Waiting and waiting

Hi,

I have suggested my site many times ( I DID NOT KNOW) that you do not did to sent it many times. But because it's been almost a year I thought that I have sent it to the wrong category and I re send it to other ones.
I do not know were to start now, should I keep waiting? how can I make some improvements so that my site would be listed?

Thank you very much!!!!!!!!!

(1) If the site has not been suggested for "almost a year" (and in this case a "year" really means "12 months of 30-odd days") then one more suggestion is unlikely to cause editor aggravation.

The caveat may seem odd, but you'd be amazed how many people have thought "almost a month" meant "under 4 days" (or something like that) when describing their suggestion proclivities.

(2) We don't review websites in the forums here. But the ODP standard is "unique content." And that question poses a special problem. Who could possibly know how you could add "more content that's unique"? We simply don't know, and can't know, what unique content is in your possession, that you are willing and able to publish -- but haven't.

In fact, it's kind of hard to imagine a situation where you had unique content you were willing and able to publish -- and weren't already working on publishing it!

For this reason, any discussion, ANYWHERE, about "improving a site for the ODP", is almost certain to be useless. You know more about the only relevant questions (which are: who are you, and what do you know that's not already online?) than any stranger you'll ever meet anywhere, online or off.

Thank you for your reply hutcheson,

I have started my website a year ago and since that I have been sending it every 2 or 3 months. For me almost a year did not mean "under 4 days"
May be I made a mistake the way I asked my question: improving a site for the ODP, because my content is unique, I write about my personal experiences. Even if there are other web pages writing the same issue, "my personal experiences will make it unique".
But anyway, I am sorry about the misunderstanding, when I asked about improving the site I was referring to optimization more than content. Any suggestions on that as a requirement for ODP?
Thank you! any feedback welcome.

OK, let me re-phrase. If you haven't suggested the site in the last, say, nine months, then one more suggestion won't irritate an editor, and might conceivably help an editor. If you've suggested it in that time, then there's no point in a resubmittal.

Site optimization has nothing to do with an ODP listing. It's all about content. As for site design, if a surfer can effectively use the site and quickly find its unique content, then an ODP editor can review it. I've (happily) listed some sites that I thought were horrible website designs. But the content!

I'd say that "every website is personal" -- and so the unique content always boils down to answers to a few basic questions: "who are you? what do you know? what happened to you? what have you done, and what would you do for money?"

This may be a slight exaggeration. But look at even the heavily-spammed categories: the worthwhile travel sites are by people who've traveled to the places described; the worthwhile nutrition sites are by people who have either professional degrees or long-standing, carefully-recorded personal experience; the worthwhile real-estate sites are by people with years of experience in the business; the worthwhile loan sites are from banks or credit unions or established consumer-protection organizations--all drawing on that personal knowledge and experience.

So, provided you've experienced something people might want to hear about, or you've described it in a way people might want to hear, that would count as significant content, and that's almost(*) the ONLY kind of significant content.

OK, almost. Much of what I've prepared for web publication isn't, perhaps, MY experience -- it was previously published on dead tree pulp. But I chose people who had done something new, unique, and significant, but who weren't yet represented online (such as Isaac Watts, Catherine Winkworth, J. M. Neale, etc.), and let THEIR personality speak in THEIR own words. It's my web development work, but in a very real sense THEIR personal websites. And there's still a lot of significant people whose personal work isn't yet online!

Thank you hutcheson , you’ve been really helpful.

I just want to thank this forum because is full of great information and I am learning a lot of things!.

these explanations don't always cut it

I have submitted my site to a category, lovebird breeders, there are only about 15 breeders listed and this has not changed in over a year. Now I don't really want to make accusations but is it possible that a breeder is the editor and only wants their friends listed? I know of several other breeders trying to get listed and they can't either.

The most likely reason for little or no change in the category in over a year is simply that no editor has chosen to edit in that category during that time.

