Inconsistencies in World listings approach.

Hi
This is my first posting here so I'm going to go to extremes not to cause offence. This means adopting a metaphoric example in order not to identify the individual concerned. OK, preamble over!

I have an english website of international relevance, and am gradually accumulating translations of it in various international languages. The main section of Dmoz has been kind enough to list the site, and so have three different language areas of the World section listed the respective language translations (at slightly different URL's). One World editor however continually refuses to list it and the reason he cites indicates clearly a misunderstanding of the premise for the site's existence. I have tried to no avail to clarify this, but I think that not sharing a common first language might be getting in the way of the clarification I seek. Time to turn to the 'metaphor' to illustrate my point!

Let's say my site is about 'International Cuisine' (it's not, but this is a good parallel) and features dishes from countries A, B and C. Now, if you live in country Z, you may well want to know how to cook dishes from A B & C. You may even want to contribute some dishes from your own country, Z. However, I find that the Dmoz edit concerned has the position that 'because there are no dishes from Z in this site, I'm not going to include it'. My response is two-fold, to point out that a) people in Z may well want to know about dishes in other countries and how to prepare them - they can only do this if the site itself is presented in language Z and made known to the people of Z (i.e. listed), also b), it's a self-fulfilling prophecy to exclude the site from the listing will have the side effect that dishes from Z will never appear in the site. The product of both of these observations is that Z will be marginalised in not having access to World cuisine, and the World won't have access to Z cuisine.

At least three other World editors plainly recognise the point and have listed the site, but one doesn't and blocks the site year after year. It seems to me there must be a higher authority to whom I can appeal, but I don't know who that might be.

Is my point clear? I'm happy to try to expand if requested, or to be specific if it's in a confidential context.

Thanks in advance for any help or guidence you may be able to offer. I trust I haven't violated any of the rules here, and I apologise sincerely if inadvertently I may have done so.

Regards

FrankRockett.

We won't generalise about theoretical situations because much depends upon the category, the website and, yes, the editor's opinion. The latter is very important and is why we mainly use human beings to do the job instead of machines.

To comment sensibly, we need the URL.

If you prefer to keep that out of the public eye, then contact me via my ODP Profile.

OR

If you think an editor has been abusive, then raise an abuse report.

I think I understand you. However, if the site has little content in Language Z, it doesn't belong in World/Z.

Added Jim's right. We need a URL to give a definite answer.

Content in Language Z

Hi
The site is translated into Z so it's 100% Z-ish. The information in that language is the same as in English - it's a large set of 'world' information; - 'recipies' in my example, but you might equally imagine e.g. travel guide information such as descriptions of capital cities. Then the metaphor would become one in which e.g. people of country B can read about cities in country A, and so could the people of Z read (in their own language) about cities in country A - but the Dmoz editor for Z won't permit it because no cities in Z appear in the guide.

No cities from B might be in the guide, but that didn't stop the Editor for B realising that his/her fellow tongue speakers might not reasonably be interested to have access to data about another country that had been translated for them.

Also, I have responded to the Moderators suggestion to send the actual URL's to him. I don't want to incur anyones displeasure so I have opted to keep the url out of the public domain. I realise this makes a definitive reply impossible, but hopefully we can discuss it in principal using generalisations.

Regards

F.R.

You may have encountered a mistake by the Z-ish editor. World/Z, in general, doesn't have to be about the country in which Z is spoken.

As I don't speak "Z", whatever language it is, I probably couldn't comment sensibly. Our guidelines forbid submission of automatic translations, and I probably couldn't tell the difference.

I'm sure Jim will investigate fairly, and possibly bring up the matter in the internal Language/Z forum.

Human Speaker

Hi Arubin
Thanks for that - yes I thought there might be a mistake here. Thanks for - tentatively - confirming my concerns.

BTW, all my translations are by real people, credited with contact emails or URL's on the site, who speak (at least) the two languages required - English and X, - or 'Z' in this case
I could never condone the use of automated systems for entire website translation. People would laugh.

Forgive me going off-topic but I will leave you with a note on this subject that is illustrative & which made me smile; a few years ago when such systems were in their infancy, a friend of mine at a computer trade show 'had a go' with a English/Z, Z/English translation programme. Being a decidedly difficult man, he typed in the English phrase (and well known book title) "The Unbearable Lightness of Being". This translated into something odd looking in the foreign language, which was then cut 'n pasted back to the input and re-translated back into English, where the single word "Anorexia" popped out. i think 'Lost in Transaltion' would be an understatement!

One additional note: in your first post you mentioned slightly different URLs. Submissions within world/ should all be to the same, root, URL.

We don't want:

www.yoursite.com/en for english
www.yoursite.com/es for spanish
www.yoursite.com/pl for polish
www.yoursite.com/th for thai

We only want to see:

www.yoursite.com/

Navigation to the various languages within your domain is your responsibility, not htat of the directory.

Just a heads up guys & gals

I now know the URL and will be taking a closer look when I have a mo

FTR, the root URL is now awaiting review in the (AFAICT) appropriate World category with a machine translated note asking the local editors to reconsider.

