Is there any way to establish if a site has been turned down?

I know it's not possible to check on the status of site submissions per say but I was wondering if it was possible to know when to assume the answer has been no? Maybe x weeks after submission, if you haven't heard - or something like that.

I submitted my site some weeks ago and have heard nothing, nor can I find my site in the ODP search. I do not know if I did the right thing - probably not - but I resubmitted today and was wondring how long it might take for a decision.

Any help or advice is welcome.

No, there's no such time, and no such procedure.

But you can assume for PRACTICAL purposes that your site has already been turned down, and take the appropriate action (away from the ODP, of course). That will turn out to have been the right action, even if the site hasn't been turned down.

Thanks, I have already done that. I have also applied to become an editor (today) and maybe that will be more successful.

Would be nice to understand why it was not acceptable though, if that turns out to be the case.

Ian

The reason is usually (99% of the time) "insufficient unique content" -- but it's very hard for a webmaster not to already know where his content came from.

That's a fair point but before submitting, I looked at a number of other sites in the same category to see if mine was OK and it is 'as unique' as far as I can see as all the ones I viewed. My site is a photojournalistic wedding, portrait and social photography site. It's a business site but also it hase some other 'non-commercial' information. Appart for the images, all of which are 'unique' or NOT depending on your point of view the rest of the content is I hope a little different from the 'norm'.

Anyway, not a moan, just a little disappointment.

Just a general point, would it not be possible to use a 'no reply' email address to send out a 'not acceptable because.....' email. This would stop the abuse emails but at least give some feedback. I guess if we did not think ODP was important, none of us would submit our sites so it's frustrating to hear nothing and then to just assume no news is bad news.

Ian

Any help or advice is welcome.

Click to expand...

You might like to read this forum's FAQ which has realistic advice about timescales.

As to your other suggestion, we've discussed it to death here many times. It isn't going to happen any time soon - or later for that matter.

...and then to just assume no news is bad news

Click to expand...

No news usually means...well, no news.

I think you're still assuming that by the simple act of suggesting a site, you're changing the universe to impose a new priority on volunteers somewhere. But it isn't so. You haven't changed any priorities. What you've changed is how EASILY an editor who shared your priorities could find your site.

But we don't know who or when will have that particular priority. It might be in ten seconds, it might be years. We don't know. We really don't know. And if we don't know, we can't tell you.

Can we get more on unique content rules (or philosophy) somewhere?

Unique content is content that isn't available elsewhere and isn't "closely related" to content elsewhere. A professional photographer has ample opportunity to generate unique content: either information about his business (on which subject he can speak with unique authoritativeness!) or the creative results of his work. So I'd tend to assume that anyone in such a business probably has a listable site, if he has a site at all.

What I DON'T do, however, is make that assumption a priority driving my work. Nothing against photographers, mind you: it is just that my skills and equipment are better geared to reviewing other kinds of sites.

A lot of photographers suggest sites to Arts/Photography rather than to their hometown (which is where most of their business will come from.) If you've done this, then -- hie thee over to the Regional category containing your office or home, and suggest the site (again) there.

I have a website which is made almost entirely from "content elsewhere". That is the intention. It is anthological in scope and relies on reports from the United Nations, Europa, Canada, and the United States. It referrences them as direct downloads, and quotes from them extensively. That is my intention - point directly at the documents and get viewers to download from the various sites to which I point. I do have original content and home generated work and yet there is a huge need to fit that work into a context. I believe that my site is quite distinct, unique for its categorical and organizational structure. It creates a framework from which to collect one's thoughts and channel ideas and knowledge. Despite that all the documents save one are distributed freely on the web (quotation permission pending) I fear that it will be viewed by editors as intellectual cannabalization. If I give you the address will you give me a critique of it, make a case about it?

If I give you the address will you give me a critique of it, make a case about it?

Click to expand...

No, we don't perform specific site critiques here. Offhand, I'd say you'd have a hard road ahead of you making a case for a site that just points to content on other sites.

thank you Motsa. Show me the way. I'm going to take the hard way, the high road. If not even "value added" retake for the United Nations will stop the critics I'm sure I could find a path for it.
Don't forget I have letters like this

"Please feel free to quote as much as you like.

regards

Nick Nuttall, Spokesperson, Office of the Executive Director, United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Nairobi, Kenya"
Yours sincerely
Eric Gooch, Analyst, Sustainable Development and good governance.

More generally, a site simply MUST make its case to the surfer by itself, without a sideshow barker -- unless you propose to provide the same sideshow barker for every surfer. The editors should be reviewing the site like any ordinary surfer looking for unique information.

I'm sorry hutcheson, motsa et al, I have a distinct impression that I will have to take this up a notch. Not only do we not know if our application is listed or reviewed but also we don't know any time frame for it, or are ever told why it is rejected or not. Such as it is, this directory really ought to be taken out of the hands of arbitrary (and somewhat self satisfied--albeit good willed amateurs) and placed into the hands of ISO or WWW, and given statutes, timetables, and an extensive rule book. My understanding is that it is about two years now since you feedback directory listing progress and status reports and that moreover you don't even bother to reply to applicants with the reasons for rejections or acceptance for their listings. This in my opinion does not even approach the spirit of the earliest days of Zen and the art of Internet, GNU or even Mozilla Open Source. I am certainly not a "sideshow barker" and feel reproached for egotistic intent, in scope and in degree. Do you represent the "ordinary surfer" in fact? Show us the statistics: if that sounds like "Show me the money" it should, as you have not answered my question. Why are you ignoring the question about "unique content"?

