Is It Possible To Get Listed In DMOZ These Days?
Many a webmaster has been through the DMOZ experience.
Unless you have friends on the inside, or happen to pick one of the rare categories in which the editor is doing their job, the experience pretty much goes like this:
- Carefully select category
- Submit relevant details
- Wait three years
- Ask politely why your listing hasn’t been approved yet
- Wait another three years
- Give up
However, I thought it would be a useful exercise to demonstrate the correct process of submitting a site to DMOZ, and seeing what, if anything, happens. For the record, Google recommends submitting your site to directories, such as DMOZ, as a valid way to get links.
Step One: Read DMOZ rules of submission to see if this site qualifies. The rules can be found here.
Reading through these rules, DMOZ say they are "highly selective" about sites they list.
Hmmm….I wonder if we are actually good enough to appear in DMOZ?
As I browse through some of the DMOZ categories to get a feeling for the the high standard required, I come across some pretty stiff competition. Sites such as:
"Flickor - Women from Sweden posing nude and having sex".
The target site doesn’t appear to contain women whos nationality could be clearly defined as Swedish, or any other nationality for that matter, as the site appears to contain nothing at all.
It’s a parked domain.
As I flicked through the listings, this seemed to be a fairly common occurance. Some of the active domains I did find were on topic, if a little stale and outdated.
Given we’ve recently been voted to the very top of industry bell-weather Sphinn, I think it’s fair to say that we have independently demonstrated we are useful, topical and relevant, as voted by our peers. Hopefully that should be a sufficient test of quality for DMOZ.
Also, the following rules must be observed:
- Do not submit mirror sites. Mirror sites are sites that contain identical content, but have altogether different URLs. - check
- Do not submit URLs that contain only the same or similar content as other sites you may have listed in the directory. Sites with overlapping and repetitive content are not helpful to users of the directory. Multiple submissions of the same or related sites may result in the exclusion and/or deletion of those and all affiliated sites. - check
- Do not disguise your submission and submit the same URL more than once - check
Example: http://www.dmoz.org and http://www.dmoz.org/index.html - Do not submit any site with an address that redirects to another address - check
- The Open Directory has a policy against the inclusion of sites with illegal content. Examples of illegal material include child pornography; libel; material that infringes any intellectual property right; and material that specifically advocates, solicits or abets illegal activity (such as fraud or violence) - check
- Do not submit sites "under construction." Wait until a site is complete before submitting it. Sites that are incomplete, contain "Under Construction" notices, or contain broken graphics or links aren’t good candidates for the directory - check
- Submit pornographic sites to the appropriate category under Adult. - check
- Submit non-English sites to the appropriate category under World - check
- Don’t submit sites consisting largely of affiliate links - check
Fair enough. Looks like we’ve passed the first hurdle.
Step Two: Make sure your site isn’t already listed.
I’m not already listed.
Step Three: Identify the single best category for your site.
Hmmm. I guess I would classify my site as link marketing. Let’s try link marketing.
Nope. No joy there.
Let’s try "internet marketing" instead.
Bingo!
Step Four: Ok, next I click on site description , just to be sure we would be a good fit for this category. The site description page proceeds to tell me what this category is "NOT!". That’s not particularly welcoming or helpful, but onwards.
The guidelines read:
"If you are a site designer, builder, promoter, submission service, even if the words marketing appear on your site or in your business name, this does not make you an Internet Marketer automatically"
It doesn’t? Why ever not? What words would I use - car mechanic?
Perhaps what they really mean is that the category doesn’t list internet marketing sites, even though the title would strongly suggest that is the case. DMOZ goes on to say:
"In other words, a well established company or consultant with verifiable expertise and contacts. Marketing does not happen, every inch is planned with contingencies for every plan. Many of these sites have case studies of current or past clientele"
And who could possibly argue.
I do actually have a fairly robust marketing track record, with real live clients, and took part in endless meetings in which terms like macrosegmentation, strategic window, decision matrix, and off-invoice allowance were thrown about wildly. Sometimes even after lunch. But I have no idea how I would prove that to DMOZ.
