Don't Like DMOZ Snippets? MSN Says We Won't Use Them

[incrediblehelp]

Well sort of. From the MSN Blog:

Opting Out of Open Directory Listings for Webmasters (http://blogs.msdn.com/msnsearch/archive/2006/05/22/603917.aspx)


What has bothered the webmasters previously is that when search engines preferred search result descriptions from dmoz.org, they did not empower webmasters to opt-out of those descriptions. This can be especially annoying if the descriptions from dmoz.org are outdated, or just plain inaccurate.

So what we did was introduce a new option at the page level - a robots meta tag – that tells the MSN search bot not to use the DMOZ site snippet. This is something that only can be done at Web page level, by a webmaster, and is not done as part of the robot.txt file.

Jeeez, finally a search engine does something that makes sense for us out there. A couple of "I wonders":

I wonder if other search engines will follow.

I wonder how using this or not using this tag will effect the algo rating in MSN?

Will using this tag effect your ranking in other search engines?

Test, test, test....

[incrediblehelp]

OK just changed my KBK website (http://www.kbkmarketing.com/) and added this tag to it. MSN was using the DMOZ description in the MSN SERPS (http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=kbk+marketing&Form=MSNH):

Professional SEO Services SEO Done The Right Way KBK Marketing LLC
Offers web development and design, interactive marketing and search engine positioning.

Lets see how long it takes to change in the SERPs from today.

[incrediblehelp]

Still no changes 5-24-06

[Jabber_uk]

hmmph - I'm gonna look at this myself. Would be interested if/ when the SERPS change for you incrediblehelp

[google junky]

If this is for real and will work then I say, "Way to go MSN!"

I can't wait to see how this works out for you incrediblehelp. Google needs to be smacked around a few times to do the same thing.
Using the usually moronic DMOZ description that is developed is useless in any case I have seen.

I have requested for 2 sites to be taken out of DMOZ for the very reason that the description that sometimes shows up on Google sucks. Of course getting a site taken out of DMOZ is as much as a pain as most have trying to get their site in DMOZ.

I'm not trying to bash DMOZ. I just have no use for them.
I didn't even ask for the 2 sites I mentioned to be in DMOZ in the first place.

[kjohnson5576]

Didn't even ask to be placed in DMOZ Google Junky? What luck! I've been waiting 3 and a 1/2 years and haven't seen any one new enter my catagory in that time. The descriptions may not be great, but the linking ability you get from DMOZ and it's affiliated directories really makes a difference, in my opinion.

[zephyrireland]

I've implemented this on one of my sites which had a very boring DMOZ entry, so hopefully this will jazz up the description a bit. I will report back if it works .

[saifai]

Just thought I'd mention that DMOZ does accept updates to the listings. You can send in and update to the description, title, or URL yourself. If you find the category on DMOZ where your listing is, there's a link at the top to "update listing." So long as the category is moderated by an active editor, it should go through fine.

The only thing you have to keep in mind with the descriptions is they don't allow anything in the description they consider to be "hype." This would be any language that sounds more like an infomercial than it does a description for a site.

From my opinion, I would use the suggested MSN opt-out method if the description update didn't go through, or the description they're insisting on using just doesn't work for you.

[bj]

Considering the dmoz description of my site ANYTHING would be better than that! But since it took me so long to get in there I'm afraid to even screw with it at all. Not that I've ever gotten traffic from there, but . . . ack.

I hope this meta thingie works.

[krumel]

But MSN not always used DMOZ description.

So what`s the difference?

In the first place MSN agreed to use ODP description.

Nothing spectacular.

From my point of view.

[incrediblehelp]

But MSN not always used DMOZ description.

So what`s the difference?

In the first place MSN agreed to use ODP description.

Nothing spectacular.

From my point of view.

huh?

This is very important for those who have inaccurate or an awfully written DMOZ description. Now you can get rid of it to improve your CTR.

[sudhani]

I would like if Google does this. But G will never attempt.

Usually, Dmoz description is thrown out when there are no matching keywords on the page or meta description. In another case, when the search is term is your company name / website name.

So, I won't bother about this new development.

-Sudha

[sudhani]

huh?

This is very important for those who have inaccurate or an awfully written DMOZ description. Now you can get rid of it to improve your CTR.

My question -

How many times you get DMOZ description to show up? The number is toooo insignificant to consider for CTR.

-Sudha

[incrediblehelp]

How many times you get DMOZ description to show up? The number is toooo insignificant to consider for CTR.
Not true at all. The DMOZ description commonly shows up for ALL rankings on a home page once Google, MSN chooses to start using it and if you had one you didn't feel properly explained your website you would feel different I am sure.

Just do a search on this topic in Google (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=DMOZ+description&btnG=Google+Search) you will find SEO forums filled with complaints about the DMOZ description use.

