And while yes, that sucks for lots of people desperately trying to get their site listed, it’s great for those who are already listed because their sites passed inspection.

It means that the directory is exclusive, which google likes, and therefore they scrape the DMOZ dump file and use it for their own directory.

First, thank you for your comment. Second, I wasn’t comparing DMOZ and Wikipedia, rather discussing two prominent websites in search engine results for multiple topics.

My remark about the Google listing in Wikipedia is only 3,000 words is relevant to the fact that there is a whole lot more information that would be included if this article explored all of what Google is, so my point is that there isn’t enough information included.

I have read the DMOZ blog, which was not active at the time of publication of this article in March of 2007. Still, little has changed in relation to the value of the content that both DMOZ and Wikipedia offers.

Between the dmoz category and the Google results, look at the Google results. You’ll see there’s a lot of them that aren’t companies but that provides informations.
In that category of dmoz, you’ll see *only* companies. So it’s more relevant.

For Wikipedia, I also don’t see how you can consider that an article is irrelevant because there are less words than the number of results in Google. Those results in the search engine are, for most of them, saying the same thing. Are you suggesting that Wikipedia should be much more consistent but repeat itself 50 times in the same article ?

Moreover, you’re saying that dmoz is going without a captain, and direction. Well if you interested yourself a bit more to the project before saying that kind of thing, you wouldn’t say that.
Dmoz is having a captain. His name is Bob Keating. And they have a direction, even if the next big change for the directory isn’t public yet and only editors are having access to it.
Perhaps you should read the official dmoz blog : http://dmoz.org
And the post about the staff : http://blog.dmoz.org/2009/01/08/meet-aols-dmoz-staff-team/

I know how you feel. It seems that many of the most competitive verticals on the Internet are even tougher when websites like DMOZ seemingly hold it against many of us and the search engines place so much value on being included.

Personally, I have been intent on being listed in DMOZ for well over three years and have had no reply or consideration. It makes me feel like there is an empty landfill of quality websites that are just invisible to the editors.

That is why I would like the search engines to lower the value placed upon websites that continually fail to update content or at least better themselves like DMOZ.

I have a Google of 4, I have great presence on most other search engines, but I do not exist on DMOZ.

DMOZ has no place in the real SEO world. It should be considered irrelevent by the other search engines.

Furthermore I operate in both Kansas and Missouri, I offer commercial and residential property mangement, sales and leasing. I even work with a large quantity of investment property.

DMOZ will allow me to choose one catagory, property management, real estate, residential or commercial. They also offer no option for serving more than one area IE Kansas and MIssouri.

I can’t immagine if I were a business that served a tri-state area like NJ, NY, CT or the Souxland in IA, NE, SD.

I can appreciate this! I battle with these same results and now YouTube has really had an affect too! The only good thing about Wikipedia is that they are marketing anything… yet!