App Status: Fashezee

[fashezee]

I applied for the category:

Top: Regional: North America: Canada: Quebec: Localities: M: Montreal: Business and Economy: Restaurants and Bars: Directories

[fashezee]

Application Re-Submit - is it possible

 

I applied:

 

opendir - be980e37374e663eb309729bf031bcd8

 

However the links I provided seem to be inadequate. Can I re-submit my application with new links?

[jimnoble]

Re: Application Re-Submit - is it possible

 

But of course. No problem <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

[lissa]

Re: Application Re-Submit - is it possible

 

However, you have to fill out an entire new application. The system doesn't save the old one, so you can't modify or append to it. (If that was your question.)

[fashezee]

refused - please review

 

Directory:

http://www.dmoz.org/Regional/North_America/Canada/Quebec/Localities/M/Montreal/

 

I applied for the above mentioned directory but got refused. The 3 URLs I provided were more then adequate as I read the guidelines over very carefully.

 

I do not see why someone can get refused without the decision maker providing accurate reasons for the disapproval.

 

Can someone tell me why my application got refused?

opendir - c9ea68e2bf9437bf79125ea2929d7450

[uzs980]

Re: refused - please review

 

I'm not a meta editor, but I guess the category you chose is just much to large for a new editor: more than 900 links (including the subcategories).

 

What about choosing a nice small subcategory for the start?

[windharp]

Re: refused - please review

 

You should have received a notice stating what uzs980 said. Try to choose a small subcategory for the beginning. Try one that has well below 100 entries.

[fashezee]

Status of application 835f2c7840054320636

 

I got refused so quick that I doubt the editor in question even had time to

read my application.

 

Please advise on why I got refused?

[giz]

Re: Status of application 835f2c7840054320636

 

All applications are read and evaluated. If the reply was quite quick then the reviewing editor must have just happened on it as you submitted it, and found that it was an "easy" one to do. There must have been something obvious wrong with the application. There is usually a list of things to consider in that reply email. Look through that and compare it to your copy of the application that you saved to a text editor before you submitted it.

[windharp]

Re: Status of application 835f2c7840054320636

 

Hint: There might even be a comment at the end of the mail you received. If it is not, then the reviewing meta thought it is quite obviously one of the points mentioned in the mail.

[donaldb]

Re: Status of application 835f2c7840054320636

 

The following are the points from the standard reject letter.

 

[*]Incomplete application. Insufficient information has been provided in some fields including reason, affiliation and/or Sample URLs.

 

[*]Improper spelling and grammar.

 

[*]Sample URLs are inappropriate for the category which one has applied to edit. They may be too broad, too narrow, completely out of scope, poor quality, or in a language inappropriate for the category. All non-English sites are listed in the World category. Applications for World categories that include sites only in English will be denied. Likewise, applications for World categories that include sample URLs in languages other than the one appropriate for the applied category will be denied.

 

[*]Not properly disclosing affiliations with websites that are, or have the potential of being, listed in the category.

 

[*]Titles and descriptions of sample URLs (and other information provided) were subjective and promotional rather than unbiased and objective. ODP editors do not rank or write website reviews. ODP editors provide objective and unbiased descriptions of websites and their content.

 

[*]Self-Promotion. Application which leads us to believe that the candidate is interested primarily in promoting his/her own sites or those with which the applicant is affiliated. The ODP is not a marketing tool, and should not be used to circumvent the site submission process. If this is an applicant's motivation for joining, then we ask him/her not to apply. Editors found to be inappropriately promoting their own site will be promptly removed.

[/list:u]

 

6 items. Not a lot, but they cover most of the basics of why an application would have been rejected. If the reject e-mail you received included these 6 items, then you can be sure that your application was rejected because of one of these items. The reasons are pretty straight-forward and if you read them carefully, you will probably see where you went wrong. If you honestly review these items then you will probably see that one of them applies.

 

If there is a particular item that you don't understand then maybe we can clarify that here.

 

Also read the information provided in the FAQ and General Advice thread at the top of the Becoming an Editor forum. The information is there for people if they really want to find it.

[fashezee]

Re: Status of application 835f2c7840054320636

 

"Titles and descriptions of sample URLs"

 

These titles; must I make it up myself or do I just take what the site already has as a title?

[windharp]

Re: Status of application 835f2c7840054320636

 

The good thing with the ODP nowadays is, that most questions are answered in the guidelines. You might find an answer in http://dmoz.org/guidelines/describing.html#titles :-)

[Guest]

Re: Status of application 835f2c7840054320636

 

I'm a little surprised that some folks who don't review applications are posting in this thread.