[TrafficProducer]

MSN already do this... Others have done via robot.txt will follow :)

If users start adding all these (excludes), and things like NOFOLLOW then why not just say, "Please do not list my site, I don't want any visitors,"

Then the same webmaste may use Google site maps or ROR sitemaps, or of course manual sitemaps, to try to get more pages listed... T

This starts getting complex, (list me with Google but not DMOZ or MSN, but list me with who ever). This get be too complex for search engines who just stop listing the site.

DMOZ:-
<META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOODP">

MSN:-

<META NAME="msnbot" CONTENT="NOODP">

[dkginternet]

My approach to this issue is a bit slanted and reverse.

When I'm at wits-end in trying to write the perfect Title and Description tags for a rank-stubborn site, I will sometimes use the DMOZ info --verbatim! If it's at least accurate anyway...

When DMOZ evaluates their "become an editor" applicants, they have to give extra credance as to how the applicant writes the title and description for a site within their preferred category in order to ensure a proper listing within the open-directory.

Thus, using the DMOZ Title and the DMOZ Description or elements thereof, might be a good place to start if you're having trouble in these areas. BUT, I do agree in that they should keep their listings more current!

Also, since many of the engines seem to like the DMOZ titles and descriptions, it makes sense to consider their worth.

DKG

[krumel]

huh?

This is very important for those who have inaccurate or an awfully written DMOZ description. Now you can get rid of it to improve your CTR.
I know (http://www.webproworld.com/archive.php/o_t__t_58730__is-msn-using-odp-description.html) that. At the time no one on this forum seems to be interested in this.

Lol

All I was saying is that MSN choose to use ODP description.
Why? I belive that was foolish.

And now trying to bring something new to show that thy are alive.
To some they are...

[krumel]

huh?

This is very important for those who have inaccurate or an awfully written DMOZ description. Now you can get rid of it to improve your CTR.
I know (http://www.webproworld.com/archive.php/o_t__t_58730__is-msn-using-odp-description.html) that. At the time no one on this forum seems to be interested in this.

Lol

All I was saying is that MSN choose to use ODP description.
Why? I belive that was foolish.

And now trying to bring something new to show that thy are alive.
To some they are...

[exoticbirding]

This is all well and good for sites that can get into DMOZ. We have not yet been listed even though we submitted our site 2 years ago and provide more content than many of our competitors. We think one of our competitors is the topic editor and keeping competitors out. Many other webmasters complain of the same problem. So, what good is DMOZ, other than those lucky enough to get into it get a boost from Google?

[Manpasand]

This is a good step for those who dont want DMOZ info. I hope other search engines will also follow.

[mtspacecreate]

So. Has the change happened yet? Or is this going to be a feature that will take as much time to happen as getting listed does? Or...(gasp) add to the length of time of getting listed?

[dkginternet]

For those who are having trouble getting listed in DMOZ/ODP, I've pasted in an editor's suggestions (from 2005) ... right from the horse's mouth so to speak ... it's lengthy but might help:

-----------------------

I am an editor on DMOZ and I will tell you that it is not an easy thing to obtain! Here's what I've learned in my two years as an ditor. For example if you want to become an editor, start in a very small category.

The reason is they have no experience with you and the meta editors would like to see how well your descriptions will meet the rules and make sure that you are acting in a proper manner within your cat. I for example I noticed that a competing company was caring for the entire province of Newfoundland however they weren't adding any new sites. Well, I went down to one of the smallest categories that they weren't an editor for and applied. This was about my third time applying and finally got in!

I operate an IT services firm in the region that I edit in and I take a very liberal tactic of listing my competitors, and their works when they are submitted. I have even listed my competitors work in a massive site add that I have been doing. I see no reason to.

I don't think it is against the rules of DMOZ, but I do believe that it is unethical to delist or not to list the sites of competing companies. However, as an editor I am responsible for the quality of the links and the site descriptions in my category. Which also include the organization of my category. I have the ability to create new sub categories, and to move sites out to other more appropriate categories.

If your site has been removed from DMOZ and you know its still an active web site then I would suggest searching through the directory to see if you can find it listed elsewhere. If you're unable to find it elsewhere I would try listing it again. If your listing doesn't appear within a week or two (some editors are slack, I try to check in once a week), then complain to the meta-editor. Because you should be able to make a case for the unethical treatment by the editor in this category, especially if you know that other web sites have been listed in the cat after you submitted your own web site.

I was actually able to move up a level about a year ago, which was apparently very early, but because I had been providing relatively good descriptions and approving appropriate sites, and I believe because of the clean-up I had been doing in my cat in general I was allowed to move up. Plus the competing company that had been managing the provincial category had not been on the site for a long long time and I believe that they actually cancelled their account.