You've got mail.

7 Months on - has anything transpired?

Hi Jim
You had written to the "foreign language" editor concerned to ask him to reconsider. That was back in February. Being as patient and zen like as a westerner can manage, I've hung on for seven months, but the editor concerned hasn't listed the site, hasn't responded to me and (I suspect) hasn't responded to you either.

To remind you of the problem: my site is offering a searchable database of hundreds of thousands of cell phone user's telephone numbers worldwide, so if you know somone in e.g. Phillipines you might be able to look up his/her number (if they opted in). This is extremely valuable as it may be your only way of contacting them. This applies wherever you live, including the imaginary land of Cricketania. Now all you need to make use of the site (it's essentially an online phone book for mobile numbers) is a translation in your local language - Cricketish - which I've provided for you. It's a human translation, not a machine one, so no problem there. Now the people of Cricketania can search for people worldwide. Hurrah!

But wait! There's a problem! The ODP editor for Cricketania has missed the point. He says that as there are only a few Cricketania residents listed in the directory, he's not going to list it.

Jim Noble looks into it and agrees and sends him a message (saddly, machine translated!), but the Cricketish editor doesn't respond. Apparently.

So that's a whistle-stop summary of where we are. Any chance of firing off another reminder, machine translated or not? It is absurd that so many different language World ODP editors list the site, but one editor (from such a massive country) has failed to understand the concept hence the value of the resource, and blocks it's visibility to so many millions of people. Can you unclog the bottleneck? It would be patiently appreciated (I've waited years so far) if you are able to jolly this along a bit.

Regards

Frank.

While I lack the permissions to do anything meaningful with regards to this request (others wil chime in, of that I'm certain) I did want to gently point out one important thing.

You indicate that you had not heard from this editor.

For the sake of understanding (your and others): editors very, very rarely will contact a submitter. Such contacts usually turn abusive, editors have t\been threatened, and very little good comes of it. So submitters, such as your self, should have zero expectation that they will ever be contacted by, or receive a reply from, an editor.

Also, editors are not required to do the bidding of other editors, and (this is theoretical) if Jim were to contact me and tell me that he disagreed with my decision on a given site, I am under no obligation to list it on that basis. Certainly, if I have half a brain (which is questionable) I'll take a look at it again, but if I still feel my decision is correct, I can leave a site unlisted. I might (or might not) as a courtesy reach out and tell Jim of my decision. Taking it a step further, if Jim stronly belives I have made an error, he can re-engage me, or, if he has permissions, simply take the responsibility and list the site. This entire process can easily take months, as there is no rule requiring that I immediately get back to Jim, or any other meta, under these circumstances.

Sometimes a seemingly straightforward request can result in a huge internal furor, with extensive postings and discussions in the internal forums. Some of these discussions can and do stretch out over a year. We'd rather discuss something for two years and get it right, than to be too quick, screw it up and spend the next 3 years fixing it.

So, again, I cannot assist you, but I did want to give you (and any lurkers) some perspective.

Added: it is also important to note that no single editor can block a listing.

Frank, the only bottleneck, ever, is what the volunteer editors volunteer to do. Staff/admin control is pretty much limited to telling people what actions AREN'T appropriate, because they doesn't advance the project goals. (In this case, that would be "reject a submittal with inadequate review".)

But no editor, ever, is going to be required to do something they don't want to do. (So long as they do something constructive, not something corrupt or destructive, they're doing OK. And if someday there's nothing else they're willing to do that's constructive, then ... the ODP just lost a volunteer. It happens.)

So your nemesis isn't blocking anything. He's just not helping you. That's OK, any other editor who knows the language and has privileges in the category involved can help, without waiting for Jim to learn the language (unlikely, I fear), or for the other editor involved to change his priorities.

Now, the ODP might profit by additional editors in that language (...which makes that language different in what way from English, or German, or, um, Tocharian? When more public-spirited volunteers for any of those languages come, we'll welcome them.)

Jim Noble looks into it and agrees and sends him a message (saddly, machine translated!), but the Cricketish editor doesn't respond. Apparently.

Click to expand...

And keep in mind that jimnoble didn't say he sent an email to a specific editor about your site. He just made sure it was awaiting review with a little machine-translated note on it for any editor that came across it. If no one comes across it or if no one coming across it wants to do something with it, then it sits there until someone does. Seven months is not a long time.

At no time did I say or tell anyone that the site should be listed there. We just don't work that way. As motsa says, all I did was to put it in the category's pool awaiting review with a brief machine translated note asking for it to be reconsidered. That's it.

There is nothing that you can do to expedite review (if that hasn't already happened).

My advice to you is to move on. If your site is going to be listed there, it'll happen when it happens.

Matter closed.

jimnoble]At no time did I say or tell anyone that the site [B]should[/B said:

be listed there.

Click to expand...

At no time did I say that either. I'm afraid that you're arguing with yourself.

So nothing's happened. Roger that. I won't ask again.