Dead Links et al

[wbeckman]

It looks like quite some time since anyone visited:

http://www.joeant.com/DIR/cat/7376/Asia

where there are some problems.

1. Indochina City Guide - not authorized to view.

2. Asiaweek Online - page not found.

3. Human Resources Development - no content.

4. Friends of Tuva - Tuva is, was, a single country and now a part of the Russian Federation. I would think this site should not be located in the general Asia category.

Just thought someone here would want to know.

[Hbird64]

Walt,

thank you for pointing out these bad links. I took care of them and the changes will be visible in public view after the Wednesday update.

We don't want to use automated link checkers because they use a lot of bandwith and they can't always be trusted. Also a human editor can search for a new link, that replaced the bad one, a computer can't :cool:

Hugo

[g1smd]

Running a program like Xenu LinkSleuth over your site one page at a time, would flag immediate problems up very easily.

I recently used it to clear 10% of the unreviewed in an ODP category. A second look with a real browser was used to confirm the URL really had gone/moved/failed before editing or deletion.

[Hbird64]

Thanks G1,

I'll have a look at the program. The unreviewed submissions are no problem here, we have enough editors to review them.

Hugo

[g1smd]

I used it as a "pre-pass" to get rid of all the dead stuff, first. Cleared the junk leaving just stuff that actually worked for later review.

ODP editors have similar tools to check the listed sites as they wish, and if they don't an automated process runs several times per year to do it any way.

[wbeckman]

After seeing JA mentioned in another thread, I took a quick look at some areas of interest and found the following:

In http://www.joeant.com/DIR/cat/10938/Iraq, the 2nd and 3rd entries are not found.

In http://www.joeant.com/DIR/cat/7376/, Asian Assoc. not available.

In http://www.joeant.com/DIR/cat/14561/Thailand, Palaces of the King no response.

In http://www.joeant.com/DIR/cat/10961/Taiwan, 2nd entry not in English.

Misspellings:

daugther
bollowood
histroy
accomodation
acommodation
libary
sophisiticated
sponors
appartment
roomates
catagories
hunderd
mountian
goverment
enviroment
comerce
personel (in the title)
photgraphy
recieve
begining
sponser
sponsered
info (abbreviations OK?)
cemetary

There are obviously tons more.

Cheers...

[Hbird64]

Thanks for pointing out the errors!

I took care of them. After the next update they will also be available in public view.

Maybe you should become an editor, then you can fix most errors yourself ;-)

Hugo

[Hbird64]

2nd entry not in English.

We allow non English sites.

Hugo

[Connie]

I think you will probably find some bad links in any directory. You find bad links in the SERPs. why would a directory be any different?

I doubt that misspelling is of much importance to a directory.

I am not sure what you are trying to say.

[Hbird64]

We don't like misspellings 8)

I think the amount of typos also is a showcase of the quality of a directory.

Hugo

[Quadrille]

Originally posted by Hbird64
I think the amount of typos also is a showcase of the quality of a directory.Do you think so? I guess that's true if people are paying ... but quite honestly, I think the quality of the content is much, much more important.

I can forgive a few typos - I cannot forgive the inclusion of c*** sites.

I agree that a perfect directory would be right on both measures - but I can't type ;)

[Glo]

We do think that correcting typos is a quality control issue. The descriptions are JoeAnt's content which is why we stress that they be unique, i.e. not taken from the site or from another directories (copied). The actual sites belong to their owners so they truly aren't our content. We may be held accountable for the type of sites we will lists and how they are categorized but the actual content is the title and descriptions we attach to those listings.

[Quadrille]

Originally posted by Glo
The actual sites belong to their owners so they truly aren't our content. aren't you being just a little picky? :)

Of course the sites belong to their owners; but the selection of sites is yours; and that's what defines any directory.

[wbeckman]

I doubt that misspelling is of much importance to a directory. Of course, misspellings per se aren't critical to a directory. What it does is to indicate to the reader something about the quality of editing behind the selection of sites. An editor's job, at least this kind of editor, is not particularly difficult. It's to find sites and then write a simple description about them. If he/she can't do the 2nd part well, the only part that involves any real editing in the normal sense, then what good is the effort? Doesn't it bother your sensibilities when you see mistake after mistake, typo after typo, in many directories? If these so-called editors can't do things this simple correctly, why are they doing them at all? Imo, any directory owner who doesn't care about these kinds of things is probably turning many people like me off. When I see lousy editing, I know it was done by someone who cares very little about what he's doing and I'll probably go elsewhere to find what I want. Crappy editing is probably symptomatic of how the same person does other things in life, taking short cuts instead of doing a job properly. Poor editing is a sign of a sloppy person, not the type of person I would ever hire to do anything.