Many other editors can edit there, if they choose to, not just one editor, and many editors edit more than one category.

I'm the named editor in two, small topical categories that don't see much action, but, I also edit in some very large categories, and I spend most of time working in those, that doesn't mean I'm crooked, , it just means I choose to spend my time elsewhere, .

just mine and other frustrations

I was mostly asking a question, that has been put to me several times by breeder friends that have tried to be listed, I hope you can imagine the frustration when you look at Google or Yahoo's directory on breeders and you can't get there because you must be listed on dmoz, because that is where they get the listing from, we just want to be found. When you get your programing fixed I will sign up to be an editor for the category my self then I shouldn't have a problem nor any other breeders that want to be listed. This is about all I can think of to correct what I see as a major problem and an issue of fairness.

Certainly you are welcome to apply as an editor when the form becomes available. Please keep in mind that a category (including subcategories) of about 50 sites is good. You also might find the FAQ helpful, and you might also take a look at the Editing Guidelines.

Google Directory does use ODP information, but Google Search is separate and Yahoo Directory is most certainly separate. Take a look at their submission forms, and for further information you might find one of the many webmaster forums helpful.

It sounds like the category could use some help. And surely there are more than 15 breeders around... You'd probably have to do some serious (deep) searching on Google or Yahoo search engine to find the ones that hadn't been suggested yet. (But you might enjoy that!)

Do remember, the listings are based ODP criteria, not on who "wants to be listed." That's part of OUR definition of "fair", which we'd expect you to work within.

Also note that Yahoo has their own directory not dependent on the ODP, and the search engines include many sites not on the ODP....so our influence may not be as great as you were thinking.

In the meantime, you might consider setting up an "other breeders" links page on your own site. One way or another, I would expect that information to get into the ODP.

Yahoo and Google

Yahoo and Google list several directories the come from ODP this is googles
http://www.google.com/Top/Recreation/Pets/Birds/Species/Parrots/Lovebirds/Breeders/

If you become the editor of that category, it'll be interesting to see how you handle any insinuations of editor abuse, when some other breeder doesn't get listed, .

Not a problem

I asked a question, it is your problem if you take issue with it. It sounds to me like the ODP has a problem with not enough editors and I see this as a problem if there are sites that request to be listed that meet your guidelines. There are categories that it does make a difference on google or yahoo if you are listed here, and it is not fair if you can't get listed, google won't put you in the directory and either will yahoo. I believe that as long as you have a problem google and yahoo or any other search engine should not use your directory period.

Actually you didn't ask a question, you made a thinly veiled accusation under the guise of ' I don't really want to make accusations'

It sounds to me like the ODP has a problem with not enough editors

Click to expand...

Not a 'problem' as such. We'd love to have more editors to add content they are interested in.
<added>If you have an area you are interested in, and can edit impartially, we'd love to have you join as an editor. The fact that someone else is interested in a different subject and chooses to edit that different subject is what makes the directory run. We don't force editors to edit sites they are not interested in. This can appear haphazard if you only look at a narrow slice of the directory, but editors spread out through 600,000 categories achieve a nett growth in the directory, even allowing for all the housekeeping involved in removing expired, changed, and innapropriate sites. </added>

I see this as a problem if there are sites that request to be listed that meet your guidelines

Click to expand...

I can only reiterate again we are not a listing service, so how is it a problem . If a user can find 3 listed breeders, adding a 4th, 5th, and so on is icing on the cake for them - they already have primary access to the type of site they require. There is no way to request a listing, only to suggest someone considers the site for inclusion.

There are categories that it does make a difference on google or yahoo if you are listed here, and it is not fair if you can't get listed

Click to expand...

You may believe that, it may even be true, but no one knows for sure (google affirm that DMOZ carries no more weight than any other inbound link). However we are not interested in the downstream effects of our directory, only on the usability of what we already have built.

google won't put you in the directory and either will yahoo

Click to expand...

