status: www.archaeologystore.com

I have submitted the site Archaeology Store [www.archaeologystore.com] for inclusion and it has been several months now and still no listing.

We offer unique items relevant to the field of Archaeology, including Marshalltown Trowels and Holsters only found on one other site on the net, and wish to be included in the following category: http://www.dmoz.org/Shopping/Recreation/Science_and_Nature/Archaeology/

Thank you

Your site has been removed from the unreviewed pool several times, most recently because you are a cafepress shop. I'm sorry to have to tell you that your site will not be listed in its current form.

You may want to read this thread or this other thread for our policies regarding cafepress/cafeshops sites.

I have reviewed the posts concerning CafePress shops. My site offers more than just the standard CafePress products. Tools and other items that are specific to my field of work (archaeology).

I would think that this fact would set my site apart from the standard CP Shop. That and the fact that I use a third party script to create a unique look.

Thank you.

I have reviewed the posts concerning CafePress shops. My site offers more than just the standard CafePress products. Tools and other items that are specific to my field of work (archaeology).

Click to expand...

I looked at your site, where are the products other than the standard cafepress products I continually see? With the exception of one trowel and one holster in the five minutes I spent looking at the site, I didn't any other unique products. I see tons of tshirts, mugs, etc that are basically the same as all the other hundreds of cafepress sites. Offering one or two unique items in a feild of non-unique items doesn't qualify the site as unique. The majority of content is still not unique and therefore the site wouldn't qualify.

It is not that this is meant to bash cafepress stores. I've seen some very cute designs, but there are just a huge mass of them so the bar for locating unique content is raised. If I were the evaluating editor I would have drawn the same conclusion. Sorry, but it just doesn't qualify for a listing at this point.