How many submissions include good descriptions?

pepped · Dec 22, 2005

I'm doing a little research for an article and wondered if any ODP editors would care to comment on the quality of descriptions included with submissions?

So people browsing this post have an idea of what I'm talking about, this is the text from the submission page:

Keep the description of your site brief - no longer than 25-30 words. A well-written, objective description will make listing your site easier. Do not use any HTML tags. Write in complete sentences and/or descriptive phrases using proper grammar, punctuation and correct spelling.
Do not use ALLCAPS in your description. Avoid capitalizing every word in a sentence. Don't repeat the title of your site in the description. Avoid using promotional language and strings of key words and search terms. Words and phrases like "cool" and "best darn site" will be removed.

How many descriptions out of 100, say, actually meet these requirements?

How many people use ALL CAPS? How many are cheeky enough to include HTML? And - perhaps the killer - how many submissions are deleted or significantly delayed because of poorly written descriptions?

Full disclosure: I also operate my own (very small) human-edited directory (here) and my own findings are that maybe one in 20 does not require any reworking and one in five is pretty much unusable.

windharp · Dec 22, 2005

We are not keeping statistics for that, sorry for not being able to hand you numbers. My own experience is that you are lucky in having 1/20 that does not need rework. IMHO the only suggestions not needing rework are those done by other editors (either from the inside or the outside). I find about 70% of the suggested title/descr combos completely unusable and don't think the number of suggestins I published untouched is larger than 1%.

How many people use ALL CAPS?

We can't know that, because if you do that, you are prompted to fix this before suggesting your site.

How many are cheeky enough to include HTML?

You don't filter out HTML in an automated preprocessing? I hope you encode it so that it is not executed when you process the submissions, otherwise you have a big security hole there.

how many submissions are deleted ... because of poorly written descriptions

I hope none, at least in ODP. Suggestions are just one of the many ways editors have to find out about new links for their categories, so a bad description really is no problem.

pepped · Dec 22, 2005

Many thanks for that feedback, much appreciated. It did slip my mind that the suggestion form does prevent certain things like ALL CAPS.

But 70 per cent being unusable? That is shocking! And only one in 100 going through untouched - well I guess that could always be down to an editor simply taking their responsibilities very seriously.

windharp · Dec 22, 2005

It might be that our criteria are different of yours. We seek to describe the contents of a site, not so much the products of the company (if its a commercial site). If we ignore those suggestions that just contain keywords, most suggestions read like "Buy the best xyz, with feature 1, feature2 and feature 3". We are not be able to use much of these if we don't consider the features interesting (i.e. unique) enough to warrant naming them. Naming those features when they apply to the products available on 90% of the sites listed in a category makes not much sense for the user

We would do something like "The producer of xyz shows his products, gives details about the production process and shows pictures of their facilities." - In this case the suggested description was useless in my eyes. (This is of course no real example, just something to illustrate what might be different in ODP)

The only good thing is, that even the description above allows a fast precheck if a site matches the category or has to be moved elsewhere. Which applies to loads of sites.

jimnoble · Dec 22, 2005

windharp is noted for his leniency :greentong .

On the very rare occasion that an external listing suggestion is publishable as it stands, I usually send a congratulatory message to the submitter.

I've probably sent around 20-30 in my ODP career of around 36,000 edits

.

monayuki · Dec 22, 2005

Sir, thats a very nice ratio approximately 1:1200.

I will keep that in mind for my career.

Happy Holidays to Everyone.

pepped · Dec 22, 2005

Apologies if this isn't possible because of ODP terms & conditions, what-have-you, but would any editors be willing to post a submission that was accepted without any reworking so other webmasters can see what makes a great submission, including description?

If that isn't possible, how about presenting a mock up involving a fake company. Widgets Inc., or something. Or perhaps even a real company that isn't going to complain about being used as an example - Microsoft, erm, for example.

windharp · Dec 22, 2005

Just look at the sites already listed in the category you want to suggest a site for. In most cases those descriptions are okay.

pepped · Dec 22, 2005

Yep, I guess that's one way of doing it!

One more thing it would be great to establish - does a well-written description increase a submission's chances of being accepted sooner rather than later?

That is, would an editor look at a list of submissions and think 'Well that one seems pretty good, I'll tackle that one first'?

Or would an editor look at a list of submissions and think 'Nuts, the first one sucks, but I can't/won't move onto the next one'?

motsa · Dec 22, 2005

Editors can review sites in any order they choose and a well-written title and description are likely to catch an editor's attention.

lissa · Dec 22, 2005

I've probably sent around 20-30 in my ODP career of around 36,000 edits

Me too.

They are so rare that I alway gush about it in the notes I leave on my editing. Probably 40% of what I see has enough information to tell what the site is about, but it doesn't describe the site contents. Another 40% appear to be from the site's meta tags (which range widely in quality). The last 20% are either pure hype, keyword stuffing, or completely lacking.

If I'm in a "list a few good sites quick" mood, I'll skim for sites that appear to belong in the category with pretty good descriptions. To me this indicates someone who was paying attention and has likely suggested the site to the right category, and if they did, I will only need to tweak the description a bit.

