Some site additions has not been added

Hi -

I recently added 5 sites in dmoz directory (in 5 diferent languages).
Unfortunately the sites has not been added.

The sites are:

http://www.emagister.net
http://www.emagister.de
http://www.emagister.it
http://www.emagister.biz
http://www.emagister.pt

Is there any way to know what is the state of this additions ??
I have added this sites 2 months ago.

Any help would be appreciated.

Best regards

Enric Ramos

No, there is not a way, check out our Announcements Forum for some of the background.

By the way, is there some reason you submitted non-functioning URLs? It DOES give you a bad reputation as a submitter, you know. And it IS against the submittal policy.

Today this sites are in "maintenance".
(the first time in 2 years)

Anyway: Thanks for your response.

Do you think it's "acceptable" if I resubmit the urls another time ?? Or it's better to wait some time more in order to see is the sites are added ??

Funny coincidence, picking the one day in two years the sites are down, to ask about their status.

I do not recommend ever submitting more than twice, six months apart. I would not recommend submitting within three months after a "site maintenance event".

It should be obvious what could happen. Remember, editors are not your dogs, pavlovian-trained to jump whenever you click a button. If an editor sees a submittal that another editor has just recently rejected -- what's the need for a re-review?

So don't ever submit close to a time that the site could have been rejected for obvious causes. Similarly, don't ever submit right after the site has had major content additions or changes -- the new submittal could be deleted out of hand as a spammy duplicate of the old, and any future submittals tainted by a reputation as a spammer. (Obviously this is not a major concern for us -- the folks who want to submit right after a rejection are spammers, pure and simple.)

It all comes down to basic human thoughtfulness. If a site has been submitted, what more can you do that would HELP the editor? And what more that you do that DOESN'T help the editor, would cause a FAVORABLE influence?

Get the site working, submit, wait many months, maybe submit again, get on with life. Most submittals do not result in a listing, and that's OK. You could be waiting forever -- or you could be out somewhere else doing something useful.

Granted, four of the five sites are down, but my initial reaction to this request was that this is really just five differnt version of the same site -- perhaps five different languages.

Unless the content is vastly, vastly different; agriculture, shoes, automobiles, web design, real estate then we really only want to see one of these sites becaue they are what we call fraternal mirrors. They are kissing cousins, and as such, we probably only want to see one of them.

Added:

I've done a bit mroe research, and the five URLs are really all the same site in different languages.

It is our very strong preference that you submit only one of these sites, and ahve navigation to the other languages. we would list the root URL is the appropiate World categories but really dislike listing separate URLs.

If a site is down when I review it for the first time, i.e. not a site that has once been listed and therefore has a history of actually existing, 9 out of 10 times I will personally reject it immediately. Some editors will give them a second chance if you are lucky. I might make an exception for a school or a church or a government institution. My reasons are that the guidelines are very clear about not submitting sites under construction. You might argue that the site wasn't under construction when it was submitted but how would I know that and we're looking for stable sites; it is very simple these days for sites to be redeveloped offline leaving a working site visible at all times. The other alternative is that if content has to be down for some technical reason, make sure there is a date on the announcement and the planned return of the content. That way, assuming the gap is short, there is an offchance I might be inclined to give the benefit of doubt that it was there and is coming back. I don't think that kind of reasoning is unusual amongst editors. The alternative is that pools of unreviewed sites are clogged with sites under construction with no indication they ever did or ever will exist.

But in this case I have to wonder if we are being gamed because it is amazingly curious that four of the five sites on the same domain "just happen" to be down, because if they were up it would be crystal clear that they are fraternal mirrors.

I may be dumb, but I'm not stupid.

Thanks for all the answers

Hi -

I just want to thanks all the answers to my cuestion.
My intention is not to SPAM, and to take in mind seriously all the DMOZ rules.

I know that all the sites I have submitted are "mirrors" (in quotes (in fact, the only difference is the language)... but I thought that it's enough in order to add as different sites in "world" section of DMOZ.

I think that there is an advantage for people from different countries if they have an entry of eMagister in their own language...

As I can understend in some answers to my cuesiton... this is not "absolutely" right.

Sorry for this inconvenience.

I would like to say also that the reason of the maintance state was not to hide the fact that all the sites are the same... and the only difference are the language (as some editor that has answer my cuestion says).

Well, keeping in mind all the answers...

- www.emagister.biz has been added to DMOZ site (appart from www.emagister.com).
Maybe it's better to delete this record, and maintain only the main one (www.emagister.com)

What do you think about this ??

Another time: Thanks to all for this response.

Regards

Enric

P.D: Maybe I am not absolutely agree with the rule of add only the main site... But I am willing to respect all the DMOZ rules in order to help DMOZ to construct a very good site directory.

Sure, I'm not trying to spam or to lie anybody adding more entries than needed.