Successful DMOZ Listing?

[haadoo]

I submit many year ago but not in Dmoz directory.My site is 8 years old not make editor list my site.

[petirin]

It is worse now than it used to be. My first website (about ten years ago) was submitted in around 2 months, later ones took usually more time. For the last one we are waiting for more than 7 months now.

[atlantadentalcenter]

I've submitted some sites a few years ago and also have still not been listed. Not sure if they ever will.

[iamyri]

One my site was listed after 1 month
another one - after about 2 weeks

My advice:
1. Submit your sites to regional areas.
2. Contact information is very important for successful listing.

PS. It's only my opinion...

[Birdie]

Originally Posted by iamyri

2. Contact information is very important for successful listing

Contact info is only important for a regional listing

[medy3a]

Thank you for good advice.
I think you are right about regional area.
Why do you think contact information so important? They are going to contact me somehow (email or call)?

[iamyri]

Originally Posted by medy3a

Thank you for good advice.
I think you are right about regional area.
Why do you think contact information so important? They are going to contact me somehow (email or call)?

Contact information makes your site to look more respectful, reliable and so on. Don't worry, Dmoz people won't contact you.

[medy3a]

Originally Posted by iamyri

Contact information makes your site to look more respectful, reliable and so on. Don't worry, Dmoz people won't contact you.

What contact information we are talking about? Just resubmit my site and didn't find any required contact info but email

[lloyd.velarde@gmail.]

our site already listed to DMOZ but never get any traffics, it takes a long time before it is being listed on it!

[ScriptMan]

Years ago I submitted my first site to DMOZ since Almost Online (AOL) relied so heavily on them. It was accepted after about 6 months.

I have never botherd to submit another and don't really know if any of my other sites are there or not. Google, MSN and Yahoo are the only ones that matter.

[iamyri]

Originally Posted by ScriptMan

Google, MSN and Yahoo are the only ones that matter.

If you speak about directories: When you are in the Google directory you can submit to the Dmoz directory only.

[Suziclue]

Send in your request and put a bribe on there..the reviewer will read your request and send you a paypal account. this should work.. usually $20 would do the trick..

[jim_noble]

Define your (DMOZ) unique content concept

Unique content is content that no other website has.
Here are a few examples.

If you own a walk in store business, that's unique. However, if you've spread its website over several domain names, they won't all be listed.

If you've written a website critiquing Henry VIII of England's marriage skills, that's unique (unless you stole it from Wikipedia).

If you own a content mill MFA website, that probably isn't.

If you've created yet another sparse directory of Canadian B&Bs, that almost certainly isn't.

To sum up, I know it when I see it - and so, probably, do you.

[ranter]

@ Jim Noble

If I follow your rationalization then DMOZ would have total amount of links equivalent and limited to amount of existing Categories and Sub-Categories.

After all if one created website that critiquing Henry VIII of England's marriage skills, then why bother to add my site that discusses the same subject from my point of view. The faux pas in your rational for inclusion comes to: what if one of us is wrong, then: who is the one that wrong, then: what if we’re both wrong, then: how do you know who is wrong?

or

Which Canadian B&Bs is completed with latest and which site info is limited by creation time. Plus, what if site you are going to reject in addition to be up to date submitted by citizen from another country than Canada for local consumption but submitted to the same Canadian B&Bs Category?

Unique is not applicable notion when it comes to Directories because even if 2 sites are talking about the same subject but provide different presentation, imagery, additional directional maps, reference links and in addition visual quality etc. they are unique.

Never mind 2 sites, 2M sites about Bananas will be unique as long they aren’t copy each other.

[jim_noble]

You seem to have misunderstood what I said. Whether that was deliberate or my funny accent I'm not sure.

Your critique of Henry VIII's marriage skills is your critique and unique because it's yours. Somebody else's is just as eligible for listing as well.

Which Canadian B&Bs is completed with latest and which site info is limited by creation time. Plus, what if site you are going to reject in addition to be up to date submitted by citizen from another country than Canada for local consumption but submitted to the same Canadian B&Bs Category?

It seems that my English language skills are at fault. I really didn't understand that question and so feel unable to reply.

Unique is not applicable notion when it comes to Directories because even if 2 sites are talking about the same subject but provide different presentation, imagery, additional directional maps, reference links and in addition visual quality etc. they are unique.

