Removed listing in DMOZ

[travellinglad]

Hi, my website http://www.holiday-rentals.uk.com was listed in category;

http://www.dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/England/West_Yorkshire/Pudsey/ but it is no longer showing - in fact there's not many sites now showing in this category.

 

I was wondering why the listing was removed?

 

If the listing will not be put back into this category will I have to wait another 3 years before the site is submitted, and what category would you recommend that I submit the site to.

 

Any assistance would be appreciated.

 

[hutcheson]

>I was wondering why the listing was removed?

 

There are basically two possibilities: (1) lack of adequate unique content in this the second internet millenium (the 99% bet), (2) editor error (1% or so chance.) We don't discuss specifics beyond that.

 

Aside: It is possible that someone will look at the site as a result of this posting (and fix any error they find), but there is of course no such obligation, and we do tell people most emphatically that they must not and may not use this forum to request site reviews.

 

>If the listing will not be put back into this category will I have to wait another 3 years before the site is submitted...

 

This sentence doesn't parse, or at least, the verbs and subjects don't seem to fit together in an ODP conversation. "Submittal" is something you as a surfer would do (or not do); and submittal would be the way to suggest adding a site. You are under no obligation to submit any site, or to submit it in any particular time frame.

 

If you submit a site, then we don't know how long it would be before an editor reviews it -- could be more than three years, could be less than three minutes. The editors have the same freedom you do, to choose when to work in the 'net, and when to do something else. (So nobody can know until afterwards, when anyone will do anything.)

 

>what category would you recommend that I submit the site to.

 

There is no need for such a recommendation here. You can submit it anywhere. The closer to a good fit you find, the more it will help us (and possibly, the quicker we'll be likely to review it.) But even if you submit a good site to a wildly inappropriate category, the editors will hunt up the right place for it.

 

The question you do not ask is "should you resubmit?" The answer is, of course, 99% of the time, a resounding NO, both in moral and practical terms.

 

But if you are sure that the site has significant content not present on any other site on the web, that it represents the best main entry point of the sole online repository of the sum of your knowledge and experience, (that is, that it is a listable site) AND that it hasn't been abusively submitted already (that is, that no other sites with part of its content or part of your knowledge could possibly have been submitted, and that it hasn't been submitted multiple times to multiple categories already, so that its removal is not related to fraternal mirror or doorway spam or vanity-domain spam or just submittal spam or any other kind of spam) THEN, only if ALL those conditions are met, it would make sense to resubmit the site.

 

It doesn't make sense to compare your site to listed sites. After all, we might have made multiple mistakes, and the other mistakes not been caught. But if you looked at 99 other REJECTED OR REMOVED sites, and yours wasn't clearly the best of the lot, then you're wasting your time and building frustration for yourself by submitting. But if yours clearly was the best (not at all in site design, not in attractiveness, but in information and content!) then it would make sense to resubmit.

 

Obviously, this answer is as general as I can make it, because it is such a common question.

 

Obviously, not all of it may apply to you -- most of it I haven't checked. It's for anyone who's had a site deleted and would like to get some idea of the reasons and the possibilities for re-inclusion.

 

And ... this is not the place to post your analysis of the site by these guidelines. The reviewing editor probably wouldn't have read, and certainly shouldn't trust, a secondhand review -- we're supposed to be looking at the website and it alone for its unique content (and at other websites for its non-unique content), and we're responsible for the results.

[travellinglad]

I've not read all of your thread - your first paragraph answers my primary question.

 

I'll forget it, if it gets listed, great - if not, no sleep lost.

 

Again, thanks for your swift response.

[BusWeb]

Dear editors,

 

I came here to inquire about a similar problem when I noticed this thread; I hope that it is OK to post my question here (if not, you could probably move it to a new thread).

 

My site http://www.amsterdam-hotels-travel.com/ had been listed in Regional/Europe/Netherlands/North_Holland/Amsterdam/Transportation/ (originally under its old URL http://www.apti.is.nl/ but the listing had been updated a few years ago, when the site had moved to its own domain).

