My Site has vanished from Dmoz???
- Thread starter ukdp
- Start date
We are unaware of how a site ranks, and it has no bearing on whether it gets listed or not, or stays listed.
There may have been a temporary problem with the url, and an automated tool may have set it aside until it can be investigated and fixed, or a new url found for it, if one exists. I've been running into that a lot lately, and fixing them.
Or, it may have been moved to another category it better fits in.
Or it may have been reviewed again, in a general category check, and found to be non compliant with our Guidelines and removed from the Directory.
We don't give status checks anymore, so, giving you possible reasons is the best we can do, I'm afraid, .
There may have been a temporary problem with the url, and an automated tool may have set it aside until it can be investigated and fixed, or a new url found for it, if one exists. I've been running into that a lot lately, and fixing them.
Or, it may have been moved to another category it better fits in.
Or it may have been reviewed again, in a general category check, and found to be non compliant with our Guidelines and removed from the Directory.
We don't give status checks anymore, so, giving you possible reasons is the best we can do, I'm afraid,
.Thanks for the repy Crowbar.
It's certainly in the right category but I have noticed the category hasn't an editor now as it's asking for one.
I've resubmitted my site, not sure if that was the right thing to do but I guess I have no choice as I've no idea why it's gone.
I mentioned ranking within Google as some search engines gather info from Dmoz, may be Goggle is different, I'm not sure.
Is there anyone else I can contact? There's only 23 sites listed in my category, someone must know why it was removed.
Thanks again.
It's certainly in the right category but I have noticed the category hasn't an editor now as it's asking for one.
I've resubmitted my site, not sure if that was the right thing to do but I guess I have no choice as I've no idea why it's gone.
I mentioned ranking within Google as some search engines gather info from Dmoz, may be Goggle is different, I'm not sure.
Is there anyone else I can contact? There's only 23 sites listed in my category, someone must know why it was removed.
Thanks again.
Hi,
We have had a website in the directory for over a year now and have noticed that it has vanished from our category recently. It still shows up in the searches however. I was wondering if this has to do with the back up problem as a lot of other websites from this category that were added are no longer there as well. If you click the green button and go to google you will see a lot more listed.
The category is Top: Home: Family: Pregnancy: Preconception
Thanks for any feedback.
We have had a website in the directory for over a year now and have noticed that it has vanished from our category recently. It still shows up in the searches however. I was wondering if this has to do with the back up problem as a lot of other websites from this category that were added are no longer there as well. If you click the green button and go to google you will see a lot more listed.
The category is Top: Home: Family: Pregnancy: Preconception
Thanks for any feedback.
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2003
- Messages
- 5,872
That a site that is not visible in the category still shows up in search as being listed in that category is a result of the recent server problems -- search hasn't been updated for a while now, so it is showing old results. (And Google's categories are usually a bit outdated.)
As for why your site is no longer listed, please see post #2 in this thread, by crowbar. The reasons he outlines are relevant regardless of category.
As for why your site is no longer listed, please see post #2 in this thread, by crowbar. The reasons he outlines are relevant regardless of category.
jimnoble
DMOZ Meta
The drop in number of listings suggests editorial action rather than server/backup problems. It's not unusual for a category to be thoroughly groomed to ensure that only fully functional websites with unique and useful content that is relevant to the category are listed. That's quality control.
Sites that don't meet those requirements are either moved or removed.
Sites that don't meet those requirements are either moved or removed.
Doesn't make sense as our site is completely relevant to the category and a lot of other newer websites are gone as well. I beg you to look again. We do not see any volunteer editors for this category.
I'd post our website on this forum however I believe that would be inappropriate.
I'd post our website on this forum however I believe that would be inappropriate.
The particular website is irrelevant if, as you say, many other websites are affected.
However, I think you're focussing on another irrelevancy. It doesn't matter whether a website is RELEVANT for a TOPIC, if it is not LISTABLE ANYWHERE. The ODP guidelines define what makes a site listable -- and only after it's determined to be listable would anyone start asking what topic it might be relevant for.
And you cannot say that "nothing has changed" either. Because the fact is, many things HAVE changed. The ODP guidelines have changed. Editors have learned more about how to apply the ODP guidelines. More sites have appeared on the web, significantly affecting the practical definition of "unique content" -- and raising the standards.
You might look at some of the other sites that disappeared, and for each one of them, ask the question that really matters to a surfer: "If this site disappeared from the web, could I still get all its significant information from somewhere else on the web?"
If you're finding that the answer to that question is often "yes", then that indicates one likely motivation for editorial action.
However, I think you're focussing on another irrelevancy. It doesn't matter whether a website is RELEVANT for a TOPIC, if it is not LISTABLE ANYWHERE. The ODP guidelines define what makes a site listable -- and only after it's determined to be listable would anyone start asking what topic it might be relevant for.
And you cannot say that "nothing has changed" either. Because the fact is, many things HAVE changed. The ODP guidelines have changed. Editors have learned more about how to apply the ODP guidelines. More sites have appeared on the web, significantly affecting the practical definition of "unique content" -- and raising the standards.
You might look at some of the other sites that disappeared, and for each one of them, ask the question that really matters to a surfer: "If this site disappeared from the web, could I still get all its significant information from somewhere else on the web?"
If you're finding that the answer to that question is often "yes", then that indicates one likely motivation for editorial action.