Hugo, I'm wondering who your target audience is. Malaysia is a big country with potentially thousands of sites in the English language alone (the ODP has > 4,000 listings). Joeant has exactly one site and it's in Bahasa Malay. Your overall site is primarily in English it seems, so wouldn't it be appropriate to have at least some English-language content listed. The only people who can appreciate that lone entry are Malaysians or Indonesians, but I doubt they are your expected readers. Also I wonder if the English description accurately describes the actual contents. The ODP has a reasonable policy in this regard in that all listed sites in the English language section must have English language content. I can see the Malay site above being listed so long as there were an English lang. link, but I saw none. Just my opinion, anyway.

[WebSavvy]

So why not point these things out to Hugo or Glo privately? Is there really a "need" to do this publicly?

As far as I can tell, they didn't ask for a site review. We have a policy here that dragging someone's site into a thread and picking out "problems" with it, is in bad taste unless the owner of said site specifically asked you to do so.

In future, if you have something along these lines that you'd like to bring to JA's attention, it shows more class if you speak to them privately.

I see Glo is responding to this thread. Following her reply, I will be closing this thread.

Thanks.

[Glo]

Hugo, I'm wondering who your target audience is. Malaysia is a big country with potentially thousands of sites in the English language alone (the ODP has > 4,000 listings). Joeant has exactly one site and it's in Bahasa Malay. Your overall site is primarily in English it seems, so wouldn't it be appropriate to have at least some English-language content listed. The only people who can appreciate that lone entry are Malaysians or Indonesians, but I doubt they are your expected readers. Also I wonder if the English description accurately describes the actual contents. The ODP has a reasonable policy in this regard in that all listed sites in the English language section must have English language content. I can see the Malay site above being listed so long as there were an English lang. link, but I saw none. Just my opinion, anyway.

I suppose that the Malaysia Regional topic will grow when an editor who is interested in Malaysia decides to add sites there. JoeAnt isn't the ODP, nor should we mimic them. Our policy is to list sites, regardless of the language they are written in as long as they comply with our guidelines. That could change in the future but I doubt it. You will find that many of the Regional topics are not fleshed out and some are completely empty. There's a lot of room for improvement but until editors who want to work in those topics come along, the regional area will not be as good as it could be.

I should also note that new editors can not edit in the Regional area. They have to reach a certain level of editing expertise before they are turned loose on a whole Regional section.

[g1smd]

Over at the ODP there are several editors that spend a large amount of time simply searching for and correcting spelling and grammar mistakes in live entries. It's been a long term project that will never end, even if the people involved come and go on a random basis.


Sometimes a pattern of poor editing by partcular editors or in certain categories can be picked up by those people, and the root causes of those problems addressed at an early stage. It is all just another part of the overall quality control that is necessary on any site of this size (600 000 categories).

[WebSavvy]

g1, I'm closing this thread. We closed the other thread because no representative of JoeAnt asked for a site review. Any comments about design, navigation, layout, content, spelling, etc., are unsolicited if not asked for by the site owner.

We currently [circa 2004] have the policy here that dragging someone's site into a thread and offering criticisms that were not asked for, is poor forum etiquette.

If you have something you'd personally like to address with regard to JoeAnt, please speak to the appropriate JoeAnt representatives via private message.

DMOZ is not without its own problems, no?

[ihelpyou]

oh, I don't know.

If a site like Google, Yahoo, DMOZ are given criticism in here and rightly so if necessary, then why not joeant, gimpsy, and websavvy?? They all have "separate" forums as well and are prominently displayed in here. I see no reason why constructive criticism is a bad thing? I agree with sites generally and that if the member did not ask for a review of the site, but sites in here with their own forum are not your everyday members/sites. They are high profile type sites and are criticised around the internet on a daily basis.

Once you get "good" and get popular, the same standards simply don't appy. :) I actually think joeant welcomes things being pointed out to them.

[WebSavvy]

Hugo told me differently, though Doug. He would prefer it handled via private message.

