My web site ukcamera.com/ukcamera.co.uk has had a listing in DMOz since 1999.
I now find I have been dropped completely from their database.

Still in Google (page Rank 6 for .co.uk & Page rank 5 for .com)
Still come up Number 1 for my chosen keywords "camera shops" but I
feel my ranking in Google could be dependent on being in DMOZ and I
fear for my future in the search engine.

Unlike other shopping portal sites, mine is compiled from all
available information and does not exclude any camera shop (only the
large multi product multiples) and is not a typical "cut & paste job".
I scour all the photo mags for new entrants and rgularly update it. As
you can see from the published stats I have over 60,000 page views
each month (probably 10,000 + real visitors)
and so I must be filling a need. One would have thought DMOz would
recognise that - in fact I had drawn DMOZ's attention to my new
venture (http://www.ukcamera.com/collect/history1.htm) and pointed out
I had started to do a "mini DMOZ "listing all the classic camera sites
I could find - was that my mistake? All in all, I would have thought
the unique (nobody else lists all the UK's camera shops!) content of
my site would have commended itself to their researchers.

Any thoughts? I have re-entered it in the same category as before and
crossed my fingers, but like all these things I don't know if I have
missed a major factor.

---

Request for Question Clarification by serenata-ga on 13 May 2004 22:50 PDT

Are you saying you had two sites ...

www.ukcamera.com and www.ukcamera.co.uk, both of which contained identical content?

You didn't have one site permanently redirected to the other?

And both of these sites were a compilation, or "directory", if you
will, of camera shops?

Just trying to get the facts in order to give you an idea of what
happened to your site in the DMOZ directory.

Of course, you could also ask the DMOZ editor, since it is arbitrarily
his responsibility.

Thanks,

Serenata
Google Answers Researcher

---

Clarification of Question by paulfromwestwales-ga on 14 May 2004 02:24 PDT

Hi Seranata,

Thanks for your swift response. It arrived overnight, so mine is a trifle delayed.

No I don't have two sites, I registered both these names at the same
time and they have always pointed at exactly the same server and web
page (index.htm in the root directory). If they were to give any
trouble, I suspect it would be with search engines, not DMOZ!

I generally use UKcamera.com with all my applications to search
engines and for the title of the site, but it is useful to have the
.co.uk to prevent somebody else from "hijacking" my name and I usually
enter it into UK directories which don't allow .coms.

I also own usedcamera.co.uk and point it to the specialist page that
deals with used cameras in UKcamera, but I have not used that as a
means of getting duplicate entries in search engines as I know that is
asking for trouble!

I have asked the editor (Mike Shailes)! No response - probably
inundated with requests. Yes, I did it politely, giving him the facts
more or less as stated here.

Regional:Europe:United Kingdom:Business & Economy:Shopping:Photography & Optics
http://dmoz.org/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/Business_and_Economy/Shopping/Photography_and_Optics/

Just checked now to make sure, not in, but ...............

Ah!....... Oh! .......... Oops!....... Sackcloth & Ashes time
.......... Grovel ......... Grovel ..............

It appears still to be listed in:
Shopping: Photography

So can I change my query please?

Why doesn't a search on "camera shops" "photographic shops" "camera
stores" "photo shops" "http://www.ukcamera.co.uk" "www.ukcamera.co.uk"
"ukcamera.co.uk" bring up any results whatsoever The first ones always
brought up my site with others. What is the point of a listing that no
one can find? These are after all commonplace words? This must also
apply to the literally 100s of other shops US & overseas listed in
this section. Taking one at random  - carolina cameras, that produced
a nil result as well!

If you don't want to answer this question, I fully understand and will
re-list it. It is my fault entirely (well DMOZ must take 80% of the
blame!) so you are entitled to the money anyway.

Paul

---

Request for Question Clarification by serenata-ga on 14 May 2004 06:32 PDT

I suggest you close thi sone out and try again ...

and I could hardly claim an answer, as I was trying to figure out
exactly what it was you had done, and were asking.

Good luck!

Serenata

---

Clarification of Question by paulfromwestwales-ga on 14 May 2004 08:48 PDT

Thanks for you interest and help