As the numerous responses to my first post show, this is one of the most common and controversial questions asked about DMOZ.
To answer this question, it is important to consider what DMOZ isn't.
DMOZ is not set up as a listing service for site owners. Site submissions are only one source for finding quality sites to add to the directory. Some editors choose to review submissions while other editors might prefer to (at first) find sites on their own through search engines, as links from related sites, in newspapers, on television, on highway billboards, etc. So...there are no guarantees that once you submit your site it will be reviewed within a specific amount of time.
There are also a number of practical reasons it can take a while for a site to get listed in DMOZ:
The site is submitted to an incorrect category. Many sites are submitted to categories that are either too broad, too narrow, or unrelated to the content of the site being submitted. Most of the time, incorrectly submitted sites are sent to the appropriate category for review, but that will usually increase the amount of time that a site will ultimately wait for review. Submitting your site to the single most specific category relative to your site's content will significantly improve your chances of getting your site reviewed.
The site is submitted to the wrong language section of the directory. For example, non-English sites are frequently submitted to the English-language section of the directory. As with sites submitted to the wrong category, editors have to redirect these sites to the correct language, which can increase the amount of time that they will await review.
The submitted site does not meet submission or editorial guidelines for inclusion. Quite often people submit sites that are incomplete, don't contain enough content, or consist primarily of syndicated or mirrored content. Uniqueness of content is one of the most important factors editors consider when reviewing a site for inclusion.
The category has a backlog of submissions. This can result when the popularity of the topic, which may attract large numbers of both listable and unlistable sites, doesn't match the interests of active or prospective editors. Submitting to one of these categories may mean a longer wait. (That doesn't mean you should submit your site to the wrong category just because you think it doesn't have a backlog – deliberately submitting your site to the wrong category is never a good choice.)
URBAN LEGENDS ( i.e. popular & fictional reasons ) as to why a site does not gain acceptance into
The category editor is corrupt and/or a competitor is keeping the site from being listed. DMOZ regularly receives allegations of corruption and abuse through its public abuse reporting system. Each report is thoroughly investigated and crosschecked. Most of these claims turn out to be baseless. In the rare case where there may be some truth to the allegation, the matter is dealt with immediately.
No one is monitoring the category. While a few categories in DMOZ may not have a listed editor that doesn't mean there's no one minding the store. All editors listed higher in a category's hierarchy can and do edit subcategories. In addition, many editors have permissions to edit anywhere in the directory.
I'm certain there will be no shortage of comments to this post, but please consider the topics listed above and re-check your submission application again.
And if/when you do submit, please...please....please avoid any claims/jokes/sarcasm of offering money to get accepted into DMOZ. Editors apply zero sense of humor to these types of statements and it is a sure fire way to ensure your site does not gain entry. Ever.
One of my future posts will include best practice recommendations for suggesting sites to editors.
Cheers.
Bob Keating
Managing Editor, DMOZ Staff


Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.



161. As I already mentioned in my earlier comment, my site: http://www.bestlanguageservice.com, hasn't been listed despite attempting many times. Can anyone from the editors please contact me on contact@bestlanguageservice.com, or send me an email that I contact to enquire about the submission policy?
Thanks,
Posted at 8:54PM on Oct 28th 2013 by aashkir
162. I'm therapist, specialized in dreamwork. I submitted one site (http://www.psyche-therapie.com) on this category : http://www.dmoz.org/World/Fran%C3%A7ais/Sciences/Sciences_humaines_et_sociales/Psychologie/R%C3%AAves/
After some time, because there wasn't any answer, I wrote an abuse report asking why. Someone answered me that in fact, there wasn't an active editor in this category, and he proposed me to postulate to become it.
So I have postulated for this category one month ago. But... no answer. I wrote to the same person, in order to ask why there was no answer... and... no answer...
Is there someone who can explain me why ?
Best regards.
Patrick Bertoliatti
Posted at 7:07AM on Feb 13th 2014 by Patrick Bertoliatti
163. Hi, Make several months to year that I submit my site for your directory but never appeared. Can u check if have any problem? The site name is http://www.beautycolor.co.uk .
Thanks for your time.
Posted at 9:05AM on Feb 27th 2014 by Maria
164. This definitely does help understand why submissions do/do not get added. However is it really too much to ask for page that lists the current status of your submission? require an account for submitting sites and then allow us to see why a site was not added or to see that it hasn't been reviewed?
I'm sure that when an editor chooses not to accept a site, that request is not simply deleted from your records. And if it is, i would strongly recommend you change your practices so there is some type of editor accountability.
Posted at 5:25PM on Oct 8th 2007 by Brian Harris
165. @Urban legends , its not a myth or a legend, bob i doubt you have time nor the resources to monitor every editors activities right ?
But here are few links, with some editors bidding for getting site listed :More links available if you search for term "dmoz" in the search field.
enjoy bob. Lets see if my comment stays here this time. cause i want some clarification's just like others.
Posted at 6:42PM on Oct 8th 2007 by Dmoz-resources
166. been trying to submit a site several times today ... even tho typing the code in exactly - it keeps telling me I did not do it right.
Tried refreshing, tried different time of day... still won't let me past
Posted at 1:25PM on Oct 9th 2007 by Susan C
167. That's right, it's not an urban legend. Sites are being kept out of the directory by corrupt editors, and if a report is made nothing happens.
Also sites are not added because there are less than 8000 editors trying to cover over 590,000 categories. That means not only is there a huge backlog but it's extremely easy for corrupt editors to go undetected.