A mish mash of part truths and patently false assumptions - Google directory is a copy of DMOZ, Yahoo directory is the closest thing we have to a competitor (as far as directories go), however neither of these are involved in the Google or Yahoo search results directly. (The use of DMOZ titles and descriptions is a display option, not part of the search function, and is a seperate issue).

I believe that as long as you have a problem google and yahoo or any other search engine should not use your directory period.

Click to expand...

Then I suggest you convince them of that. They have as much right to use DMOZ in their web crawl as you have to put content on your own web site. I'm sure if Google told you to remove your site from the web they'd get pretty short shrift from you.

jdhighland, you have a GREAT deal to learn about search engines and directories other than Yahoo--and this is not the forum for a remedial course on either Google or Yahoo. Please avoid expressing your misunderstandings of the way THEY work here. There are other forums that do a fairly good job of providing remedial information on them, but in this forum we'll focus on what its founders know best -- the ODP.

In this context, the important fact about the ODP is: it is licensed with very few restrictions and at no cost to ANYONE. Google (or Yahoo, should they ever be minded) doesn't have to tell us what they're doing with our data, and they don't have to ask if they can do it; they don't have to get our approval to stop doing it. They have the data and a license.

Since this is true, the ODP simply CANNOT be run with a view towards who's licensing the data today. It has to be run with a sole focus on the mission, which is maintaining the most comprehensive directory of the web. The attitude has to be "if we build it, they will come."

That has been the attitude and the approach, and the degree of the ODP's influence thoroughly validates that attitude and that approach. More importantly, it suggests that we should NOT change that approach for something else that has been proven to be less effective, everywhere and every time it's been tried.

jdhighland said:

I asked a question, it is your problem if you take issue with it. It sounds to me like the ODP has a problem with not enough editors and I see this as a problem if there are sites that request to be listed that meet your guidelines. There are categories that it does make a difference on google or yahoo if you are listed here, and it is not fair if you can't get listed, google won't put you in the directory and either will yahoo. I believe that as long as you have a problem google and yahoo or any other search engine should not use your directory period.

Click to expand...

If you would take the time to actually compare what the search engines use with what is currently in the ODP, you'd see that the search engines are nowhere near up to date with ODP. Here's an axample from Google : http://www.google.com/Top/Shopping/Visual_Arts/Painting/Artists/Watercolors/H

Now go to http://editors.dmoz.org/Shopping/Visual_Arts/Painting/Artists/Watercolors/H/ , the actual ODP page for the exact same category. See the difference? Google's list is at least 10 months out out of date. I know because I edit this category and I know when things were listed and when other things were DElisted.

So, statements such as, "I believe that as long as you have a problem google and yahoo or any other search engine should not use your directory period." are really irrelivant to ODP because it is the search engines that have it "wrong" according to your "rules."

Also, statements like, "There are categories that it does make a difference on google or yahoo if you are listed here, ... " really concern the search engines' choice to use ODP, even though they do not bother to keep that use up to date. So I might suggest that you take your complaint to the proper place. The search engines.

edited to correct url link.

the facts remain

This is about a category that is not being edited. There are breeders listed that have not bred for years and there is no content left on their site. When I do a search for a breeder and get this directory on yahoo or google and am looking for a breeder in my area there is none but there are 4 breeders in this area with websites, so the comment that if they find three breeders they found what they are looking for doesn't wash. I know how the search engines work or I wouldn't be in the top ten of every search that relates to my site and the fact that I already come up very well in the search engines is not relevant. This is about fairness and the fact that this has gotten so large that you can no longer keep up with editing this directory. If you want to be the most comprehensive directory on the web, does it matter to you that it may take years to catch up with all the submissions that you have waiting to be edited? Do you really think I have no right to complain if I can't get listed when I meet or exceed your guidelines. Help build the largest human-edited directory on the web should have the disclaimer "when the system works".

There are breeders listed that have not bred for years

Click to expand...

and

and there is no content left on their site.