I'll unlock this thread and Hugo and Glo can address this themselves.

I just found the whole thing a bit petty and pointless. Editors from JoeAnt, Skaffe, GoGuides, Gimpsy, and WebSavvy -- don't follow dmoz editors around saying; "Well ya know, this is how we do things over at ______" ...

BUT dmoz editors do always say that to other directories.

dmoz is dmoz.
Other directories are NOT dmoz and do not care how things are done over at dmoz.

'nuff said

[ihelpyou]

hmm well, dont' know. If I were the owner of a directory that is now popular with the webmaster/owner community, I'd be damn proud of it and willing to accept constructive criticism of it in public. Afterall, google, yahoo, etc, including dmoz accept criticism all day long and the owners don't say one word about it. :) Feel good about it. Heck, I feel good when people out there bash me and this place. Any kind of talk is a good thing. :D

Having a forum all your own puts you at a different level than a regular site/member in here. If a site does not want criticism in public, then why have a forum all their own to begin with?

[g1smd]

>> do not care how things are done over at dmoz <<

Is that aimed at me?

I was just saying how these things are handled over there, just in case anyone else wanted to try doing it the same way too... and if they don't want to try it, then that is also OK.

Nothing else was to be implied by what I said.

[WebSavvy]

Oh no, g1. Not aimed at you at all. It's in reference to another editor that thinks they should be "keeping us (other directory owners) on our toes" ... he knows who he is.

Sorry I didn't make that clear. It was in no way, shape, or form, aimed at anything you've said. :)

[Glo]

Personally, I don't care. The thread can stay open or can be closed. I don't have a problem with criticism, constructive or otherwise. When anyone looks for a reason to fault something or someone like wbeckman seemed to be doing, they will find it. I'm still not sure what point he was trying to make by posting in this thread. It seems he had more on his mind than the petty typos and the language thingy.

I'd like to think he posted the typos to help but I seriously doubt that was his intent, though it did help and we can always use more help! ;)

My only concern is that I will forget who or what I'm representing in this forum and let the REAL me slip out ... gawd forbid should that happen! :D

[Glo]

g1smd, we do have a few editors who look for misspelled words and/or specific phrases that shouldn't be used in descriptions. Without going into any real detail (simply because I'm too lazy to type it out), the don't always find everything simply because they aren't searching for it.

Not being the best speller on the block, I often miss what some would see as an obvious error when reviewing a submission. I'm sure I'm not the only one who misses them while reviewing. Typos/misspelled words will always be something that needs to be worked on in most directories. That doesn't mean that we will not work at cleaning them up and that we don't appreciate someone drawing our attention to them.

[ihelpyou]

My only concern is that I will forget who or what I'm representing in this forum and let the REAL me slip out ... gawd forbid should that happen!
But you see Glo; I've known for along time that you are representing "one" site in here, but have entirely different "thang" that is the "real" important "thang" in your life that you are keeping VERY hidden. :D You have not put anything over on me at all.... for a few years now. lol

Anytime you want to PM me about you, feel free. :)

[Connie]

Not being the best speller on the block,
That certainly represents me. :D

I check all my forum post with a spell checker. If I use to, rather than too, the spell checker will not find an error even though one is wrong based on my post.

Spell checkers make mistakes.

That does not mean the person posting, or editing is completely inept, or that they do not care about quality. It does not mean that they have not edited the spelling to the best of their ability.

[WebSavvy]

eh? Say what, Doug? Are you all hopped up on cake and ice cream? Because ... you're not making *any* sense. :confused:

Must be the smoke from all of those candles ... how many fire alarms went off?

[Glo]

:lol: @ Deb!

Doug, if I pm you will you tell me about me? :D

[ihelpyou]

Nope, as I don't know your "other" life, but I do know you have one. :D

[WebSavvy]

Put down the cake man! Someone ... quick ... grab his fork before he hurts himself.

[Dave Hawley]

Wouldn't it make more sense for a directory to ensure grammar and spelling is correct before making the listing live? Seems to be double handling by having editors that look for errors. Is there another editors that checks the 1st editors edits:)

[WebSavvy]

I don't know how they do things in other places, but that's how we do it in websavvy.

The submissions go to Temp Queue and they're reviewed by our editors. The editors all have spellcheckers in their dashboards.

After the editor rewrites the description to conform with our guidelines, they then send it to Admin Queue.

