Requested update to description, and editor changed title!?!?

Hi,

We've been listed on DMOZ for more than two years, and decided our site description could be updated to better describe our site. A rather reasonable request. The change requested was completely within the guidelines set forth by DMOZ (as was our original request years ago).

The change request for the description was entered and the update posted quickly, within several days apparently.

The problem:

The editor changed the title from the site name, which is also the business name and domain name (and accurately describes the line of business) to that of it's parent company, which of itself, has nothing to do with the retail line of business and does not, itself, have a website. The only place the parent company is ever mentioned is on our About Us page. To make matters worse, the editor mis-spelled his/her own description (not the one we submitted), which was also more misleading than our original two plus year old description!

Another update request was sent to change the title back to what it should be, and to change the decidedly misleading and mis-spelled description. Within one hour, the only thing changed were the mis-spellings.

The associated DMOZ directory is as follows:
Shopping: Consumer Electronics: Accessories: Cables

How can we get our title back to what it is supposed to be and the description changed to what we intended? By the way, a third request was submitted immediately. But this time, after three hours, no changes.

Thanks in advance for your responses and potential remedies to this strange situation,

Tesla

When processing an update request, it's routine for editors to re-evaluate the website and ensure that the category is correct, the title is correct and the description is guidelines compliant. It would seem that that's what happened in this case.

The title should be the company name.

We don't expect website owners to be familiar with our Editing Style Guidelines and it's not unusual for their suggested descriptions to be rewritten.

Unusually for this forum, I took the trouble to look at your listing and it meets our guidelines. It might not meet your promotional requirements but they aren't our objective. I'd say that any significant change is unlikely.

Hello Jim, and thank you for such a quick response.

Responding to your statement "The title should be the company name", that's where the problem is with the editors update.

The title was the company name and was correct until the edit!

The title, prior to the change, is the official, registered business name of the web site. It is not the name currently shown as the title.

Please check any of the "business verified" links found on the website, including the SSL certificate. You will find they are registered correctly to the separate business name associated with the website, not the parent company.

When we look at the OD title guidelines we find the following:

Do give the official name of the site as the title. Generally, the title will be obvious and prominently displayed on the site.

The official name is displayed on all 2500+ pages and is also the domain name. The parent company is displayed only several times on the About Us page and itself does not have a web presence.

Do give the official name of the business or entity as the title, if the site is about the business, organization, or other entity (e.g. a company's home page).

With the editors change, the title no longer represents the above.

Do contain the full form and acronym if the business, organization or other entity is known by both, and both are used on the site.

Not applicable.

Do derive a concise title from the site's contents if the title is ambiguous or would give the appearance of spam.

The title appears considerably more ambiguous using the editors change.

Do have the first letter of each word in the title capitalized, except for articles, prepositions or conjunctions unless they begin the site title or a new part of a compound title.

The old, correct title was two words, both capitalized (as is the business name).

Thanks again for your time and consideration (and quick response!).

Tesla

An after thought: Are you sure you looked at the correct entry?

Are you sure you looked at the correct entry?

Click to expand...

Oh yes.

Perhaps it was a mistake to say so in a forum which has the description Forum for discussions about the process of suggesting a site for inclusion. General discussion only, no mention of specific sites here please.

Jim,

I'm not sure where the misunderstanding is here.

As you mentioned in your first response "The title should be the company name". That's why I asked the question "are you sure?", since I never mentioned the site or company name.

The bottom line to my commentary is:
As it now reads in the OD, it is not the company name, and has nothing to do with an accurate title of the site. Are you seeing something different? If so, feel free to PM me so we may briefly discuss any details.

Thanks,

tesla

p.s. A sample analogy: a brewing company owns or operates a number of businesses. All have their own legal separate business names, one of which is a baseball team. One would not logically place "ABC Brewing" as the title, and have the description read "Professional baseball team playing in the Northwest Division". The same holds true for the edit change being discussed. In our case, the "parent" company line of business (service oriented) has no direct relation to the subsidiary (website retail) company line of business. The change by the editor actually made the listing title irrelevant to the description, or the business directly.

That's why I asked the question "are you sure?", since I never mentioned the site or company name.

Click to expand...

Never be surprised by the prescience and forensic capabilities of meta editors .

Seriously though, we won't debate or negotiate the details of an individual listing here so please stop trying to.

jimnoble said:

Never be surprised by the prescience and forensic capabilities of meta editors .

Click to expand...

Understood. As a network engineer by profession, the forensic capabilities of hardware and applicable software never surprises me. The capabilities of the end user on the other hand sometimes does.

Sorry that you are considering this to be a debate. I'm trying, so far unsuccessfully it seems, in pointing out a severe discrepancy between dmoz guidelines and an entry by an editor, which is completely obvious.

Again, here's one of your own replies:
"The title should be the company name."

It was. Then, the editor changed it, so now it is not. For what it's worth to anyone searching DMOZ, the title might as well be "ABC Brewing", which also has nothing to do with the site!

What we had before was title = business name = url. The editor errantly changed the title due to one sentence on one page of a 2500+ page website plastered with the correct name/title! The title, as it currently stands, bears no relationship to the website, it's content or the business.

Who do I contact to rectify this situation and have the title changed back to what accurately represents the website and business?

Thanks,

tesla

To repeat what jimnoble has already reminded you:

we won't debate or negotiate the details of an individual listing here so please stop trying to.

Click to expand...

Everyone is welcome to suggest changes to any listing via the Update Request feature. A volunteer will review the suggestion at some stage and consider the request in light of current guidelines.
As with all editing activities, there is no time frame for this.

Please do not keep asking for special attention or expedited action.

markrhod,

This will be my last post on the subject in this forum, simply to reply to your recommendation with my acknowledgement and a very brief explanation.

I understand the standard review policy and appreciated the fact that Jim took the time to immediately look into this. I just don't understand the logic of the title change since it didn't follow...well logic (or guidelines), that's all. Without changing the title back, it's simply innaccurate.

Anyways, the webmaster has removed the two occasions where the "parent company" shows up on the one page of the 2500+ page site. This should avoid any potential issue or confusion for the next DMOZ editor.

I will enter another "change request" for the title.

Thanks, and have a pleasant afternoon.

tesla

Tesla, I want to apologize for the unhelpfull behaviour of my fellow editors. Although they are right that R-Z is not intended for discussing individual sites it sometimes is IMHO right to forget these guidelines and help someone with a legitimate question.

If the situation is as you described the title is to my opinion changed incorrectly. But. I am not able to verify this. Your websites is unavailable for me. It also was unavailable some 12 hours ago and both in IE and Chrome. robots.txt and googlesitemaps files are available but non of the pages mentioned in the sitemaps (well, the few I tried) are reachable for me. All give 404 error.
On the other had I know jimnoble as a very good editor. If he looked at your website and came to the conclusion that the change of title was appropriate I am sure he is right. It might not seem logical to you but it is according to DMOZ guidelines. The guidelines have been created trying to handle all situations and are many times influenced by actions of not so honest people trying to bend them. As a result some editors treat them as written in stone rules instead of guidelines which may result in what look like illogic actions. Certainly when you look ate other sites listed in the same category. I checked 5 websites and 3 of them did not have the company name as title.

Three Four different meta editors have looked into this situation and there have also been two public abuse reports - both resolved as not abuse.

Amending a website to conceal important information doesn't impress either.

The case and this thread are now closed. Please do not start another thread about the same website.