Is my website qulify for the DMOZ standard?

Is that possible someone can tell me what will be the chance for my website to be listed in DMOZ?

The basic information about my website:
PR3, hundreds unique visitors every day, low in alexa rank since I do not install alexa tool bar in my computer.

Here are 3 major parts in my website:
Home Page - PR3 (www.168forums.com)
English Forum Part - PR3 (review.168forums.com)
Chinese Forum Part - PR0 (panda.168forums.com)
There are more visitors in the forums than the home page.

can I submit them in different sections of DMOZ?

And also please give me some advice about how to improve to have more chance to get listed in DMOZ?

Will delete some advertisements in the website help?


Thanks in advance for your time and help.

 

All you need to know about whether your site is suitable can be found here: "DMOZ Site Selection Criteria"

To be more specific:

These factors are completely irrelevant as far as DMOZ is concerned, and editors do not take them into any account.

Please don't. As the suggestion guidelines say: "You should submit a site to the single most relevant category."

 

Unless you get some connection from the inside, then you can have almost ten links, its magic

 

BLAH!

Submit to as many relevant categories as you would like to be listed on! It's perfectly normal and natural. Take TOPIX for an example

Here is the refference (which is also on the ADD page you linked too...

What your above quote is meaning, is that the same page should only be submitted to the SINGLE best category. By applying my quote it means that each page on your site can be submitted to the single best categories. A well diversified site could earn it's webmaster hundreds of links.

 

That's extremely bad advice, contra ODP's submission guidelines and enormously increases the amount of work for the volunteers - thus slowing down the whole process for everybody. We don't like spammers any more than anybody else does and, when provoked, we have the means to deal with them. Multiple and deeplink listings are at editorial discretion, not the website owner's.

As Q very well knows, because he's been told time and time again, the huge number of Topix listings were the result of a deal done between its owner and ODP's owner, AOL, without reference to editors of any level. AOL, being the owners, are entitled to make whatever deals they want and any editors disapproving can do the other thing - which a number did at the time. I don't recollect Q making a fuss about it whilst he was an editor though.

@Q: Some people come here looking for genuine help. Deliberately mischievous comments don't provide it.

 

I know how and why it was listed. Does that mean those listings conform to the guidelines? Does the fact it was a deal with AOL make it right or just?

I really don't think so... and so long as that is a leading example, I'll continue to use it. As what is good for the goose is good for the gander... if one site can have thousands of deep links, I don't see any problem in others having one or two, so long as they meet the guidelines for such a listing.

After all, deep linking IS allowed with editor discretion.

Maybe because it's seemingly something editors are not allowed to fuss about. Heh, I certainly don't see any other editors that find a problem with having an affiliated site with over ten thousand deep links. Maybe that just shows that there is something wrong with the editing team and its morals.

Oh, I was serious... Lead by example! Deep links ARE allowed, multiple listings for a site ARE allowed. Are they the norm? Certainly not... seemingly they are reserved for AOL staff But do they happen to other sites? I'd certainly hope so.

Was my post misleading? Possibly, but then I gave my source so anyone reading it could make up their own mind. Though based solely on the ADD page, I was not all that far off the mark was I?

 

That's an irrelevant question to ask volunteer editors. AOL owns DMOZ, so they can make any decisions they like without reference to the editorial community, as jimnoble has patiently explained.

If you or anyone else has a problem with the way AOL does things, please address your comments to AOL, because it is not "right or just" to criticise or harangue people who have no more say in the matter than you do, and who may very well share some of the same frustrations and concerns.

Venting about AOL corporate decisions is one thing, but expecting volunteers to be able to do anything about them is sadly over-optimistic.

 

Is it really irrelivant? Don't you have a say as an editor?

What is the contact information to AOL as it concerns the ODP again... I know I've asked a few times, but no one seems to have an answer.

You can not do anything about how the directory is ran? Funny, I recall editors actually being able to edit...

Either way though, it the example still stands, that one editor can have thousands of automatically listed deep links. I'm NOT blaming you, I am pointing the finger at the ODP in general.

 

No. You must have forgotten my post above which already explained that. Amazing because you even quoted it in post 6.

