Hello editors,
I tried unsuccessfully to become an editor for the hyperhidrosis section on DMOZ, but it proved futile and I have essentially given up barring some suitable link/description/title combination I can submit with any confidence. Hopefully I am posting this message in the correct place and not screwing up like I did with my editor applications.
FYI -- I already found two basic mistakes that were corrected so I am not just posting this lengthy message here because of the need for attention (see following thread last few messages) --
http://www.resource-zone.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=53072
The reason I am posting here is because I have another concern about something more complicated and that essentially involves the whole current DMOZ hyperhidrosis section (and which annoys me, because I have been involved with this field of hyperhidrosis for a decade):
http://www.dmoz.org/Health/Conditions_and_Diseases/Skin_Disorders/Hyperhidrosis/
On there is the main page listing with 7 links, another listing of 23 clinics, and another listing of 4 personal pages.
All the clinics listed in the clinics section offer a surgery to treat this condition called ETS (Endoscopic thoracic sympathectomy). ETS is the only know guaranteed "cure" for hyperhidrosis for all intents and purposes. In effect, anyone in this field knows that a clinic owned by a doctor will have ETS as its main and often only business with very very few exceptions. The surgery is quick and lucrative. All surgeon (aka clinic aka doctor) websites discuss alternative treatments with a negative bias and generally plug the surgery. Anyway, back to the concerns:
1) Some clinics are listed by the surgeon/doctor owner's name, some are listed by the clinic name even though a little searching inside the linked page will show the surgeon or doctor clinic owner's name, some clinics are titled by both the clinic and surgeon name with the clinic and surgeon name repeated in the description (e.g., see Northwood Clinic Paes repeated) and so on....
2) The titles and descriptions seem to violate some of the basic DMOZ regulations that I have read. For the most obvious example -- Ceders Sinai - Top treatment center in Los Angeles. High profile surgeons with over 1,000 treatment cases. Practitioners of revolutionary ETS procedure.
The words "top", "high profile", and "revolutionary" are uncalled for in any serious medical related subject. "High profile" is not necessarily good, and one high profile doctor just helped an unemployed woman with sextuplets give birth to octuplets. Are we sure this treatment center is "top"? The ETS procedure is not "revolutionary" anymore. It was "revolutionary" in 1985. Another link states "latest most advanced" which is not really true as I checked the site and the surgeon is 1-2 years behind what is latest.
Perhaps more OCD on my part is another example -- (Buffalo NY Hyperhidrosis Clinic - Diagnosis Sweaty Palms.com: A hyperhidrosis information site. Learn about the disease, and treatment options. Discussion forums and news. Based in Buffalo NY)
A hyphen, followed by a .com, and then a colon, followed by a several sentences? Does it make sense to have the website title spelled out in the description? Its the only link on the "clinics" listing that does that. Also, there are no discussion forums I see when I enter that site despite the description saying so.
I can add more...but I assume if someone looks at these titles and descriptions, they will find whatever else is incorrect (assuming my intuition has been correct so far regarding the bad quality of this hyperhidrosis section)!
3) The part that bothers me the most is that on the main listing of seven sites, THREE are surgeon/clinic sites that advocate surgery. I maintain a ranking of ETS surgeons on my own hyperhidrosis website, and all three of these surgeons are listed in there, along with ALL the ones listed in the clinics section in the DMOZ hyperhidrosis page. In my opinion, these three sites on the main page belong in the clinics (aka surgeons) section. These three sites are the second, fifth and sixth respectively on the main page. The surgeons' who own these clinics/facilities have initials IT, FB and AG respectively. All surgeons present hyperhidrosis information on their sites, but in the end, all recommend ETS. So why are these three on the main page, while the several dozen other in the clinics page?
Maybe a better organization would be ETS surgeons instead of clinics in my opinion.
4) More basic things -- "hyperhydrosis" in the clinics section is an incorrect spelling with two y's. Some clinic descriptions have only the city name, some have city and state names, some are outside the US and only have city names (e.g., Whiteley -- Guildford and Chemsford -- sounds very English). Does DMOZ recommend consistency or is that not really a concern?
I could post more...but maybe its all futile.