Perhaps DMOZ only want agencies in that category? You’d think they’d just label the category "Agencies", but you’ve got to expect this type of arbitrary nonsense when dealing with DMOZ. Needless to say, the category only features three internet marketing agency links, one of which leads to a spam page. In Dutch.
Perhaps I’m better suited to a sub-category. Ah-ha! Perhaps I’m a "Resource".
"You have a site offering substantial unique content (not just commercial offerings) related to Internet Marketing. Sites which are mostly affiliate links will not be listed. Please do not submit sites cloning "Make Your Site Sell" or other similar programs".
I guess that’s a good fit. I don’t know what substantial means, as they don’t define it. We’re certainly more substantial than a few of the existing listings, 4-11 Internet Marketing, for example.
I hit "Suggest URL". I’m almost feeling excited.

I enter my details, careful to ensure that I’m following the rules.
Here’s my description: "Provides news and information about link marketing techniques and strategies. Also features interviews with internet marketing experts".
I check the terms of use. Yes, AOL owns my first born child. Yes, I’m happy with the terms of use.
I click "Submit" .
I’m advised my submission has indeed been received, and that an editor will review it.
Wonderful!
Who is the editor? Turns out, there isn’t one. However, there is an editor for the category above, cmconsulting.
I find with DMOZ, it all comes down to the quality of the category editor. Some are on the ball, whilst others haven’t signed in for months. Many more appear to be arguing in the DMOZ staffroom.
We’ll see what happens. I’ll count the days ’til DMOZ.






August 17th, 2007 at 6:54 am
Few months ago i tried registering my own web-comic site/blog to DMOZ. I’ve read through all the rules, faqs, etc. After registering they noted me that “registration can take up to few weeks or even months”. Pity. Still waiting .(
August 17th, 2007 at 6:33 pm
Same as enc…
I did everything. I’ve been waiting 8 months now.
August 17th, 2007 at 9:25 pm
Right.
I think your experience is common, which is ironic, given the reason DMOZ was started in the first place i.e. people were waiting too long to get their sites listed in Yahoo.
August 17th, 2007 at 10:50 pm
It seems quite obvious to me that the era of DMOZ has passed. Unfortunately, Google hasn’t yet arrived at that same conclusion…which means it’s imperative to at least TRY to get listed if competitive positioning matters to you.
After years of frustration and failure, I’ve arrived at the same conclusion as have you: It all boils down to the editor. Near as I can tell, the hierarchy of old cronies is so tight that they are able to perpetuate their delusion of self-importance withou moving a muscle to improve a single thing. They grind down new people who try to volunteer…so most newbies try it for awhile and move on. I’ve seen multiple editors come and go within the same category within a period of just a few months. And I have a friend who is still an editor there, but who gets denied for most new (currently unmoderated) categories for which he/she volunteers. Simply amazing…
The most incredible part to me is that DMOZ is owned by someone now. I forget who…but an actual moneymaking entity. Can you imagine that someone actually collects a paycheck to oversee this wreck of an online presence?
A truly powerful human-edited directory ought to be of great value. But it is a MASSIVE undertaking…and as far as I’m concerned, the name and rep of DMOZ is so sullied…and the lack of will to “right the ship” so clear…that I don’t think it will ever be truly relevant again. At least, I’ve seen no signs that would indicate a trend in that direction.
August 18th, 2007 at 3:09 am
Thanks chazzbro.
I agree that it is worth a try, but I don’t hold out much hope those in charge are any less useless at running a directory than they were two years ago.
However, the particular editor responsible for this category - cmconsulting - may be one of the good editors. Only time will tell.
BTW- AOL owns DMOZ.
August 18th, 2007 at 10:56 pm
I have an idea.
Quit wasting your time worrying about DMOZ, and instead focus on providing your visitors with content they will remember because it was so great.
I never submitted my site to DMOZ. And guess what? A few months ago I noticed the description text of my site was weird, and low and behold I was added to DMOZ.
