www.melbournecup.com was removed from directory

Hello,

I am the marketing supervisor for www.melbournecup.com and as mentioned in another thread/section of this forum.

I believe that this website was removed for technical reasons but would like to justify my thoughts.

Any help would be much appreciated.

Regards,
Impact

It would have been helpfull if you told us in which category the saite was listed.

In our logs I found that it was deleted from http://dmoz.org/Sports/Equestrian/Racing/Tracks/Famous_Races and from http://dmoz.org/Regional/Oceania/Australia/Victoria/Recreation_and_Sports/Horse_Racing .
This was not done for technical reasons. The editor that checked the site noticed it did not comply to our guidelines. These guidelines can be found at http://dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html .

Thank You PVGool & sorry for not saying which category I was listed I will remember for future referencing.

I have checked my website and I tend to disagree with the editor that removed me. My website does comply with your guidelines and I have re-submitted it for re-reviewing.

What do you suggest my next step be? It is very important that I be listed in the http://www.dmoz.org/Sports/Equestrian/Racing/Tracks/Famous_Races/ category again asap and I do not want to annoy the editors so please any help would be VERY much appreciated.

Regards,
Impact

Next step after suggesting a site is always: wait
You are allowed to ask for status 1 month after you made the suggestion.
But based on the reason given on the previous delisting I doubt the site will be listed in its current form.

I have since made major changes to the website...Have you checked it to see if it has changed since the editor removed the site?

Impact

>It is very important that I be listed in the ... category again asap

We claim the right to define our own priorities: it is therefore better not to discuss specific priorities at all in these forums.

>Have you checked it to see if it has changed since the editor removed the site?
pvgool has kindly repeated the forum policies regarding status requests. It is better to comply on your own initiative.

I have re-submitted my website.. I will keep you all posted on how the site actually goes.

Thanks Hutcheson and pvgool...

Just writing to check the submission status of the domain www.melbournecup.com it was submitted to this directory - http://dmoz.org/Sports/Equestrian/Racing/Tracks/Famous_Races/

Thank you for your time

Regards,
Impact

Your submission is waiting for review by a volunteer editor. If you do not see it listed before then, you may check again in 6 months. (bookmark this thread please)

Hello,

I have a website that is of great service to your Famous Races category that will fill out this section.

I submitted my website in September 2004 - in the category of - http://dmoz.org/Sports/Equestrian/Racing/Tracks/Famous_Races/

I am yet to hear from any editors or had my site added/reviewed (as far as I can tell). Are you able to give me some closure on this Please.

I am not going to sit here and plead my case as to why my website is a good site etc but I just want you to know that there are great things in store for this website over the next twelve months.

Thank You

Status updates are given once every six months, so we will be happy to serve you on or after April 5th. Please come back to this thread then, if you don't find your site listed by then.

Hello,

I have a website that is of great service to your Famous Races category that will fill out this section.

I submitted my website in September 2004 - in the category of - http://dmoz.org/Sports/Equestrian/R...s/Famous_Races/

I am yet to hear from any editors or had my site added/reviewed (as far as I can tell). Are you able to give me some closure on this Please.

I am not going to sit here and plead my case as to why my website is a good site etc but I just want you to know that there are great things in store for this website over the next twelve months.

Thank You

Status: No one has touched your site, it continues to await review.

I am yet to hear from any editors

Click to expand...

you won't hear from any editors. We don't do e-mail or any type of notifications.

Are you able to give me some closure on this

Click to expand...

We don't really do closure, but your current status is noted above, and you are welcome to return to this forum in six months for another update.

I just want you to know that there are great things in store for this website over the next twelve months.

Click to expand...

To be blunt: we could care less. We do care about your site on the instant that we review it. There is only that moment. There is no yesterday, there is no tomorrow. We could build a stairway to the moon on promises we have heard of future content, but for our customers (the people who use or directory) there is an expectation that any site we list will:

1.) comply with our guidelines
2.) offer unique content
3.) be complete.

I took an 18-second look at your site in preparing this reply and can tell you that if it were to be reviewed right now, in all likelihood it would be declined for the same reason it was declined more than a year ago.

You may have have embarked on an ambitious redesign, but the fundamental flaw that cuased you to be delisted more than a year ago still remains.

Well then, I waited 6 months to get a reply which was - No one has touched your site, it continues to await review.

Are you able to tell me why my site was removed (not declined)? I cannot see anything on my website that is against your guidelines and the site is complete.

Are you able to tell me why my site was removed (not declined)?

Click to expand...

No we can't - becasue it was not removed or declined [both mean the same thing] since you submitted it. No one said it was against any guidelines, since no editor has reviewed it. Please read the forum FAQ regarding time frames for site reviews.

Thanks Bobrat.

Well I am not an editor, but seeing as no one else has pointed it out and to save you wasting your time.
"Don't submit sites consisting largely of affiliate links."
Also we are now in 2005, not 2004.