 

I recently discovered, however, that I am no longer listed in that category. This is quite frustrating for me. Not only has the content of my site been copied (without my permission) by numerous "scraper" sites, but now my DMOZ listing is gone as well.... As a result, my site has become almost unfindable. Just FYI, my site has offered a wealth of information about public transportation and travel in Amsterdam since 1999 (according to the Wayback Machine; I actually didn't realize it had been that long...

 

While I understand from Hutcheson's post that the odds are against me, I was hoping that someone could check if I happened to be in that 1% "editor error" group... Thank you very much for your trouble!

[motsa]

While I understand from Hutcheson's post that the odds are against me, I was hoping that someone could check if I happened to be in that 1% "editor error" group... Thank you very much for your trouble!

Doing so would be giving you a site status check, which we no longer do.

[BusWeb]

Actually, I did not mean to ask for the "status" --I know that the site was listed earlier, but it isn't anymore, so I assume that it has been deleted.

 

I was simply hoping that an editor could verify ("internally") if the deletion had been an error, as I assume that it is.

 

I don't expect to get an answer from you here. If the listing shows up again one day, that would be great; if not, too bad...

[pvgool]

You can also check yourself if there is a good reason to be deleted. Look at http://dmoz.org/add.html and http://dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html

 

I myself think Hutcheson is a little high on his numbers: my guess 99.99% or maybe higher are deleted correctly ; 0.01% or less are removed by mistake.

 

 

<<added>> note to myself: remember to remove the editor part of urls :icon_conf

[BusWeb]

Thank you very much for your reaction, but -as I am not an editor myself- I have no access to those pages.

 

As for my site being removed by mistake or not: it is my guess that -as stated in my original post above- other sites copying my content may have lead to my site beïng removed by mistake.

 

I would really appreciate it if an editor would be so kind as to have a look at it.

[Locutus]

Try http://www.dmoz.org/add.html and http://www.dmoz.org/guidelines/include.html

[BusWeb]

Thanks for the URL's, Locutus! I've read everything and I suspect that my site has been removed because the information it offers is not "unique" (which seems to be the the key criterion).

 

If that is true, however, then I have been punished because others have copied my content!

 

Of course, I wouldn't expect you to take my word for it when I say that I am the original source --in theory, I could have copied the content myself... But an editor should be able to verify my claim using the Wayback Machine (http://www.archive.org/): as I mentioned earlier, you can check that I have offered it since at least Nov. 25, 1999 (the site actually existed before that date, but that's when it was first archived).

 

I don't want to sound like a broken record, so I will stop here. I just hope an editor is willing to check my claim, but again, I don't expect to read the outcome here.

[hutcheson]

We can't use the forum for "checks" of specific sites, but if you feel your site complies with my criteria (except for the fact that many other people are copying your content) then I'd suggest resubmitting with a note to the reviewing editor [xxx content is original but has been widely copied without permission -- see wayback machine etc.]

 

I'd also suggest making sure you have a good "about me" page, describing your own experience and knowledge of the subject area, describing how you collect information, featuring what's new -- that is, let us see not only the (non-scraped) finished product, but its progress and the mind behind it.

 

This doesn't obligate the editor to take any particular action, but it makes the site more useful for visitors (you know, of course, how many ignorant jerks have set up so-called "travel guides" about places they've never been, so they can be hotel rezzer or airline affiliates.) Set yourself apart from the crowd. (I might mention, having a guide to Amsterdam but not to, say, Paris is a pretty strong indication that one is focusing on one's knowledge, not one's desire for page clicks, so I think there's a good chance you'll be able to do this, and that if you do it, it will benefit surfers looking for authoritative information.)

[BusWeb]

Dear Hutcheson,

 

Thank you for your advice. I will do as you suggest and simply hope for the best!