Seriously, this post is a waste of time. Focus on making your site more useful, for example I had to sign into your site to make a post on your blog, which I find to be a huge waste of time. Why do industry leading seo blogs like seobook.com not require you to register an account?
Because they are good enough that the visitor will come back on there own accord.
August 18th, 2007 at 11:19 pm
Thanks for your thoughts, Tommy
There is method to my madness, and I’m not worried about DMOZ.
Still wondering about the sign in thing myself…
August 20th, 2007 at 3:38 pm
Maybe we should all apply to become editors? To quote the site “you can make a difference”
http://www.dmoz.org/about.html
August 20th, 2007 at 10:09 pm
If there’s no editor for the category you’re submitting to, you should absolutely apply to be an editor.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:38 pm
If people want to apply to be editors, do so by all means. Personally, I don’t think one should have to apply to be an editor of a directory simply to get a site listed.
Let me know how the “applying to be a DMOZ editor” experience goes
August 20th, 2007 at 11:13 pm
I was a DMOZ editor for a short time. It was a very harried time in my life (not related to DMOZ…despite the fact that I wish I could pin on them ALL of the world’s evils), and I eventually had to drop out. I went back later to apply…and found the application process so disjointed and bruising (weeks-long delays between responses, write a sample listing, self-declare every site you own or might even have a slight interest in seeing listed…of course, this might be a slight exaggeration)…I just dropped it.
Bottom line for me is that I’d be willing to moderate a category…and to do so fair-mindedly and faithfully, but I’ve lost so much respect for them as a site that I can no longer be involved in such a broken-down mess in good conscience. There just seem to be too many people there with personal interests in protecting the status quo.
August 21st, 2007 at 2:51 am
Thanks. I enjoyed the article as it was identical to my own experience 10 - 12 months ago and I am still waiting. After a couple of months I checked and did so every 2 or 3 weeks and have just given up. Even thought of volunteering to be an editor but, like Chuck, I became disgusted with the whole process.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:31 am
Right, Chuck.
They certainly do have issues with overload, but their fortress mentality has alienated many people. I don’t think they could care less, either. It’s a tight little club, achieving little.
Many editors have moved on to Wikipedia instead.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:33 am
Thanks Susan.
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:08 pm
DMOZ - where so I start? I think most of us in the industry have written them off. Fortunately, they do not hold the keys to online success, although I am baffled as to why two seemlingly solid companies continue to stake their reputation on DMOZ. AOL, the owner, and Google, who still uses this outdated database as its Directory.
August 24th, 2007 at 3:27 am
I’m guessing Google don’t use all of the ODP. In any case, the influence on ranking is minor.
AOL probably don’t know what to do with it.
What they should do is kick all the editors out, charge listing fees, pay some editors to administer it, and compete directly with Mahalo.
Or just turn it off.
August 27th, 2007 at 11:59 am
That has got to be the fastest Dmoz entry ever, they decline all of my clients sites making up reasons like this site mirrors another site (when it has totally unique content), or standard drop ship website (when it is not a drop ship website).
August 28th, 2007 at 10:08 am
And now, Shoemoney is reporting that he was the victim of an extortion attempt by a purported DMOZ editor…and when he didn’t pay, his site was removed:
http://www.shoemoney.com/2007/08/26/dmoz-extortion/
Man…next thing you know, DMOZ editors will be drowning puppies or something. LOL…
August 31st, 2007 at 7:04 pm
What about Wikia.com? that looks promising.
A directory that is public and free.
November 15th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
My deeplink is listed on DMOZ but homepage not. I submit it many times but I am desperate now. We will see what happens.
December 5th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
I agree, we should make a new DMOZ.
December 21st, 2007 at 3:45 pm
Yes, but it takes time…
Two sites I submitted at the beginning of September are now (21st December) listed.
Oh what joy!
Two others submitted at the same time aren’t listed; yet.
December 28th, 2007 at 4:00 am
I think most of us in the industry have written them off. Fortunately, they do not hold the keys to online success.
April 2nd, 2008 at 6:36 am
That is great. I think what they should do is kick all the editors out, charge listing fees, pay some editors to administer it, and compete directly with Mahalo.