Click to expand...

Are not the same beast at all - the first does not diminish the directory, the second does. If you know of a site with no informational content we'd appreciate being informed via the 'update listing' feature. NB that historical content is not 'no content' though.

and am looking for a breeder in my area there is none but there are 4 breeders in this area with websites, the comment that if they find three breeders they found what they are looking for doesn't wash

Click to expand...

You are correct but you have narrowed your criteria from 'breeders' to 'breeders in my area' - in which case the site is probably listed in Regional (this is one case wheree it might be listed in both a Topical and Regional category). Whilst I'd agree that having more sites listed is a good thing, I'm not at all interested in breeder sites, so why would I list them? We have editors who are very interested in this type of category and work on them extensivly, but in the areas they are interested in - if they have an aversion to horse breeders that's not stopping the growth of the directory they provide by listing cat and dog breeders, or pet fish breeders, or breeders of exotic birds. In fact if we had an editor that only wanted to list horse breeders that's their perogative, we don't want to force them to lists sites for cat breeders. The bottom line - if no one is interested enough to create/develop/maintain the category it is as represented in the directory as the public want it to be. We offer the ability to edit to those who want to improve it.

I know how the search engines work

Click to expand...

Good, but irrelevant, we do not care how, why, or even if the search engines work at all.

does it matter to you that it may take years to catch up with all the submissions that you have waiting to be edited

Click to expand...

Not only do we not have such a pool of suggestions at present, but we never expect to list most of what is suggested. It will not take years to 'catch up' with the net, because it will never happen. We don't rely on suggestions for sites to list, we list what we find, sometimes thats from suggestions, but not always, and for some editors almost never.

Do you really think I have no right to complain if I can't get listed

Click to expand...

Yes, I think you have no right as you yourself agreed when you suggested the site

I also acknowledge that Netscape and the ODP have unfettered editorial discretion to determine the structure and content of the directory and that, because a site's placement in the directory is subject to change or deletion at any time, I may not rely on any aspect of a site's inclusion in the directory

Click to expand...

Editorial Discretion
Please recognize that making the ODP a useful resource requires us to exercise broad editorial discretion in determining the content and structure of the directory. That discretion extends (but is not limited) to what sites to include, where in the directory sites are placed, whether and when to include more than one link to a site, when deep linking is appropriate, and the content of the title and description of the site. In addition, a site's placement in the directory is subject to change or deletion at any time at our sole discretion. You should not rely on any aspect of a site's inclusion in the directory. Please understand that an editor's exercise of discretion may not always treat all submissions equally. You may not always agree with our choices, but we hope you recognize that we do our best to make fair and reasonable decisions.

Click to expand...

> This is about a category that is not being edited.
That is very well possible. With the large amount of categories and the limited amount of editors it is reasonable to asume several categories will not have been edited for some period of time.

> There are breeders listed that have not bred for years and there is no content left on their site.
OK, did you report them. If not please go to the thread called "Report Hijacks, Dead Links, Inappropriate ODP Content, and other issues here ONLY" and let us know which sites and why they should be removed.

> When I do a search for a breeder and get this directory on yahoo or google
Google is a user of DMOZ data but did not update their copy of the database for almost a year. Yahoo directory has no relation with DMOZ at all. And DMOZ is not responsible for either one.

> This is about fairness
The only fairness DMOZ offers is our promise to look at every sites suggested to us. We never promised to do that within a certain timeframe and we never promised to list all of these sites.

> does it matter to you that it may take years to catch up with all the submissions that you have waiting to be edited?
No, it does not. The task of an editor is not to review suggested sites but to build the directory. And we are still doing that faster than any other directory. Maybe not in specific subjects but we look at the directory as a whole.

> Do you really think I have no right to complain
Yes, we think you have no right to complain.
You would have a right if DMOZ was offering you some service related to reviewing and/or listing webistes. But we don't have such a service.