My Status

[ironhacker]

Can't explain why did you declined me?

 

I applyed to be an editor, but the reviewer's comments for declineing me were:

 

Site descriptions have too much hype.

 

What does this mean??

[Alucard]

Definition of hype:

1. Excessive publicity
   
2. Exaggerated or extravagant claims made especially in advertising or promotional material
   
3. Something deliberately misleading; a deception
   

In the ODP guidelines, we explicitly say that descriptions should be factual descriptions of the site, and should not contain any hype.

 

Therefore, using phrases like "the best", "leading", "cheapest", "fantastic", "quaint", "and more" and use of exclamation points ("!") are not compliant with the guidelines.

 

I have not seen your application, so I don't know specifically what you wrote, but those are some examples.

 

In case you haven't seen it, check out http://dmoz.org/guidelines/describing.html#descriptions which talks about how to write ODP-compliant descriptions for sites.

 

Hope this helps and that it will encourage you to reapply.

[ironhacker]

I get it. Thanks Now if someone can just help write a nice description, not a hype one. Here's what it's:

 

The ultimate site for all the new programs to watch and create digital movies plus guides that can help you encode your own movies. Search, download fast and easy.

 

I don't like it, but I can't think of a new one. I will be very gladful if someone helps me.

[hutcheson]

Roll eyes, fur sure.

 

Try it for yourself, before we help you.

 

Read that again, and scratch out EVERY SINGLE WORD that ANY of your COMPETITORS would disagree with. Instead, make it a description that any one of your competitors could write.

 

Then go back and scratch out EVERY SINGLE WORD that says anything at all good about your site. Site descriptions assume that all sites listed are good for something, otherwise they wouldn't be there.

 

Then go back and scratch out EVERY SINGLE command telling us what to do. We don't like it. We don't tell people what to do, we tell them what's on ALL the sites, not just yours, and we don't care which, if any, of the sites they actually go to. They are free to choose.

 

Then scratch out everything that you don't know is true, or that a reviewer couldn't possibly know is true, or that may not be true tomorrow.

 

Then we'll go from there.

[brmehlman]

Good advice, to which I'd like to add one small point: While you've got that eraser in hand, remove also anything that is already obvious from the name of the category.

[ironhacker]

So I red everything there and came up with this:

 

AllDivX.net

 

Contains all kinds of downloadble digital video software. Including players, codecs, other divx related tools, news, skins, guides and a discussion forum.

 

Can it get better?

[leer]

Good spelling is always an advantage

[enarra]

It's not a listable description. It still contains hype, and keyword stuffing (repeating redundant words for the purposes of getting higher placement in search engines).

[ironhacker]

How about this?

 

AllDivX.net

 

Contains numerous digital video software. Including players, codecs, other divx related tools, news, skins, guides and a discussion forum.

[hutcheson]

A "discussion" forum?

 

As opposed to, maybe, a non-discussion forum? What else do you do in forums?

 

A clue: whenever you see "foos, bars, and other bazzes" in a description, you KNOW you can just remove "foos, bars, and other", and the sentence will still mean exactly the same thing.

 

The same rule applies when you see "all kinds of bazzes, including foos and bars". Just cross out "all kinds of", and "including foos and bars".

 

If the site included NO kinds of bazzes EXCEPT foos and bars, we'd just say "including foos and bars." If the site included "foos, bars, bazzes, and bins", we'd probably look for a generic term for all of them, and just say that.

 

Any absolute phrases get whacked right off. And "all kinds of" is one of those phrases that stands up and says, "hyposuction squad needed in aisle ten."

 

But that's all pretty straightforward, and close to describing content on the site. Enough, at any rate, to begin looking at the site.

 

Now we'd look for UNIQUE content: are those programs already available elsewhere? If so, is this site the official source? If not, then it's not unique content, it's just clutter. Is the forum really on a unique subject? Is is really active, or would surfers be better served to not see this site, and instead be directed to a more active or authoritative interactive site? Is the news copied? if not, is it really substantive, and is there a track record to show that some sustained reporting process is firmly in place?

