Update Status http://www.unmuessig-timber.com/

Hi,

in May 2003 i submitted this URL:

http://www.unmuessig-timber.com/

at this Category:

http://dmoz.org/Business/Agriculture_and_Forestry/Forestry_Products_and_Equipment/Import_and_Export/

After some weeks it was added.

But as a description you wrote: "Importer and exporter of timber and lumber."

This is too much in general.

As you know, some Search engines take care about the description of a site at ODP. If the important keywords are missing, the ranking in those search engines is not that well. And Google is one of them.

So i tried to update the entry in September 2003 with this Title and Description:

Title: Unmuessig Timber

Description: Supplies beech, oak and other European hardwoods, sawn timber as well as logs or lumber.

Till now nothing happend

If you could update the description with our text, this would be great

Thanks a lot and greetings from the Black Forest in Germany!

Rolf Goering

Your update request of Sep 15 is waiting in the category. The editors are instructed not to pay attention to possible page ranks and keyword issues in Google and other users of our data, so that is not a reason to update the description I'm afraid. On the other hand, it appears to me that the description of your site is much less specific than that of most of the other listings, and that could be a reason to update the description, to help the user find what they are looking for in the directory.

In any case, your request is waiting together with a small number of other sites. If you don't see any change within a calendar month, you can return and ask for status in this thread again, if you like.

I looked at this straightaway, since (based on your proposed description and the result, I surmised that what might have happened was:

1) submitter submitted a generously keyword-stuffed description (which you admit was an ulterior motive, and which to us is viscious abuse.)

2) first editor (I thought it might even have been me) stripped out all the obvious keywording, and left it to another editor (who hadn't been made nauseous by the keywording) to do an unbiassed review.

3) second editor clicked through on the minimalist description, without considering whether some more specific text might have been useful.

Well, that wasn't what had happened. But I was in the neighborhood, so I put most of what you asked for in.

For the record, Zillions of people do what you did: "supplies gadgets such as widgets, grommets, and fidgets") or "supplies fidgets, widgets, grommets, and other gadgets" or even "supplies fidgets, widgets, and grommets").

We ought to, and often do, convert all of those forms to "supplies gadgets."

<added>
I should mention in my defense, it was a short unreviewed queue, and I reviewed them all. We have to lean over backwards to keep people from getting the idea that we review sites quicker because they've been mentioned in these forums. We don't, we can't, and we really really can't afford to.
</added>