If I'm in a weed whacking mood, I'll look at the suggestions with spammy descriptions to see if the site is even appropriate at all. There's a greater chance that a suggestion with a description of "Buy Cheap Widgets Here!! We Fill All your Cheap Widget Needs!! Blue Widgets, Red Widgets, Big Widgets, Small Widgets." is a widget affiliate site than a site with a description of "We are a family run widget maker and gadget seller in Podunk. Open since 1987."

bobrat · Dec 22, 2005

From my memory, I woold guess maybe one in a thousand is ok as supplied. There are also some that are fairly good, but need some minor rewording.

Other very in quality, with too much hype and superlatives, repetition of words, redundant use of words already in the category name. For example, if a site is in a category for the city of Peoria, Illinois, it's bad to include the city name in the description.

A surpisingly high number are grossly bad. I would think site owners would be offended to have such poor looking descriptiions.

Here are some snippets from some currently submitted sites [leaving out any identifying info]

.... for Corporate, Celebrity and Private events. Why the capitals?

The Premier Close-up... Capitals and hype

.... You'll Know You Made the Right Choice When You Hear the Uproarious.... Yech

...to ensure your next event is a success! Leave out words such as you and yours

The Web site explains the different types Not necessary to say web site

Manufacturer, Exporter, Retailer of High class and professional,,, Hype and caps

We are the leading manufacture of... Hype and spelling

...Day and Residential Art and Literature Courses and Holidays.. Caps

...is an affordable web design solution .. Expressing judgement, affordable should be removed

Providing quality web design services at fair prices. Judgement x 2

Your one stop for all your.. Marketing lingo

... hosting to Document and grapic design ... Bad caps and spelling

pepped · Dec 22, 2005

bobrat]Here are some snippets from some currently submitted sites [leaving out any identifying info said:
...

That is a fantastic selection of hints, tips, dos and don'ts, much appreciated.

pepped · Dec 22, 2005

lissa said:
If I'm in a "list a few good sites quick" mood, I'll skim for sites that appear to belong in the category with pretty good descriptions. To me this indicates someone who was paying attention and has likely suggested the site to the right category, and if they did, I will only need to tweak the description a bit.

And I'm sure people would do well to pay close attention to this as well.

shadow575 · Dec 22, 2005

bobrat said:
...to ensure your next event is a success! Leave out words such as you and yours

Not to mention "!"

What bobrat said.

I have never attempted to count, maybe a handful were 100% good to go. There were quite a few that were pretty good, but still needed a few minor things changed-most usually spelling and caps as bobrat noted. The rest that are nearly complete rewrites were due to hype or keyword stuffing in the suggested description. I won't go in to specifics but I have seen many descriptions like:

Your #1 State Realty Agent!-Your best choice in real estate, real estate services, realtors, real estate appraisals, and real estate properties statewide. We offer real estate advice and real estate tips for buyers and sellers who are looking for property in the state.......

*Disclaimer: This is just an example to help illustrate what I am talking about. No specific site or sites are being referred too. Any actual likeness or similarity to real site suggestions are strictly and sadly coincidental.

)

jimnoble · Dec 22, 2005

Our publicly available Open Directory Editing Guidelines include a Descriptions section which you've probably already read

.

pepped · Dec 22, 2005

jimnoble]Our publicly available [url=http://dmoz.org/guidelines/]Open Directory Editing Guidelines[/url] include a [url=http://dmoz.org/guidelines/describing.html#descriptions]Descriptions[/url said:
section which you've probably already read .

I have indeed Jim, but many thanks for that. However, it didn't include answers to my original question, which was how many descriptions are useful and how many are useless. Apologies if I'm taking up bandwidth.

lisahinely · Dec 22, 2005

Hey! I just got one today!!! So I'm dancing around like Snoopy at Christmas!

To answer your how many question, this would make, uh, 1. And I did edit it first out of the pile.

spectregunner · Dec 22, 2005

However, it didn't include answers to my original question, which was how many descriptions are useful and how many are useless.

All descriptions are useful in that they give the editor some insight into the mindset of the person making the suggestion.

Some descrptions can be used as-is, but it is an exceptionally small number, probably a single-digit percentage.

Many submitted descriptions -- perhaps a third to a half (depending upon teh part of the dirctory) provide a good starting point for the ltimate description. They are not usable as-is, but can be edited/tweaked by an editor to achieve a guidelines-compliant description.

monayuki · Dec 22, 2005

Your #1 State Realty Agent!-Your best choice in real estate, real estate services, realtors, real estate appraisals, and real estate properties statewide. We offer real estate advice and real estate tips for buyers and sellers who are looking for property in the state.......

This is full of Real I wonder if they are real ? So they end up no real listing......

How many submissions include good descriptions?

pepped

Member

windharp

Meta/kMeta

pepped

Member

windharp

Meta/kMeta

jimnoble

DMOZ Meta

monayuki

Member

pepped

Member

windharp

Meta/kMeta

pepped

Member

motsa

lissa

Member

bobrat

Member

pepped

Member

pepped

Member

shadow575

kEditall/kCatmv

jimnoble

DMOZ Meta

pepped

Member

lisahinely

Member

spectregunner

Member

monayuki

Member