Currently I'm trying to work up to a point where my meta-editor will allow me to assume control of the provincial category. But, my meta-editor has been very picky and will usually find problems in my descriptions. Which brings me to a problem with DMOZ.

The descriptions for sites are to be full sentences, and grammatically correct. They should not try to sell a product or a web site, instead they should be a description of the company and what "features" may be found on the web site. This could be something like online shopping, or has a guest book. But, grammar in my view is subjective... Plus few people have perfect grammar. My grammar is not perfect but, in general I feel that I have a good grasp on it. My meta-editor has on occasion suggested alternative wordings for my descriptions. It will say the same thing, but be worded slightly differently to meet what she feels the proper "grammatically correct" version should be worded.

There are other times when I haven't realized that I was submitting a description that is against the rules. But then there are always exceptions. I edit in a regional category for my city and as such I am not to list the country, province, or city name in my titles or descriptions. Plus the title of the site is not to be repeated in the description.

The reason for this is that DMOZ is a directory not a place for keyword intensive search engine listings. But then there are always some exceptions to the rules when you have almost no choice to use a word from the category listing or repeat the title of the site. Government sites are one example.

I apologize for the length of my post.

To summarize, 1. Start in a very small category

2. List the sites of competitors (If your meta-editor goes that far to look it will better for you)

3. Make quality additions to the site

4. Search out sites to add to the directory in your category

5. Move up slowly

I've tried to move up to the provincial level in my region, but I've been denied a few times. Once for not having enough editing experience, and another because of the quality of my descriptions, which was only two or three sites of over 241, like 2% of the sites needed a slightly better description.

In any case, that's been my experience.

--------------------------

If DMOZ can get their act together by keeping their listings current and accurate, I think it would help establish at least a "standard" for the meta-description tag. Wouldn't this also keep the SEO industry a little more honest?

DKG

[incrediblehelp]

Still no changes 5-31-06, LOL does this even work?

http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=kbk+marketing&Form=MSNH

[Jabber_uk]

8 days incrediblehelp? hmmm maybe a few more days perhaps :o

[google junky]

incrediblehelp

Anything new here to tell about?

[Weedy Lady]

Don't know about incredible help, but I tried it for a week and nothing changed.

So much for MSN supposedly being on top of things.

I took it off.

[incrediblehelp]

Yes it has changed!

Original DMOZ description that was being used:
Offers web development and design, interactive marketing and search engine positioning.

Description from my meta tag now being used:
Professional SEO Services by KBK Marketing LLC. KBK Marketing can help with web development, interactive marketing, search engine positioning, and search engine partnerships.

The cache says the page was updated last on 5-29, but I checked the tag on 5-29 and it was not updated, so sometime between 5-29 and today it was updated. So total time for this tag to work for KBK was between 1-2 weeks. Not bad MSN!

I am going through a whole redesign on KBK so I look forward to seeing how long each engine takes to update.

[incrediblehelp]

Yeah, Google now supports this tag to!

http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/060713-131905

[Weedy Lady]

Just as I took the tag off MSN picked up the description, so I put it back on. Google had been using my own description for quite a while without the tag. My description changes often, so both SE's are behind from time to time depending on when their bots visit and register the new home page.

I am only using it on my home page. Might add it the others later but I have a lot of meta tags as it is and don't want to make the page size any larger than it needs to be.

[incrediblehelp]

As you know I added this tag and MSN changed the description in the SERPs. It will be nice to watch and see Google do the same.

For some out there with some of those terrible DMOZ description this has to be great news!

[Webnauts]

I already used on our web site for DMOZ:
<META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOODP"> and it worked.

Do I need for Google <META NAME="googlebot" CONTENT="NOODP"> and for MSN <META NAME="msnbot" CONTENT="NOODP">?

[incrediblehelp]

I use:

<META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOODP">

for both and they have been adhering to it!

[Webnauts]

I use:

<META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOODP">

for both and they have been adhering to it!

Thanks Jan! Cool stuff!

[Jason (Expletia)]

If your lucky enough to get into the ODP Directory! Still waiting!

Although if you are stuck with an outdated or bad Title & Snippet at least MSN & Google give the option to change it. I have written a Meta Tag Creator that also includes ODP Meta Tags it may be useful:

www.expletia.co.uk/metatagcreator.html

ODP Meta Tags as I am aware only at present work with MSN and Google.

MSN & Google
<META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOODP">

<META NAME="MSNBOT" CONTENT="NOODP”>
<META NAME="GOOGLEBOT" CONTENT="NOODP">

I am aware you can also combine the usual Robot Meta Tags with Google, for example: NOFOLLOW, NOINDEX etc.

<META NAME="GOOGLEBOT" CONTENT="NOODP, NOFOLLOW">