runboy27
Joined: Jan 02, 2002
# Posts: 154
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-08 23:40
I am pretty sure a site of mine was listed in DMOZ, but now it is not there anymore. Is there a way to see if I am just remembering wrong or if it has really been removed ?
|
 |
kctipton
Joined: Sep 15, 1999
# Posts: 251
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-09 02:06
You give ZERO information to help someone answer your question.
If you weren't keeping track back then, why ask now?
|
|
runboy27
Joined: Jan 02, 2002
# Posts: 154
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-09 05:57
I have a LOT of sites and usually don't bother checking after they are listed in DMOZ. I am pretty sure this particular site www.aircraftbargains.com used to be listed, but need proof.
|
|
windharp
Joined: Mar 11, 2002
# Posts: 513
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-09 06:53
Since this is nothing disqualifying in this comment, I don't see any problem in answering here:
It was listed in Shopping/Classifieds/Aviation. Some time ago, it was unreviewed because it was not responding for some time. (The ODP has an automated linkchecker in place which brings sites to editors attention so they can decide if a site has to be unreviewed or not) Since then, no editor got around to review it again.
|
|
runboy27
Joined: Jan 02, 2002
# Posts: 154
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-09 07:31
That is really strange. It has never been unresponsive for more than max an hour or so within the last 3 years.
How long does it have to be down to become unreviewed?
Can this data be manipulated by a potential rival working as a DMOZ editor?
|
|
windharp
Joined: Mar 11, 2002
# Posts: 513
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-09 09:14
Disclaimer: I don't know the following fur sure, but I will share what I think is right. Don't blame me for it not being entirely accurate.
Normally RoboZilla stomps through the directory in two runs, some days between them. Sites that fail to be accessible in both runs are marked with the resulting error code.
These tags cannot be set by anyone but RoboZilla (and most likely ODP staff ;-) ) , so it is quite unlikely that they are faked. I won't talk about who did the unreview, but in this case I think it is most unlikely that he removed the site out of private reasons.
Anyway: I checked the Archive.Org version of the site back in the beginning of 2000 - since it is very much the same site nowadays, I reinstated the listing to the past state.
Before you ask: No, I won't make any changes. That is one of the many areas I am not knowing anything about. If it would not have been that clear, I wouldn't have touched the site at all. There is an Update URL Link at the top right of the screen for such requests.
I forgot: It may take some days till this is visible on all the public DMOZ servers.
|
|
runboy27
Joined: Jan 02, 2002
# Posts: 154
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-09 14:39
Thank you. I am impressed. Now that I know I am talking to an expert maybe you can answer the following: Why is it that the Google PR on one of our sites (Avitop.com) is zero when listed in Googles Dmoz Directory, but otherwise it has a PR of 5/10?
http://directory.google.com/Top/Society/Military/Aviation/Aircraft/Fighters/F-16_Falcon/
|
|
windharp
Joined: Mar 11, 2002
# Posts: 513
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-09 15:53
First of all: I am an ODP editor and have no relation to google. They are using our data for whatever they want to do with it. So the only guys who can answer this question ae the google-guys ;-)
AFAIK (I am not allknowing, you know ;-) ) the google directory is quite out of date, but their search isn't. Some people reported that a search with google gave as a result that site A is listed in the google directory (with a link to the apropriate category below the search result, so it must have been in an RDF file that google imported). If you click on the category link, it showed an older version without that site A in it. So they seem to have something like an "internal" and an "external" version of the directory at the moment.
From the ODP's view we can see that the google search seems to have newer information than the google directory. Why that? That is only known to people living on the other side of the fence.
[Edit]
I forgot to come back to the question: Now it could be (speculation here!) that the PR shown in the google directory is outdated as well. Someone with more interest in this than me could surely check this on a couple of sites. Maybe one of the SEO reading this forum who usually have a precise knowledge of the PR of their sites over the last few months. ;-)
|
|
kctipton
Joined: Sep 15, 1999
# Posts: 251
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-10 14:47
>>That is really strange. It has never been unresponsive for more than max an hour or so within the last 3 years.
How long does it have to be down to become unreviewed?
