Application status

[motsa]

Please leave at least 14 days between status checks. Since you last got a status check on the 18th, come back here after February 1.

[stender]

I'm back again!

 

Submitted - 4th of Jan 2006

 

Category - http://dmoz.org/Shopping/Entertainme...tronica/Vinyl/

 

Editor Name- Stender

 

It was still awaiting review on the 18th.

 

Thanks

[mromppel]

Application status still unchanged.

[stender]

Thanks. Be back in 14.

[stender]

I originally applied to become an editor in december and was turned down as the category I applied for was deemed too large and was told to choose one with around 50 items. I looked for another suitable category and found one which had 62 in. I asked the question if this was an ok figure, and was told it should be ok if my application was excellent. I therefore re-applied on the 4th of January. I have today received another rejection stating that the category I applied for is again too large!.

How frustrating is that and what a waste of my time. is 12 sites really make or break? Can this not be re-reviewed? I assume your answer will be apply again and wait another month or so?

[jimnoble]

If you read the words of the email carefully, you'll see that it makes mention of the big pile awaiting evaluation. This also has a bearing on the matter.

[stender]

Yes, but the message said it should be ok with a decent application. I wouldn't of wasted my time and a month of waiting if it was clear. I previously asked the question, how are we supposed to know how many unreviewed sites are in a category? so are you going to have a new thread where we can ask if categaories are suitable for applying for? They're may be one with 5 sites in but 15,000 unreviewed applications!

 

"Your chances of becoming an editor are greater if you apply for a small, underdeveloped category to start (generally categories with less than 100 sites)." Mine had 62 how am I to know about the pool of unreviewed?

[stender]

Does my post not warrant a reply?

[motsa]

It's only been 4 1/2 hours since you posted it. Give us a bit of a break, would ya?

 

There is no way for you to find out how many suggestions are awaiting review but it's generally fairly easy to determine which categories might have large suggestion pools by how popular they seem to be, e.g. travel, drug, and real estate categories are notoriously spammed. No, we won't be creating a thread for people to ask about suitable categories to apply for.

[stender]

Sorry I just saw that you guys were actively posting in other threads.

 

I first applied for a travel category then applied for Music category which was quite specific

 

http://dmoz.org/Shopping/Entertainme...tronica/Vinyl/

 

Vinyl dance records aren't exactly mp3's! What I gauged as a small category obviously isn't so how can I estimate what's popular?

What about if I apply for the category

 

dmoz.org/antiques/vase/mingdynastry/blue&white/porcelain/1605to1606/large/???

 

I received replies to my applications each time saying we would like to accept you but the pools are too large! I am at a loss as to what to do next?

[motsa]

Pick something else.

[stender]

Ok my skills lie in Travel, Music and finance so having looked through for suitable categories I have chosen

 

http://dmoz.org/Business/Investing/Stocks_and_Bonds/Equities/Brokerages/

 

Now there are currently 33 sites in that section. Can someone advise if the unreviewed pool is large or not? This will be my 3rd application!

 

I feel I am also qualified for this

 

http://dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/Travel_and_Tourism/Travel_Services/Travel_Agents/Global/

 

Also if you could advise to the size.

 

thanks

[stender]

Help? anyone?

[stender]

Bump

[motsa]

I think you'll find you're not getting a response because you're asking for help we generally don't provide. Just pick a category and apply for it.

[stender]

I don't think i'll bother. Seems like another flaw with the system when I apply and get refused as the unreveiwed is too large (how i am i to know this) I then pick another small category and ask if that is ok and am refused again as the unreviewed is too large! (again how am I to know that) So what is the point of me applying again and being told the pool is too large????

 

Seeing how long it takes to get a site submitted I would guess every category is going to be too large! I spend time on my applications!

 

And as for no reply as I am asking a question. What's the difference between my question and the 20,000 people a week who ask for status reports to be told it's not 14 days yet? :confused:

[stender]

So 3rd time of applying and this time it wasn't because the pool was to large (which we cannot see).

I was turned down due to "titles and/or descriptions from your sample URLs" My titles and descriptions were along the same lines as those already listed???

 

SO if I re-apply with the same application and same url suggestions but change the title and or descriptions then that is ok??

[stender]

mmmm nice. silent treatment again. perhaps this thread will get to 2000 views?

[jimnoble]

I don't know what your previous URLs were or whether or not they are appropriate for wehatever category you want request next time. This makes answering your question a tad tricky. If they fill the bill, by all means re-use them.

 

There's plenty of good advice about how to apply to be an editor, including where to find our editor guidelines (which help with descriptions) in the FAQ and General Advice thread at the top of this forum. Around 90 editors a week join us, so writing a good application is by no means impossible.

[stender]

Thank you Jim. My first 2 applications were turned down as the unreviewed pool was too large, so I assume everything else with my application was ok?? or was I turned down for that before they even reviewed my applications???

 

My last refusal said that it was down to my titles/descriptions.

So from that I take it the sites were ok???

 

So if that was the case I will just submit the same application again but with reviewed titles/descriptions although I felt I stuck to the guidlines which I read and also felt they were similar to descriptions already in that category which makes me feel it was the titles.

[motsa]

My first 2 applications were turned down as the unreviewed pool was too large, so I assume everything else with my application was ok?? or was I turned down for that before they even reviewed my applications???

You can't assume that as the meta editor may not have looked at the application at all beyond noting that the category was too large.

 

My last refusal said that it was down to my titles/descriptions.

So from that I take it the sites were ok???

You can't really assume that either nor can we discuss your specific application here. It's possible that the reviewing meta editor didn't take a close enough look at the suggested to see whether or not they were appropriate. As jimnoble said, if you think they fit the category, then reuse them with better titles and descriptions.

[jimnoble]

I assume everything else with my application was ok

Please don't. Once a show stopper reason to decline an application is found, it is often declined then and there.

 

Far better to complete your app and then double check it against the advice, guidelines and category description (if there is one) before submitting it. Also, it's not wise to assume that existing descriptions in the cat are good.

 

Giving attention to detail is one of the attributes we prize so demonstrate your capabilities in that skill .

[stender]

Also, it's not wise to assume that existing descriptions in the cat are good.

 

How did those people get in then??? shouldn't they be removed then??? I made sure mine were along the same lines as those already in to make sure they were apt.

 

I have many many years experience in the category and fsa qualifications so I know the url's were valid for the section, and I did read the guidlenes for titles and descriptions. I will however re-submit it with amended titles & descriptions.

 

This is sooooo frustrating! has anyone ever sued you for causing high blood pressure!!!!

[jimnoble]

How did those people get in then???

You seem to have misunderstood my comment. Our guidelines have evolved over the years and I merely meant that some decriptions might not meet the current standards.

shouldn't they be removed then???

No, their descriptions should be fixed. All it needs is somebody to volunteer to fix them - which might well be you

[stender]

lol! hopefully. My application is done just need to do the titles and descriptions, but am getting a little confused now as to what is right and what is wrong reading the guidlines!