I tried unsuccessfully to become an editor for the hyperhidrosis section on DMOZ, but it proved futile and I have essentially given up barring some suitable link/description/title combination I can submit with any confidence. Hopefully I am posting this message in the correct place and not screwing up like I did with my editor applications.
FYI -- I already found two basic mistakes that were corrected so I am not just posting this lengthy message here because of the need for attention (see following thread last few messages) --
http://www.resource-zone.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=53072
The reason I am posting here is because I have another concern about something more complicated and that essentially involves the whole current DMOZ hyperhidrosis section (and which annoys me, because I have been involved with this field of hyperhidrosis for a decade):
http://www.dmoz.org/Health/Conditions_and_Diseases/Skin_Disorders/Hyperhidrosis/
On there is the main page listing with 7 links, another listing of 23 clinics, and another listing of 4 personal pages.
All the clinics listed in the clinics section offer a surgery to treat this condition called ETS (Endoscopic thoracic sympathectomy). ETS is the only know guaranteed "cure" for hyperhidrosis for all intents and purposes. In effect, anyone in this field knows that a clinic owned by a doctor will have ETS as its main and often only business with very very few exceptions. The surgery is quick and lucrative. All surgeon (aka clinic aka doctor) websites discuss alternative treatments with a negative bias and generally plug the surgery. Anyway, back to the concerns:
1) Some clinics are listed by the surgeon/doctor owner's name, some are listed by the clinic name even though a little searching inside the linked page will show the surgeon or doctor clinic owner's name, some clinics are titled by both the clinic and surgeon name with the clinic and surgeon name repeated in the description (e.g., see Northwood Clinic Paes repeated) and so on....
2) The titles and descriptions seem to violate some of the basic DMOZ regulations that I have read. For the most obvious example -- Ceders Sinai - Top treatment center in Los Angeles. High profile surgeons with over 1,000 treatment cases. Practitioners of revolutionary ETS procedure.
The words "top", "high profile", and "revolutionary" are uncalled for in any serious medical related subject. "High profile" is not necessarily good, and one high profile doctor just helped an unemployed woman with sextuplets give birth to octuplets. Are we sure this treatment center is "top"? The ETS procedure is not "revolutionary" anymore. It was "revolutionary" in 1985. Another link states "latest most advanced" which is not really true as I checked the site and the surgeon is 1-2 years behind what is latest.
Perhaps more OCD on my part is another example -- (Buffalo NY Hyperhidrosis Clinic - Diagnosis Sweaty Palms.com: A hyperhidrosis information site. Learn about the disease, and treatment options. Discussion forums and news. Based in Buffalo NY)
A hyphen, followed by a .com, and then a colon, followed by a several sentences? Does it make sense to have the website title spelled out in the description? Its the only link on the "clinics" listing that does that. Also, there are no discussion forums I see when I enter that site despite the description saying so.
I can add more...but I assume if someone looks at these titles and descriptions, they will find whatever else is incorrect (assuming my intuition has been correct so far regarding the bad quality of this hyperhidrosis section)!
3) The part that bothers me the most is that on the main listing of seven sites, THREE are surgeon/clinic sites that advocate surgery. I maintain a ranking of ETS surgeons on my own hyperhidrosis website, and all three of these surgeons are listed in there, along with ALL the ones listed in the clinics section in the DMOZ hyperhidrosis page. In my opinion, these three sites on the main page belong in the clinics (aka surgeons) section. These three sites are the second, fifth and sixth respectively on the main page. The surgeons' who own these clinics/facilities have initials IT, FB and AG respectively. All surgeons present hyperhidrosis information on their sites, but in the end, all recommend ETS. So why are these three on the main page, while the several dozen other in the clinics page?
Maybe a better organization would be ETS surgeons instead of clinics in my opinion.
4) More basic things -- "hyperhydrosis" in the clinics section is an incorrect spelling with two y's. Some clinic descriptions have only the city name, some have city and state names, some are outside the US and only have city names (e.g., Whiteley -- Guildford and Chemsford -- sounds very English). Does DMOZ recommend consistency or is that not really a concern?
I could post more...but maybe its all futile.