Once in Admin Queue it's reviewed by one of the four Administrators, or one of the three Jr. Administrators.

If no errors are found it's approved to Live Queue (where it becomes publicly available). If it does contain errors it's sent back to the Editor for further editing and corrections.

[Dave Hawley]

That makes perfect sense to me.

[wbeckman]

Not aimed at you at all. It's in reference to another editor that thinks they should be "keeping us (other directory owners) on our toes" ... he knows who he is. Hmm, could that have been aimed at me perhaps? You know I'm actually quite surprised there has been so much indignation (is that the right word?) to the suggestions I was making re. the JA directory. After I left DMOZ quite a few months ago as an editor, I was finding problems that I felt needed attention. So I simple went on over to the RZ Quality Control forum they have there and mentioned a number of items that should be corrected. That is what that forum is for as I think it was g1 who mentioned that fact earlier in this thread. The senior editors there actually welcome the kinds of problems I brought up, so it was natural for me to think the same thing would be welcome here. Alas, it seems not to be the case for many in this thread. Deb even went so far as to say I lacked "class" for doing so. In fact, one of the reasons I started this thread originally was that others might join in and continue making comments, critical or otherwise, in order to help this and another directory. So far, it appears not to have been successful in that regard. Sorry, but there is no ulterior motive for those of you who think that way.

[WebSavvy]

wbeckman, my comments weren't aimed at you, either. There's another editor here (current/former? dmoz) and he's not someone I would let into my directory as an editor.

Firstly, his attitude is borderline bigot. I have no issues with any races, creeds, religions, political affiliations, etc., and our selection of editors demonstrates this.

He sends me messages all the time saying "Oh you shouldn't do things this way, you should do it that way -- because that's how dmoz does it."

I finally had had enough and told him to stop PM'img me and to stop emailing me.

DMOZ is a fine directory and their editors work hard. DMOZ has its own policies and its own way of doing things, which doesn't mean it's good/bad or right/wrong. It just means it's DMOZs' way of doing things.

In that very same respect, other directories have their way of doing things too. Whether it's good/bad or right/wrong, they are entitled to handle their business their way.

I've seen numerous errors, in both sentence structure and spelling, in DMOZ website descriptions. However, you would never see me starting a thread about the grammatical errors in DMOZ.

Firstly, no directory is perfect. Editors are volunteers and many of them work hard. They do the best they can and find sites that meet the guidelines set forth by the directory. To have complete perfection in anything is not possible because of the "human" aspect, as humans are by nature, imperfect.

DMOZ has spelling errors, sentence structure errors, syntax errors, and deadlinks. Wow, what do you know ... they're just like JoeAnt and other directories too!

There's an old saying; People that live in glass houses should never throw stones.

Now, if there were some serious type of "editor abuse" going on within JA, it would be in public interest to expose it and would rightfully warrant a thread about the matter. However, I just don't quite see spelling errors as some important public interest issue, and this coming from me says a lot.

I'm a former English Teacher with nearly 20 years Teaching background. I loathe seeing grammatical errors and every time I do I'm tempted to find my red pen! However, if a property doesn't belong to you and the "assignment" has not been given to you to correct such errors, it then becomes unsolicited advice.

It's one thing to be asked for advice and quite another to provide it when none had been sought.

Hopefully, you're able to see and understand the difference?

[ihelpyou]

hmm I disagree Deb. ... spelling errors are something "every" website would want to know about, including me. If someone pointed out any typos on my site, I would want them to tell me about them. I think that goes for any website for the most part.

Sure, I doubt I would start a new thread to tell a site that fact, but I would certainly post about it in another thread going on or something.

beckman started a thread about "dead links" at joeant, which I feel is VERY much wanted in here. There is nothing wrong with pointing out spelling errors as well. If someone posted a new thread about something websavvy was doing, I would think others might point out other things as well. Not a damn thing wrong with that at all. If a site is that popular that others want to point things out, that's a damn good compliment to that site I would think. NO site who is listed on the front page of these forums with their very own forums is going to be protected from criticism. Constructive criticism should be wanted by those sites the same as praise is wanted. If an owner can't handle criticism for being popular and seen as important, then they shouldn't be popular at all. :)

Google, yahoo, MSN, DMOZ, etc are listed on the front page in here and they don't have any rules about criticism in here, so why would any of the other directories listed on the front page have a different set of rules than they do?