You are of course free to do what you wish, but you might save a lot of wasted time by reading the terms of use of ODP (which you agreed to abide by when you suggested your site)

http://www.dmoz.org/add.html

Please recognize that making the ODP a useful resource requires us to exercise broad editorial discretion in determining the content and structure of the directory. That discretion extends (but is not limited) to what sites to include, where in the directory sites are placed, whether and when to include more than one link to a site, when deep linking is appropriate, and the content of the title and description of the site. In addition, a site's placement in the directory is subject to change or deletion at any time at our sole discretion. You should not rely on any aspect of a site's inclusion in the directory. Please understand that an editor's exercise of discretion may not always treat all submissions equally. You may not always agree with our choices, but we hope you recognize that we do our best to make fair and reasonable decisions


The bottom line being that the directory can do what it wants, and is not obligated to review or list your site under any time frame.

Well if the ISO or the WWW want to make their own directory, with whatever rules they want to impose, they're more than welcome to. We happen to like our directory just the way it is - we work on improvements to it all the time.

I'm not going to work according to anyone else's time schedule - and I like to think that I contribute significantly to the directory. Are you willing to risk losing my work and the majority of the other editors just because you don't think we work fast enough? Where do you think the directory would be if everyone "walked off the job" because the imposed constraints were too significant?

I'm sorry hutcheson, motsa et al, I have a distinct impression that I will have to take this up a notch.

Click to expand...

Not here, you won't. Your questions have been answered as well as we can -- hounding us for something more is not going to go over well.

Not only do we not know if our application is listed or reviewed but also we don't know any time frame for it, or are ever told why it is rejected or not.

Click to expand...

By "application", I presume you mean suggestion (as in suggesting your site to the directory)? We offer that ability as a courtesy and that courtesy does not in any way obligate us to look at, list, report on, or otherwise do anything with a suggested site.

Such as it is, this directory really ought to be taken out of the hands of arbitrary (and somewhat self satisfied--albeit good willed amateurs) and placed into the hands of ISO or WWW, and given statutes, timetables, and an extensive rule book.

Click to expand...

Why? Seriously. Why? Yahoo with its paid editors can't build up a directory the size of the ODP. What makes you think that the ISO or WWW would be able to do it without (a) using volunteers and (b) encountering the same issues that the ODP faces?

You know that it's only a directory, right? One of many on the planet? If you have an idea for a better directory, feel free to go ahead and create it instead of waiting for the ODP to turn into what you're looking for. We'll applaud your efforts.

My understanding is that it is about two years now since you feedback directory listing progress and status reports and that moreover you don't even bother to reply to applicants with the reasons for rejections or acceptance for their listings.

Click to expand...

That would be partly correct. We stopped giving site suggestion status checks here less than a year ago when it became more of a hassle than a benefit and we've never emailed site owners to let them know the status of their suggestions.

Why are you ignoring the question about "unique content"?

Click to expand...

What answer are you looking for? Unique content is content that is, well, unique. If you're looking for anything more detailed than that, it's not going to be forthcoming as it would require that we actually review your site (and that is beyond the scope of this forum).

I guess I don't understand the confusion over unique content. It's seems awfully simple to me.

Take - for example - my website. It contains pictures of afghans that I have designed and/or crocheted, including descriptions of how they are created; instructions for ordering an afghan from me; a brief bio, my current projects, my shipping and return information, and a calendar & reminder service that I offer.

No other site on the internet offers those specific items from me - although there are thousands of crochet / afghan sites all over the web.

Hence - ta da - unique content. If someone were to do a search on the content of any of my pages, they would only get one return - my pages, as I have written all of the content myself.

Does that guarantee me a listing in the ODP - of course not! No site is guaranteed a listing. However, it might put me a step ahead of someone who's crochet site simply links to patterns and afghans on other sites.

Now, it's up to the editor in the category where my site could / would be listed to find my site on the Internet or work his/her way through the (possibly) gazillions of suggestions awaiting his/her attention to find it, review it, and decide if it's listable.

My job? The same job I've been doing for almost a year - add content, keep crocheting, submit to search engines, and keep on keepin' on.

Would I like a listing in the ODP? Of course. (I'm an editor. ) Will I do anything differently with or without it? - nope.

I guess I don't understand the confusion over unique content. It's seems awfully simple to me.

Great post Jules!

Continuing in that vein, I have three personal websites.

www.gunships.org is, unquestionably, the single best source of information and photos concerning the USAF fixed wing gunship program. I've been working on it for about 15 years now, and a number of commerical "expert" sites have stolen a lot of my content over the years.

www.ralphvaughan.com is a family genealogy site that probably has more information on the GNARINI family name than any other site in the world, and has extensive, unique information about the VAUGHAN name. It would be eligible for perhaps as many as three different listings, but I haven't submitted it yet because, as an ODP editor, I don't think it has enough completeness.

www.vwip.org is fast becoming a major authority site on the Vietnam war, the photo album has more than 700 images, there is content not found elsewhere on the web, such as the complete Garwood report, the discussion forum is the weak point. It has has lots of posts (but most are from me and I don't have enough quality members yet -- but that is changing) so I haven't submitted it yet, even though it would go in a category where I have editing rights, so I could list it immediately if I wanted to. But I don't want to because while it has a lot of unique content -- truly unique content -- I am not satisfied and I'm much, much tougher on my own sites than I am on others.

So ther you have it, some more example of unique content.