Can this data be manipulated by a potential rival working as a DMOZ?<<
Oh boy. It was unresponsive for at least 3 visit attempts over a period of at least 2 weeks.
You think that a rival could give the illusion that you've shut your site down? Maybe, but it has nothing to do with ODP editors doing linkchecking.
|
|
runboy27
Joined: Jan 02, 2002
# Posts: 154
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-10 18:17
Well, the problem is that this was never the case. I have several different monitoring systems on my sites/servers that will alarm me of any downtime.
Could this have been a problem with the linkchecker? The site has changed IP a couple of times`, does the spider recheck DNS if a site is found unresponsive ?
|
|
gimmster
Joined: Jun 03, 2002
# Posts: 85
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-11 00:25
well you've been really unlucky.
The linkchecker checks a link, then a week or so later rechecks it. It has to be down both times to be flagged for editor investigation.
Once flagged a real live editor then has to check it and it has to be down *again* before any action is taken.
That said - the site has to be returning an error or timing out. The site may have still been up, but a server misconfiguration or service failure may also result in problems. One of my sites [not listed under the forwarding url] uses web forwarding which mysteriously was turned off by the provider for at least 3 days. The site was still up on it's real url, but not found using the forwarding url.
|
|
g1smd
Staff
Joined: Jul 28, 2002
# Posts: 10438
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-12 15:43
How odd that the words editor corruption turn up in only the third line of the question. Why not ask an unloaded question first, then wait for the answer, without any speculation, accusations, or guesswork?
I don't count the first post as a question, as there was no information about site or category anywhere to be seen.
|
|
runboy27
Joined: Jan 02, 2002
# Posts: 154
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-13 23:51
The first post is indeed a question. I was assuming that there were older versions of DMOZ available on the net. That way I could have checked for myself without having to mention the URL of the website.
After confirming that my site was previously present I think it is natural to speculate in why it was removed. I have now gotten an explanation.
But on the other hand, don't tell me that there aren't any DMOZ editors who have used there editorial position to make there own sites look better.
|
|
kctipton
Joined: Sep 15, 1999
# Posts: 251
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-14 05:39
I am certain that ODP editors aren't manipulating the internet to make your site look dead.
|
|
runboy27
Joined: Jan 02, 2002
# Posts: 154
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-14 21:23
Did I ever suggest that?
|
|
Teresha Aird
Joined: Feb 14, 2000
# Posts: 595
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-16 10:37
<Now it could be (speculation here!) that the PR shown in the google directory is outdated as well.>
The PR lines shown in the Google version of Dmoz ("Google directory" are indeed several months of date, as is the Google directory itself.
|
|
runboy27
Joined: Jan 02, 2002
# Posts: 154
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-18 10:34
<The PR lines shown in the Google version of Dmoz ("Google directory" are indeed several months of date, as is the Google directory itself.>
I am pretty sure that this is not the only reason for the difference. It is several years ago that we had a PR of 0.
My theory is that the PR listed in Googles version of Dmoz is added a "Dmoz relevance factor"
If we take my listing of http://www.avitop.com/ in
http://directory.google.com/Top/Society/Military/Aviation/Aircraft/Fighters/F-16_Falcon/
Our main page doesn't have a lot of F-16 related items, yet the site contains a lot of F-16 related material. To a Google spider it may look as though our site is not very F-16 relevant and a low "Dmoz relevance factor" is added. So our PR of 5 becomes 0.
Take another site in the same directory http://www.f-16.net/ - Very F-16 relevant and the "Dmoz relevance factor" is high. The F-16.net site has a PR of 5, but in the Google version of Dmoz it is showing as 7 because the "Dmoz relevance factor" is added.
How does my theory sound?
|
|
momathome
Joined: Nov 06, 2003
# Posts: 3
|
Posted: 2003-Nov-06 15:28
My best advice is to take the theory to the Google forum, because unfortunately Dmoz editors do not have any relation, affiliation, or divine knowledge of how the Google page ranks actually work. (Because we are not Google). As webmasters, business people, hobbyists, and general members of the Internet community around the world we are in the same position of only being able to speculate in regards to Google's mysteries, just as you are.
|
|
Inbox
