Problems Getting Listed

I have 2 sites that I tried to register over a year ago. I followed all of the guidelines very carefully and the sites are extremely worthy and respectable. I also spent much time in suggesting them to the correct category. Is there anything I can do to try to get them in? Can I resubmit.

Thanks so much for your help-

> Is there anything I can do to try to get them in?
No. The only thing you could do you have done already. You suggested the websites.
> Can I resubmit.
There is no reason to suggest them again. A suggestion will not disappear until it gets processed (reviewed) by an editor.

Working hard to find the right category is appreciated--many website owners don't bother. Which delays not only their site review but everyone else's.

And the focus on the website rather than the site suggestion is also realistic--websites without good suggestions can get listed; suggestions without a listable website don't.

However, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by 'respectable' or 'worthy'. But that doesn't so much matter. What's important is the ODP guideline. The directory lists sites with "significant unique content". A site suggestion will be more likely to be used quickly if (1) it mentions something unique about the information on the site, and (2) that unique information is especially interesting to surfers.

How do you know what's interesting to surfers? In particular, the sort of surfers who volunteer to review websites for the Open Directory? In detail, you can't. In general, they reflect the same combination of curiosity, acquisitiveness, and effort any other random collection of people would have.

Some very good advice although it's sometimes frustrating when you do everything by the book. I even applied to become an editor of a certain category and got turned down and told to choose a category with less websites in - the category submitted to had a about 3 submissions!!

It was probably not that the category was too large but rather that it was too broad -- in Regional, for example, most sites are listed at the locality level so a 3-site country-level category probably wouldn't be appropriate for a new editor.

About to throw in the Towel!

It has been since 2003 that we have tried to get listed on your site as per all your rules and we are still not there?

Got any ideas on how to get us listed? We are a national company so we are broad in our range but see our competitiors in the same catagory we have suggested our listing to go into.

KMLC

The answers above and the forum FAQ will help you.

Young Victor Boxing

Dear Sirs,
My website was listed in the "Boxing News and Media" category for years and I have discovered it has been dropped out recently and I am distressed about accidently losing my nurtured position.
My request was to include my site in the regional section as an addition.
It has been included and is at present listed in the Regional section and that is also good.
My website is more comprehensive than ever before and I don't see any reason why this should have happened.
I do a mail out when necessary to my contacts regarding some things of importance and it may have been the case as you may have been in my contact list
I considered my listing very proudly and I am very disappointed.
Running a website with what I place on mine is a very hard task and it takes a lot of effort to keep my faith in what I do.
Please reconsider my site's listing.
Best Regards and thanking you kindly for years of being listed, I have been extremely proud of that fact.
Best regards, Young Victor (Victor Aquilina)

If your site was moved to http://dmoz.org/Sports/Boxing/Regional , then the reviewing editor obviously felt that the content was most appropriate there. It wouldn't be listed in that Regional subcategory and in the News and Media subcategory. If the site only deals with a specific regional area's boxing, then that Regional category is the right place for it. News and Media would be the place for sites covering more than one country's boxing news.

Not a rocket science!

I don't know why DMOZ has made it a hype to select the right category. Duh! It's not a rocket science. The easiest thing one can do is search competitors' websites on DMOZ to see all the related categories. One can easily select the one best suit for his website.

The real problem is very late or no reply from DMOZ editors. DMOZ should open up a bit more about its policies other than Title, description and category if there is any that can affect approval process.

tkexplorer said:

I don't know why DMOZ has made it a hype to select the right category. Duh! It's not a rocket science. The easiest thing one can do is search competitors' websites on DMOZ to see all the related categories. One can easily select the one best suit for his website.

Click to expand...

It should be very easy as you describe but for many people it is to big a task. Either they are to lazy or they are not smart enough. But fact is that many websites are suggested to the wrong category. I could imagine picking a category very close what would be the best one, hey the directory is very big and complex. But picking a category that is a mile away, that I can't understand.

The real problem is very late or no reply from DMOZ editors. DMOZ should open up a bit more about its policies other than Title, description and category if there is any that can affect approval process.

Click to expand...

We will (almost) never send a reply. Our policies about which sites we will inlcude are 100% open and available for anybody to read. The major thing that will affect the approval process is the content on the website, no or not enough (unique) content means no approbal. Selecting the right category and writing a good title and description can speed up the process but will never be reason for a rejection or approval.

Some of the "big deals" about "picking the right category" are:

(1) It's the thing most site suggesters are likely to overlook. Unlike FFA link farms or classified ads sites (which often call themselves "directories"), the Open Directory classifies sites according to its guidelines, not customer request. (Webmasters aren't OUR customers, but they are the FFA/CA sites' customers.)

(2) It's the one thing that will help the editors the most. We don't really expect people to write an objective description of their own website. It's pushing the bounds of realistic expectations to expect them to admit the name of the entity owning the website. But the volunteers can fill in a website title and description easily enough. However, finding a website when you're looking for exactly that kind of websites, is a BIG help.

(3) As a result, webmasters who do suggest their interesting site to the right category will (on average) get their site listed much faster than other sites of the same class.

@tkexplorer

We do not provide status information about suggested websites. Not in the forum and certainly not through personal messages.

Please read:
the anouncement from May 2005: Discontinuation of site status checks
and our FAQ:
Why can't we ask about the status of our site suggestions anymore?

DMOZ should open up a bit more about its policies other than Title, description and category if there is any that can affect approval process.

Click to expand...

The policies are all open. Completely open. Anyone can read the editors' guidelines, which talk about reviewing sites; or even the meta editors' guidelines, which talk about reviewing editor applications!

Beyond that, there are literally tens of thousands of posts by editors, not just here but in many forums, describing how we work. The problem isn't lack of openness, the only problem is that there is so many windows that hardly anyone can look through them all.

Oh, and of course the windows are shaped to fit a directory structure. There's no point in looking for windows shaped to fit an advertising business--not being an promotional business, the directory doesn't have any place to install them.