And those 8000 editors are only required to make one edit every four months...and that edit does not have to be adding a site, it can be something like just rewording a description. Again very easy for an editor to keep competitors out.
Plus dmoz has an official Social Contract with the Web Community which states "We will make every effort to evaluate all sites submitted to the directory." That is a direct contradition to this statement "...editors choose to review submissions while other editors might prefer to (at first) find sites on their own..."
Posted at 11:03PM on Oct 8th 2007 by daisy
168. @ daisy.. Yup.. Offering to pay is enough to get a permanent ban on "your" website.. It's a brilliantly simply way to keep your competitors out of DMOZ.. It's keeping Shoemoney out..
Posted at 11:55PM on Oct 8th 2007 by Feydakin
169. Shoemoney.com is not included b/c the site owner offered money to be included in the directory.
Ironically, he's not being excluded for making baseless extortion claims against a community of volunteers, but that would be a great reason as well.
DMOZ Resources & Daisy....please go away.
There other forums where you two can distract people with conspiracy theories and dated, boring DMOZ hate.
Posted at 9:32AM on Oct 9th 2007 by Chubacabra
170. I tried twice to submit my site and both times it would not match the characters I saw in the box at the bottom. They are difficult to read, but I am certain I typed them correctly on the refreshed page the second time I submitted it. Is there a problem with this part of the submission page?
Posted at 10:28AM on Oct 9th 2007 by David Wise
171. My website used to be listed in DMOZ as http://myurl.co.uk for some time. Approx 12 months ago I request that the www portion of the URL be added to the listing.
Within a few weeks my listing had vanished. Now within the same category another user owns and operates the .COM version of my website and it is displayed in full.
I have requested (no less than 5 times) to have my website re-listed but it never appears, nor does I ever receive a reason why. I do suspect that one of my competitors is in charge of the category and purposely keeping my site from being listed, but this I cannot prove.
Posted at 12:03PM on Oct 9th 2007 by CaptainKirk
172. Re: #2
How do you know these are real editors? Because they say so? We frequently get complaints about SEO's masquerading as editors, and guaranteeing a DMOZ listing, but in reality they just take people's money and deliver nothing. Through public reports, we discover these individuals are not, nor were they ever DMOZ editors.
Posted at 2:47PM on Oct 9th 2007 by Bob Keating
173. LOL I just had a look at this directory (though i could have looked at many, this one was picked at random)
http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Multimedia/Software/Macromedia_Flash/FAQs,_Help,_and_Tutorials/
The vast majority of links in here refer to flash 4.. i.e this hasn't been checked or updated in over 6 YEARS!!! 6 YEARS!!!
Bob Keating, please justify why editors like *editor* are a fit and proper person to be an editor of a category that hasn't had the idlest 5 minutes of attention in many a year.
If you can't maintain a few directories e.g about core web topics of interest to many of your audience (who I dare say are web developers) then what hope or point is there?
Posted at 6:07PM on Oct 9th 2007 by Mark Anders
174. I agree with Brian, because most of us are / have been told that our submissions drop back to the bottom of the pile, and re-submitting will set us back to the bottom also. I have followed all of the guidelines but I haven't had my site added and have not re-submitted after about a year, mainly because I do not want my site "sent to the back of the line" so to speak.
Unless there is some way to check on the status of our submission....and we're afraid to re-submit and having our site moved back, there is no way for legitimate quality site owners to IMPROVE what they are doing, or even care about the Open Directory Project at all, really.
Posted at 6:17PM on Oct 9th 2007 by Lori
175. "have not re-submitted after about a year" Suggest it again if that is the case. All sites in unreviewed were lost in the crash last year, with a few from near the date of the crash being recovered. If your site is not listed and it was suggested before the middle of January 2007 (when suggestions were opened again),it is very likely not in the unreviewed queue.
Posted at 8:47PM on Oct 9th 2007 by bldarter
176. If your site was suggested before the middle of January 2007 (when suggestions were re-opened after the crash), then you should suggest it again. It is probably not in the unreviewed queue. All sites in unreviewed were lost in the crash last fall. A very few from right around the time of the crash were recovered.
Posted at 8:59PM on Oct 9th 2007 by bldarter
177. Oops, I thought my first comment was lost due to a glitch in my computer. Anyway, the second comment reads better :)
Posted at 9:01PM on Oct 9th 2007 by bldarter
178. Yep, it's very difficult for some of us to get our sites into Dmoz, but i don't really find it very important.
Posted at 12:58AM on Oct 10th 2007 by il maistro - tecnologia
179. bldarter: Thanks for the info, I will have another go at it.
Mr. Keating:
Sorry my criticism of this blog was edited out of my above post. DMOZ really shouldn't edit out negative comments if you do want to communicate and clear up myths.
Posted at 5:30AM on Oct 10th 2007 by Lori
180. To me, as a user, the fact that an enormous number of categories are polluted with spam, dead domains, and adsense sites speak volumes to me in regards to a decent site's chance getting added to the directory, or whether any editor is paying attention at all.
How is a searcher supposed to find an operating site in your directory that would have any relevance for what I am looking for?
It's impossible to find what isn't there. It just defies logic to assume that a searcher is going to find or click on the handful of decent sites on a category page, when the first 10 sites are no good. People give up faster than that since they don't have the time. After a few visits to odp and not finding what they were seeking, they just don't bother to visit your directory any more.
I do have my site listed in Open Directory Project, but I am almost embarrased that I do, considering it looks like my site is listed among junk sites. If I had other good sites listed among my own, it would make mine look better!
Posted at 5:44AM on Oct 10th 2007 by Sally