern, however, in getting this claim processed.

Click to expand...

At the risk of being nitpicky, I'd like to suggest that we would hope you would view this as a request, not as a claim. From our perspective, it is a request that we will review at some future time and review on its own merits -- the word "claim" suggests to me some sort of obligation to act, and there is no such obligation.

And, since I am lending perspective, allow me to share some perspective on how this particular editor approaches requests to change titles and descriptions. what I am sharing is simplyhow I work, and may not be indicative of how others work.

The first thing I do is review the existing title and description to see if they are guideline compliant. If they are not guideline compliant, I rewrite them to make them so, generally ignoring the content of the suggestion. The suggestion will have then served its purpose by identifying a non-compliant title/description that could then be fixed.

If the title/description are guidelines compliant, I will then look to see if they are accurate. If the title says Harry Smith Company and the company Name is Joe Jones Company, a change is forthcoming, without regard to the title that is suggested. If the title is accurate, then I look at the description and determine if it is accurate. If it is accurate, I will leave it alone, regarless of what is suggested, since the writing of descriptions is not a collaborative effort and I have better ways to use my time than engaging in a wordsmithing exercise with a site owner. Forgive the bluntness. If it is not correct, I will correct it, again generally ignoring what was suggested.

Why am I so adament about ignoring what was suggested: beause there are a million ways to write a compliant, accurate description and I choose to write my own rather than regurgitate a suggestion.

So how does this work in real life?

In my experience, much greater than 95 percent of all suggested title and description changes result in no changes being made. Now, I edit heavily in Regional/ so the overwhelming majority of updates come from Real Estate Agents, and they are not worth the electrons they are submitted with. In other parts of the directory where I edit, I find suggested changes are more useful, but are usually promotional or keyword driven, designed to help "position" the company rather that provide useful information to the surfer.

Despite the reject rate, I make it a priority to review suggested updates, because they can and do often point to quality problems within the areas where I edit, and while I may not use the suggested title and description, I often time find myself adding a line or two to the "acceptable" existing description in an effort to "make it better."

Hope you find this useful.