F
fdwilk1
Please give the status of http://www.directory-of-plastic-surgeons.com submitted to www.dmoz.org/health/medicine/surgery/cosmetic_and_plastic/directories.
Thank you.
Thank you.
F
fdwilk1
Thank you for your reply. I have a comment and a question:
THis is the only site I have found that supplies the list of surgeons in such a way as to be able to scroll one page to see all the physicians.
If I add more unique content (I still need to supply the list of doctors to fullfil the purpose of the site), can I re-submit the site for review?
Thanks
THis is the only site I have found that supplies the list of surgeons in such a way as to be able to scroll one page to see all the physicians.
If I add more unique content (I still need to supply the list of doctors to fullfil the purpose of the site), can I re-submit the site for review?
Thanks
John_Caius
Member
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2003
- Messages
- 584
How does your content differ from the content provided by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, which is already listed in that category?
F
fdwilk1
I am glad you asked about this site in particular. If a user wants to see ALL the plastic surgeons in a major city, they must use "next page" several times, giving a disadvantage to physicians in the later part of the alphabet. Also with my pages being static html, as opposed to dynamic from a database, the search engines can do a better job of indexing. We already have over 400 pages indexed by Google and every day we are able to help 20 - 50 web surfers looking for a specific surgeon by doing a name search. Also, I believe it is easier for visitors to click on a link to a city rather than keying the name of the city.
To sum it up, we offer better navigation and better indexing. If someone does the more typical search of "Plastic Surgeons in Tampa" they can find our site and go directly to the Tampa page of surgeons. With the site you asked about, you have to go through the process of filling in the search form and then you are just presented 10 names at a time.
My reason for desiring to be in ODP is to rank better in the search engines therefore serving more searchers looking for plastic surgeons in a specific city.
Thank your for your assistance.
Doug Wilkinson
To sum it up, we offer better navigation and better indexing. If someone does the more typical search of "Plastic Surgeons in Tampa" they can find our site and go directly to the Tampa page of surgeons. With the site you asked about, you have to go through the process of filling in the search form and then you are just presented 10 names at a time.
My reason for desiring to be in ODP is to rank better in the search engines therefore serving more searchers looking for plastic surgeons in a specific city.
Thank your for your assistance.
Doug Wilkinson
Yes, it's the content that counts, not the presentation. Given the same content, we'd look for authoritiveness (and obviously the official site gets the nod over a copy).
As a website designer, I appreciate your concern for ease of use. As a website reviewer, I look more favorably and more deeply at a well-designed site, and am therefore more likely to find something worth listing. But ... as an ODP editor, what I'm fighting through your navigation to find is ... unique CONTENT. Not presentation, not format, not promotion.
I don't want to seem like "piling on", but you aren't the first (or the million and first) person to misunderstand the ODP guidelines that way. And it may not be altogether a moral fault in you that you did: the marketing industry has a very different notion of what constitutes "content." If you had been exposed to marketroids at a tender age, you could leap to the conclusion that we used their definition.
So it's worth repeating, on every opportunity: we don't. OUR concept of content is "information."
This even applies to sites from commercial and retail entities. Joe Schmoe is the authoritative source of all information about the menu at "Shmoe's Bar and Grille." And as such, a website he creates or commissions is uniquely authoritative information about that business.
The information may be provided solely with a view toward selling sandwiches, and so its advertising value may be critical to him, but it's absolutely nothing to us. So we list it (for one reason) and he's happy (for another.)
Now, John Doe creates a site with affiliate links to his favorite books at amazon.com. John is creating this site solely to promote sales of a product -- but that is no concern at all of ours. We already list amazon.com, and Mr. Doe has no authority to speak for them; we prefer to let amazon speak for themselves. john-doe-books.com gets rejected with contempt. And it doesn't matter a whit how attractive or useful his presentation is.
As a website designer, I appreciate your concern for ease of use. As a website reviewer, I look more favorably and more deeply at a well-designed site, and am therefore more likely to find something worth listing. But ... as an ODP editor, what I'm fighting through your navigation to find is ... unique CONTENT. Not presentation, not format, not promotion.
I don't want to seem like "piling on", but you aren't the first (or the million and first) person to misunderstand the ODP guidelines that way. And it may not be altogether a moral fault in you that you did: the marketing industry has a very different notion of what constitutes "content." If you had been exposed to marketroids at a tender age, you could leap to the conclusion that we used their definition.
So it's worth repeating, on every opportunity: we don't. OUR concept of content is "information."
This even applies to sites from commercial and retail entities. Joe Schmoe is the authoritative source of all information about the menu at "Shmoe's Bar and Grille." And as such, a website he creates or commissions is uniquely authoritative information about that business.
The information may be provided solely with a view toward selling sandwiches, and so its advertising value may be critical to him, but it's absolutely nothing to us. So we list it (for one reason) and he's happy (for another.)
Now, John Doe creates a site with affiliate links to his favorite books at amazon.com. John is creating this site solely to promote sales of a product -- but that is no concern at all of ours. We already list amazon.com, and Mr. Doe has no authority to speak for them; we prefer to let amazon speak for themselves. john-doe-books.com gets rejected with contempt. And it doesn't matter a whit how attractive or useful his presentation is.