Famous Diamonds

I recently submitted the site
"The World of Famous Diamonds"
http://famousdiamonds.tripod.com/
to category
http://dmoz.org/Home/Consumer_Information/Jewelry_and_Gemstones/
Because I believe it's the best site about its subject, frequently and enthusiastically updated.
I did not include a description, because from experience, it always gets altered anyway.
There is no category editor, but I do not wish to volunteer, but it would be nice to be able to see the progress or status of my suggestion.
I have no connection with the site, except that it contains one link to one of our own websites.

Read the forum rules here, contemplating especially the meaning of "wait" and "month". Then bump this thread.

Oops, sorry about that, although I can't believe it has not been previously submitted, by the site owner at least, the site has been aound for a few years.
I was also looking for feedback about my omission of a description, and whether it causes any problem, and also about the category being without editor.
As you suggest I will wait a month, although the next war may be over by then.

Omission of a description may make a difference. If a description is well-written according to the ODP guidelines, then it is more likely to get reviewed quicker, because it will tend to catch an editor's eye. Absence of a description won't stop it getting listed eventually, but it might slow it down.

The fact that there is no listed editor for a category just means that an editor from a category above that one will have to review the application. However, if this is the best category for the site (and I haven't looked) then this is the right place for it - submitting it to a different category (with a listed editor) will just cause it to get moved to the correct category, and thus not gain any time.

Any news on this site yet?

It's still waiting for review.

It looks as though I missed a month checking the status of this site, and let 2 months slip by.
Any news?
If it helps, I would suggest a description:-
Title:-
(The) World of Famous Diamonds
Much information about famous, large or fancy diamonds and other gemstones with celebrity connections and auction prices.

Note for category editor if still alive:-
This really is the best site by far about its subject. The author really puts great effort into unearthing fresh info, even if his spelling isn't the best.

Please see the very_first post in this forum?

Secondly, Doubt if you'll get that description as it doesn't tell what visitors will find upon visiting.

May I ask that "if"! >>>"This really is the best site by far about its subject".<<< Why is it hosted on Tripod?

I don't know, you would have to ask the webmaster, but presumably because it is non-commercial, and the guy is a poor but enthusiastic devotee of his subject.
Is everything hosted on tripod worthless?

"Secondly, Doubt if you'll get that description as it doesn't tell what visitors will find upon visiting."

I don't want to get that description, it was just a suggestion, and intended to be better than nothing. Actually the site title is reasonably self-explanatory.

The description could be:-
"Yet another amateur tripod home page, this time about diamonds"
and be an vast improvement over the existing one.
Surely a mediocre description would be better than not listing the site?
Is there a ban or restriction on sites hosted on tripod?

> Is there a ban or restriction on sites hosted on tripod?

Not at all. The directory contains thousands of tripod.com sites. But you did describe this as the best by far in its field. It's been my experience, and apparently that of editor raggedyrugs as well, that a tripod.com site is rarely the best by far in its field.

The site is still waiting to be reviewed.

Agreeing with brmehlman that from experience, the "best" of anything is rarely, if ever, hosted on Tripod, Angelfire, or Geocities. Not even going to mention annoying pop-ups.

No bans or restrictions, and they even get reviewed the same as any other site.

There are many, many, many sites listed in the ODP by "amateurs" and quite frankly, we don't care if the site is made by professionals or a 5 year old.

As long as it has considerable content, pertenent to the category, and is fairly easy to navigate it should be listable.

Another "editor's voice of experience:"

I do a lot of work (tens of thousands of edits) moving site submittals past the "spam filter." Mostly I try to just send them on to the category their submitter suggested (unless it's obviously inappropriate.)

But I make a special exception for any site described by its submitter as "the best on the web" -- I go ahead and review them.

Why?

My experience has been that well over 90% of such described sites are just legends in their submitters' minds -- they don't exist at all! That's right, hardly ever even a lame "under construction" or "coming soon" notice. So I can just delete that submittal right there, without bothering the local category owner. (Of course, if someday someone submits a real site with that kind of blatant hype, I'd strip out the hype, and send the submittal on. But, as I say, that hardly ever happens.)

So that's the kind of company you put yourself in when you start describing yourself as the "best on the web." And, knowing that, I bet you'll use a different description for your next submittal.

And to top it off, if I might add, some of the text descriptions appear to have been copied as is from other web sites on gems and diamonds. We hope this was done with the permission of the site owner.