status of www.downingteal.com & www.dtworkforce.com

Hi,

A while ago I submitted two sites:

www.downingteal.com
in the directory area:
http://www.dmoz.org/Business/Energy_and_Environment/Oil_and_Gas/Industry_Resources/

and

www.dtworkforce.com
in the area: http://www.dmoz.org/Business/Energy_and_Environment/Oil_and_Gas/Industry_Resources/

I just wanted to know if they are still in the queue, or have been reviewed yet?

Thanks,

Kathleen Balson
Itomic
Itomic Web Design Perth

Um, those are the same category and I can find neither submission awaiting review in it. Nor have they been reviewed. Since both sites belong to the same business, at most only one of them is permitted a listing, presumably http://www.downingteal.com/ as it appears to be the main site.

Please feel free to resubmit it, once, to the most appropriate category, and then return here in a month for another status update.

Hi,

Actually, they are separate businesses, so they should be able to each have their own listing, shouldn't they?

I'll submit them both again today.
Thanks,
Kathleen

Hi,
Any progress? I hope they actually submitted properly this time...
Thanks
Kathleen

OOps, just saw Downing Teal has been added. However DT Workforce is an independent company with its own website, so would it be considered for its own listing?
DT Workforce is owned by Downing Teal but is definitely run independently with its own specialisations and own offices and everything.
Thanks

So long as it's owned by the same people and on the same subject, we consider it a "related site."

Read about submitting "related sites" in the ODP submittal policies.

I'm really sorry to drag on about this... but I've looked at your submission guidelines again, and I really don't see any breach.

1) In the guidelines there is no specific statement about related sites. So there's nothing I can see that it's breaching at all.
2) It's not like once a site on a subject is included, no other site can be included that provides similar information.
3) These sites and companies are totally independent. They have different business numbers, they provide different recruitment services, for different industries, and most importantly, their content is different. One site provides a database of blue collar jobs, one provides a database of white collar jobs. There is no overlap in information here. They don't exist as the same company, they are run from different locations in different offices by different people.
4) In my opinion a good example of the kind of breach of guidelines you're suggesting is that of coke. In the Open Directory there is a link to http://www.coca-cola.com.au/.
But there is also a link to http://www.dietcoke.com/.
Both these sites and companies are owned by Coca Cola. They exist independently - although they sell essentially a related product, to a related market. So in my opinion you guys are flaunting the rule you've just cited.

If you still feel the sites are related, maybe I could get a third opinion here?

Thank you,
Kathleen

Thirded. That you've spread your website over multiple domain names doesn't entitle it to multiple listings in ODP.

Thirded. That you've spread your website over multiple domain names doesn't entitle it to multiple listings in ODP.


I understand where you're coming from but the fact is that the site has not been spread over multiple domain names. Had it been, I would accept that it was a breach.

The point I made was that a website for a company owned by Coke (Diet Coke) can be listed, as well as the Coke website, but a website that is by a company owned by Downing Teal, but is also individual, and doesn't provide duplicate content in any way, cannot be listed.

If you look at the facts there is no breach.
- Downing Teal does own DT Workforce, but it has its own business name, business number, premises, clients, job database, administration... in no way is this the same company
- DT Workforce is currently competing with Downing Teal in the search engines, they are after very similar markets, just like Diet Coke and Coke.
- DT Workforce's site provides its own unique content, so it's not a case of the same site on two domains

In each of these I would say it's a parallel to Coke and Diet Coke (or better - I'm sure Diet Coke runs out of Coke's offices). And if they're not breaching the rule, how is DT Workforce?

If you can give me a reason for that I will accept it 100%, but as yet I've seen no proof of a breach of your guidelines.

Thank you

Thank you for mentioning Coca Cola - it appears that some listings for them may be incorrect,and it is being looked at.