I think you'll find that this segment of the discussion was triggered by my use of the phrase useful unique content. The two words go hand in hand - even for directories. Here are some directory specific examples that might help you to understand.

- A niche directory focused on bee keeping resources in Texas would be very welcome, even if it had only a dozen links.

- A UK wide wedding directory listing only one florist and two limo companies in Manchester is useless - too sparse to be listed.

- A New York business directory with gazillions of name and address entries copied from the Yellow Pages might well be comprehensive but it isn't unique content. Yes I know that a few entries have added detail because the business paid a fee - just like the YP.

- You mentioned that 'different presentation' and 'visual quality' add uniqueness to a website. Yes they do in a way, but they don't add anything to the usefulness of the content. Pages ripped off from the CIA Fact Book and dressed in a pretty frock would still adding nothing of value of DMOZ.

[ranter]

You see Jim, you have problems not with your language, you have problem with your logic but using language problems old trick excuse to avoid the issue

You said:

Originally Posted by jim_noble

Unique content is content that no other website has.

Ok, let go back to one of my examples.

I have site that has all Canadian B&Bs listed in it and which has been already indexed by DMOZ and you took my site with all my links, changed appearance by adding Google's maps and properties pictures to them, and then submitted to DMOZ your site version.

Two sites with identical content.
Should and/or will DMOZ editor include your site into DMOZ Index?

[jim_noble]

I have site that has all Canadian B&Bs listed in it and which has been already indexed by DMOZ and you took my site with all my links, changed appearance by adding Google's maps and properties pictures to them, and then submitted to DMOZ your site version.

Not trying to dodge the issue but as a hypothetical question, it's a close call and I don't believe there's a right or wrong answer..

Reality 1: it would very much depend on:
a) The actual websites
b) The judgement of the editor making the decision.
c) Whether or not the editor realised that the two lists of establishments were identical. Most editing work is done by editors passing through a category, not by a resident editor. They aren't likely to be intimately familiar with every listing or view every other listed site in the cat to make comparisons. That would take a lot of effort which could be more productively spent on other tasks.

If I noticed that both websites listed an identical set of B&Bs, I'd tend towards not listing the second one. However, if the second one added a lot more value with say user reviews for most of the entries, I might well add it.

Reality 2: I probably wouldn't notice the common dataset and list the second one anyway.

Reality 3: Maintenance issues mean that they wouldn't have identical datasets anyway .

Reality 4: I don't believe that there is a website listing every Canadian B&B. It would be a maintenance nightmare.

We call our editor guideline guidelines for good reason. They aren't and could never be immutable laws that cover every possibility. Instead, they're intended to help the editor in making his list/not list decision. If the whole decision making process could be algorithmic, we wouldn't need humans!

As you're probably aware, we have internal forums. One of their major purposes is to permit editors in doubt to discuss specific cases with colleagues and more senior editors. This happens quite a lot - which is 'a good thing'. Fortunately, most listing suggestions don't trigger these levels of uncertainty else we'd never get any work done.

[ranter]

Originally Posted by jim_noble

Not trying to dodge the issue but as a hypothetical question, it's a close call and I don't believe there's a right or wrong answer...

Come on Jim, you do or you don’t.
I am talking about enhanced with additional information C & P site and even use words identical content to hear from you yes or not if editors and /or you will add stolen content site even if it have nicer presentation e.g. Google maps etc.

Everything in life is hypothetical until it’s happen and because of that my example as plausible as chance that DMOZ become exemplarity directory as it once used to be.

Now, we are talking about “unique” as a concept that DMOZ applies to determine usefulness of Websites Content and to justify raison d'être for inclusion and all you have to do at this point is to say Yes or NO given that you know that second site is a copy job.

[bobsweeney]

I have never successfully been listed in dmoz, on any of my sites. Ive heard it takes a long time but give me a break. I need to make money now, not in 3 years. Sorry for whining....LOL

[Birdie]

Originally Posted by bobsweeney

I have never successfully been listed in dmoz, on any of my sites. Ive heard it takes a long time but give me a break. I need to make money now, not in 3 years. Sorry for whining....LOL

You have a big problem if you are dependent on a DMOZ listing to make money for you!

The site in your profile is NOT listable.