Those of you who follow forum discussion regarding category approvals have heard this repeatedly expressed -  metas want to grant editors' requests to edit additional categories and don't like to deny requests. It may seem hard to believe at times, but it's true. 

Meta editors strive to be fair and consistent in approving editors' applications for new categories, while protecting the quality and integrity of the directory. That said, quality is paramount, and editors whose records reflect a lack of concern for quality or deliberate misconduct should think twice before applying for additional categories. So, what's the secret? Here are some tips.
 

Submitting an Application for New Permissions

Although this should go without saying, be honest during the application process. Please don't try to mislead metas as to why you are applying for a new category. Many editors work in categories where their own sites, or their clients' sites, are listed. Don't make the mistake of believing that you are better off deceiving metas about your business interest in a category, as deception in your application can bring consequences far more serious than the denial of your application.

Also, the application form for new categories requests an explanation of your interest in the new category, as well as three sample URL's with proposed titles and descriptions. Please complete the entire application, as it helps metas gauge your interest in the category. If there is a special reason why you aren't submitting sample URL's, make sure that you explain your reasons on your application.

By the time you apply for a new category, you are expected to have read the Directory Guidelines and understand the contents. Your application should reflect your familiarity with the guidelines, and should be error-free. There are editors who will be happy to review the categories you edit before you apply. Simply make a request in the latest incarnation of the Have Your Category Checked Here thread in the New Editors forum. While this may seem intimidating the first time you ask, please recall that the editors who devote their time to that item are seriously dedicated to helping you. Any errors identified in those threads will be quickly forgotten.

Before submitting an application, please be sure that all of the categories that you edit are in good order. Do all sites in the categories you edit have descriptions? Are all of the site titles and descriptions in the category consistent with the current directory guidelines? Are there unreviewed sites sitting in the categories you can already edit, even as you apply for more responsibility? Are you adding non-English sites outside of the World/ hierarchy or ignoring the Regional Guidelines? Fix any problems before you apply, as any obvious defects will result in the denial of your application.

Please also consider your own request history. If you have recently been rejected for an additional category, try to find out why before applying for a new category. If you apply for another category, or the same category without any significant increase in your total edits, you run a high risk of being rejected upon discovery of even minor mistakes. Metas spend a lot of time reviewing new category applications. It helps no one to waste their time if another rejection is inevitable.

If you are a new editor, applying for a second category, keep in mind that you will often be rejected for any category larger than your total number of edits. That is to say, if you have made a total of forty edits since you joined, you should probably not apply for a category containing more than forty sites. The fastest path to success is to apply for smaller categories, one at a time, and to work each category into near-perfect order before applying for the next.
 

Application Review Process

In a typical review of an editor's application, metas will in most cases perform a detailed examination of the applicant's editing history. This will involve the examination of any unusual editing patterns in the applicant's detailed editing logs, the condition of the categories in which an editor is already working, and the editor's history of cooling and uncooling sites. Editors whose history includes making significant changes to categories without consulting co-editors; editors who "move" categories by deleting and recreating them; or editors with an inability to cooperate with co-editors will frequently be rejected. Editors whose history reflects inappropriate removal of symlinks (@links), click-through editing, indexing non-English sites outside of the World/ hierarchy, violation of the adult guidelines restrictions on indexing adult material outside of the Adult/ hierarchy, or serious misconduct will always be rejected as well.

If you are engaging in editor misconduct, such as self-cooling, inappropriate multiple listings for your own website, manipulating the title of your own website for better placement within a category, or adding adult sites outside of the Adult/ hierarchy, applying for a new category is tantamount to turning a spotlight on your misconduct. Keep in mind that if you are caught, a best-case outcome will be your rejection for the new category and an official warning about your editorial misconduct.

At the end of the process comes the joy of victory or the agony of defeat. Please don't take a rejection decision personally. Many editalls and metas have rejections on their records. A number of editalls and metas made serious mistakes early in their editing careers, such as getting into fights in forum discussions or even cooling their own websites. They chose to learn from their mistakes and moved forward.

Sometimes, metas will provide feedback following rejection of a new category application, and sometimes following approval, a meta may suggest corrections that must be made to your categories. 
If you take the time to read these suggestions, and take them to heart, you will significantly improve your chance of being accepted when you next apply for a new category.