You can't have been asking loud enough. Try

You're either being deliberately obtuse or deliberately provocative. You might as well blame the entire Zimbabwean population in general for the actions of Robert Mugabe.

 

Contact Information for DMOZ/ODP

How much louder does one need to ask in a forum with over a dozen editors watching?

Though I must ask, with people like Skrenta being admin, I wonder if AOL will actually get that, or if it's screened by the meta team or something. *shrug* Is there an actual AOL email?

What are you talking about? You are a spokesman for the ODP. Your actions speak for how the ODP operates.

By your example, what Bush has done has nothing to do with America... or heh, that's like saying Germany was unjustly the center of both world wars and that it was all just Hitlers fault.

When the LEADER of a country speaks, that IS the country speaking. When I say that the ODP has problems, it DOES, and it DOES from the TOP down.

Does the fact that Bush being a complete moron mean that every American is a moron, no, but heh... the majority of us voted for him. Likewise, Skrenta broke the guidelines at the ODP with his his site got listed. Does that mean that all editors are bad? Of course not, but there is no trouble in pointing the finger at any editor who has a category with a TOPIX listing...

 

No, we do not.

Nope, not that either.

 

Funny, I thought you could edit...

And besides, if you don't have a chance at changing anything why even bother to point me to the people that can make a difference. I mean, if you as an editor do not mind corruption from the top down, why should staff bother with a lonely email me from a non-editor?

I mean, you have voiced your opinions about a single editor having well over ten thousand links haven't you? After all, you have already stated that each site should have only one listing...

 

I didn't say we couldn't express opinions about AOL matters. Everyone is free to do that, whether an editor or not, as you have demonstrated.
However, volunteer editors have no control over decisions made by AOL. But I think you knew that's what I meant.

 

Not always true according to other posts in this forum about Skrenta & Topix. Seemingly any editor (with proper accesses) is free to remove such links from the project. That gives the editors a pretty big voice if you ask me, though sadly not many editors have exercised that voice.

So again, single best category? YES, on a page by page basis! What is good for the goose is good for the gander. If site_A can have thousands of links that it in no way shape or form deserves (as MOST of them are syndicated from other sites listed, making most of those deep links duplicate content) then there is no reason for site_B, _C, _D, _Etc. to also have a few links....the guidelines say that deeplinking is allowed after all, only it's not the norm. Though with a well diversified site, there is no reason that it can not have hundreds of links. I'd use Ivan as another example, but oddly enough his links seem to vanish faster then Skrenta's even though his are actually unique content (seemingly what editors WANT in the directory).

The cards keep stacking against the ODP on this issue. While other sites keep losing thier additional links, one keeps it's THOUSANDS...

Do I blame you personally? No, not really, but then, you DO have the power to help make things right, and if you've not done your part, then yeah, there is some blame on your shoulders...

Fairness for the end user? I think not, look at the OP in this thread, (s)he's not even got ONE link yet

 

i have had a difficult time getting into DMOZ, but i have saw other sites with far less content get accepted with no problems

 

How can you possibly know this? You are making an awful lot of assumptions, but again, I think you know that.
Non-editors can only see whether or not a site is listed, not whether it has been removed, moved, or re-added, or by whom, or when. So once again, please do not berate volunteers for things about which you know nothing, and over which we have no control.

There are many problems within ODP, but it is disingenuous and unproductive to invent some merely to create hostility and provoke pointless debate.

 

Sometimes it's WHAT content...

http://www.townofmyrtlebeach.com/contact.htm

That can certainly keep you from getting a listing, especially in a local cat. Also, the owner of that domain, seemingly also owns 130 other domains... none of them would be clones would they?

 

no that is a new site it has not been submitted to dmoz or really any directories.

nope - no other clones of that site

 

i have had a difficult time getting into DMOZ, but i have submit my craft site many times but get no acceptance from DMOZ, my website have experience two years and get lots of original contents for my website. why can't get my site into the directory.

 

Be patient! You've submitted, now move on to other free directories. There is nothing you can do to get listed other then having the best site you can have and submitting. So your end of the job is done.