[WebSavvy]

Doug, I truly believe you're missing what I'm trying to express here.

beckman has a relationship with dmoz, so naturally any criticism he has at RZ would have a "comfort zone level" due to the existing prior relationship.

However, that relationship never existed with him and JoeAnt.

You are not "welcoming" to open critism such as been pointed out here. For example, the TW Yahoo's were analyzing and commenting on your logo alt attribute. You were openly bothered by this.

The size or popularity of a website should not make any difference.

Something like editor abuse, guideline infractions, etc., are something that are exposed within the guise of public interest. Exposing such abuses makes a directory stronger.

Starting a thread about spelling errors isn't a public interest thing as the only ones it helps would be the directory reps themselves. So, why not simply handle that privately?

I guess it just comes down to how a person handles themselves. I personally would never begin a thread pointing out spelling errors on someone else's site especially if the site I represented was also guilty of the same type of errors, repeatedly.

Physician heal thy self.

[ihelpyou]

What??

I totally have NO CLUE as to what you are trying to say. And what the hell does another site bashing me have to do with "this" issue"?

Sheesh Deb. You are very wrong. Period.

Criticism of sites with their OWN forum on the front page in here is NOT going to stop. Period. Live with it. If we all can bash and trash DMOZ and Google and Yahoo whenever anyone wants to do so, then we all can also bash joeant, goguides and websavvy whenever we want as well. You all have your own forum in here which means you are "something". If you think for one second that I'm going to ban any criticism of websavvy or joeant just because the owner does not like it, you are mistaken.

I hope I'm clear. :)

http://www.ihelpyou.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21297&perpage=20&pagenumber=1

I truly don't get it. He posted in the very same thread he started a few days earlier. What the hell is wrong with pointing out mistakes in the Joeant directory? He posted very legitimate things that I would think joeant would certainly want to fix. I know I would.

Comparing another site who is bashing me? That other site does not have my site/forums listed on their front page prominently either. I just don't get the connection at all.

Websavvy, joeant, goguides, gimpsy, etc, are on the front page in here with their own forum. If these directories cannot take criticism, then they should be removed from the front page.

[WebSavvy]

You're clear.

I'm not "wrong" ... it's my opinion which I am entitled to both have and express.

Just as well, you have your opinions to which you are also entitled to both have and express.

It's not my position to quantify whether or not your opinions are right or wrong within the same guise it's not your position or responsibility to quantify whether or not my opinions are right or wrong.

So, let's just agree to disagree on this matter.

I won't be posting on this subject any further and I've more than adequately stated my position, reasoning, and logic which to a reasonable person, would be perfectly clear.

[ihelpyou]

Actually Deb; my opinion was posted as a fact as we are not going to start censoring members just because they are criticizing a site that has their own forum in here. :) You can have your opinion about it, and might not like it, but what I posted were facts. It's just not something I will compromise on.

[WebSavvy]

OK, I'm fine with that.

I don't have any problems with someone pointing out editor abuses, guideline infractions, deadlinks, etc., as these things need to be brought to the attention of someone with the powers to correct or control it.

But for something as trivial as "oooh I found a spelling error" ... my opinion is -- just send me a PM because it's really a waste of my time for something that's trivial in nature as compared to more serious administrative responsibilities such as deadlinks, editor abuses, and guideline infractions.

Hopefully now, I've now made it abundantly clear exactly what I mean without a monochrome of ambiguity.

[g1smd]

Just to make things clear, the ODP openly welcomes anyone that is prepared to list spelling and grammar errors, dead links, and sites that no longer meet their listed description. Even with 8000 editors, things get missed; the more eyes reporting things that are incorrect, the better. Whether anyone believes that or not, the ODP makes quality control of existing listings a higher priority than adding more sites and that is why it gives editors 4 ways of communicating these things internally, and non-editors 3 ways of communicating these to editors...

[WebSavvy]

OK. :)

The next time I run across some g1, I'll send it to you via PM. OK?

[g1smd]

Posting in the Quality Control thread at Resource Zone gets more eyeballs, so posting there would be better... but I can always pass them on...

[WebSavvy]

OK, actually I'd prefer to pass them to you in PM here. All that green at RZ is very hard on the eyes. Using my screen reader there is useless because it chokes on the code for some reason.

... today has just been frustrating ... so, I'm outta here now.

see ya's all tomorrow