 

Any part of the site's content could fail the sanity check: we'd whack it out of the description, and go on to check the other parts. But after three or four parts, if there were nothing, we might well just dump the site altogether -- our job is to help surfers find content, not send them on a scavenger hunt through a morass of recycled bits. We wouldn't so much use the suggested description as take it for a guide when looking through the site for content.

 

So if you have a mixture of original and plagiarized content, you can help the site by featuring the original content prominently in the description, and saving the non-unique stuff for the back pages. We don't mind non-unique stuff -- most of us have posted some ourselves -- but what gets a site a listing in the ODP is actual value, not mirror images thereof.

[ironhacker]

You can't find unique content on divx sites. Those programs are available in all other divx sites. All the divx sites are quite the same. Instead of searching on 10 other sites for a program, guide, skin etc. our website will have it all. Copied or not, all the content will be important. Look at your directory for instance, the websites in it have very much in common. http://dmoz.org/Computers/Multimedia/MPEG/DivX/ and the words "discussion forum" are used twice. It really sounds better than just a forum.

[DigiGuy]

You can"]http://dmoz.org/Computers/Multimedia/MPEG/DivX/[/url] and the words "discussion forum" are used twice[/b']. It really sounds better than just a forum.

it may sound better but it isn't always correct.

 

If you want to have two words what about "message boards"

 

 

What i'd use.

 

Download site providing DivX players, codecs, tools, news, skins, guides and forums.

 

I could possibly improve it more but that should be a good guide.

[thehelper]

Check it out -

 

Offers digital video software.

 

lol - i have not looked at the site but that is a no hype description don't you think?

[enarra]

Check it out -

 

Offers digital video software.

 

lol - i have not looked at the site but that is a no hype description don't you think?

 

(No hype but those are the three keywords he wants)

[ironhacker]

Ok, so DigyGuy's was too long and thehelper's was too short. So I made a mix and here's what happened.

 

Offers divx software, news, skins, guides and forums.

 

Like it? I made it as short as possible.

[thehelper]

Now that is a dmoz.org compliant description.

[ironhacker]

Now that is a dmoz.org compliant description.

 

Thanks

 

Now I have some questions. The first is: Can you resend the information I entered so I don't have to erite everything again? (Name: Ignat Chakarov Email: admin@alldivx.net) and If I understood right I can't post my site in the last 3 URLs right?

[jimnoble]

I'm afraid not. Once an application has been denied, it's no longer available within the system.

 

You can include your own site as a candidate URL

[ironhacker]

Thanks, Jim. Ok, now I'll post my application. And by the way how can I become an editor for more categories?

[hutcheson]

Do a good job with the first category, and read the internal forums on that very subject.

[ironhacker]

Do a good job with the first category, and read the internal forums on that very subject.

 

I have another last question. Can I edit the other 2 URLs' description? I mean if the real description is different, but I write what I think it would be.

[arubin]

What do you mean by "edit" ... the description?

 

You should write as descriptions for the sites (including your own -- although I thought I recalled reading that you couldn't use your own site as one of the three) what ODP wants for a description. This may not resemble what the site owners would want as description or what they have on the home page. You describe what's there, in the format we want, not what the owner thinks is there or what the owner would like to be there.

 

Sorry. I just cleaned out a Real Estate category in one of my Regional sections.

[lissa]

Your application should contain 2 or 3 (preferably three, especially if one of them is your own site) URLs not already listed in the category that would fit. You should then write a concise description for each of them, using the same process we just ran through, and use that on the application.

 

Hope that clarifies.

[enarra]

That description isn't completely perfect though since you applied to Computers/Multimedia/MPEG/DivX which means that "DivX" should not be in any description unless the sentence makes no sense without it (that should be rare). Unfortunately the descriptions that were already in the category didn't follow that guideline, so I just changed them all. If you're accepted you'll have to update your description to remove the word too.

 

We have this rule because saying a site is about DivX is redundant when it's in the DivX category.

[giz]

>> Can I edit the other 2 URLs' description? <<

 

 

Ummm, you're applying to be an editor aren't you?

 

That is one of the things that editors do; they edit titles and descriptions!