Jump to content

Talk:List of search engines/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

AroundGlendale.com

City specific search engine and directory for Glendale, CA USA. Developed by Neolynx Business Solutions. A Los Angeles web design company also specializing in search engine optimization and online marketing. 69.235.46.189 (talk) 04:51, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Add VADLO - BioMedical Search Engine

I could not see the search engine VADLO page in wikipedia articles. While I suggest that some search engine veteran creates it (I have no idea how to create a page), I strongly suggest adding this wonderful search engine, which is rapidly growing in popularity, be added to the list of major search engines. Regisbates (talk) 22:38, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Your first article. You will need to find reliable sources, such as newspapers, magazines, books or edited web sites that have taken notice of Vadlo. If you are able to create an acceptable article about Vadlo, it is then reasonable to include it in this list. EdJohnston (talk) 23:06, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I have added the article[1], with some references, which I thought are reliable indicators. There are many more refs on the website itself. Thanks. 128.135.170.7 (talk) 18:06, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 128.135.170.7 (talk) 18:06, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Add Coveo G2B Information Access Suite to "Enterprise"

How does one add an established enterprise search vendor (Coveo) to the "Enterprise" section? Dbauhaus (talk) 01:09, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

In principle there is no problem with adding mention of Coveo here, since it has its own article. I do notice that the Coveo article is not very good, and sounds promotional. Since your user page mentions a connection with Coveo I wonder if you could do something to improve the article. Editors here are standing by to give you advice about Wikipedia policy if needed, or to suggest how to go forward with the article. EdJohnston (talk) 18:36, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Proposing a meta search engine

http://umibozu.net

A user driven meta search engine (prototype) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daemonize (talk • contribs) 03:29, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Umibozu needs a Wikipedia article of its own before it deserves inclusion here. See the advice given above about VADLO. To justify having an article, find some coverage in external sources which shows the importance of Umibozu. If you are successful, you might create an article called Umibozu (search engine). If it is only a prototype, you may not be able to find any external notice yet. EdJohnston (talk) 17:16, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

formgle.com

Could you add www.formgle.com as meta search engine? Yandrey (talk) 16:12, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

See the above advice about Umibozu. EdJohnston (talk) 17:17, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Real Property , Dec 2008 updates

Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_search_engines#Real_property :

-Properazzi became 'Enormo' (http://www.Enormo.com) ;
-Missing relevant Real Estate Search Engine : http://www.dothomes.com ;
-Missing relevant Real Estate Search Engine : http://www.homes-market.com ;
-Missing relevant Real Estate Search Engine : http://www.trulia.com ;

STE --151.83.64.119 (talk) 21:35, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

A new Metasearch Engine Suggestion

I suggest to add Glseek metasearch engine ( www.glseek.com ) ( [2] ) to this list.Becuase its a good metasearch

engine with many abilities. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamidhamid1985 (talk • contribs) 17:29, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Blackle.com — saving energy one search at a time

Blackle.com is a search engine project of Heap Media with an environmental conscience. Powered by Google Custom Search, Blackle.com attempts to help internet users take a small step toward saving energy by maintaining predominantly black pages throughout the site (monitors require more power to display light pages than dark ones). All skepticism about real energy savings aside, this search engine may be worth considering as an addition to this list.

Ryft (talk) 05:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Kid Safe Search Engine Section?

www.kidrex.org
www.squirrelnet.com
www.kidsclick.org
kids.yahoo.com
MrsHenderson56 (talk) 23:09, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

StopKa

Can i add a reference to the desktop search tool "StopKa"? This is a link with description: www.stopka.us. vitali yemialyanchyk (talk) 20:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

It needs to have its own wikipedia page first, then list can here. DMacks (talk) 19:11, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I was trying to create page with some information, but the User_talk:Thingg delete the whole page. As I think this is absolutely unfair. I state StopKa - Desktop search tool has many advantages to other search tools in the list. User_talk:Thingg told "StopKa" still is not so famous as others, but how can I present it, if I prohibited even to public some information about it? As I know from wikipadia rules, it is not prohibited to write about software. StopKa is freeware, so I do not have a big interest then inform people. Direct link to download: download StopKa --Vyemialyanchyk (talk) 23:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Add Ava find to desktop search engines

Ava Find should be added to the Desktop search engines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gardara (talk • contribs) 11:15, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

http://www.blogsearchquery.com/ Searches blogs that have opted in and been manually verified to be non duplicate blogs. Crazyhippy99 (talk) 00:18, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

A new type of search engine

A new type of search engine was described in one of the Toronto, Canada, newspapers a few weeks ago by a writer who had tried it out. It provided quantitative answers to questions. I don`t remember its name but I expected to see it listed here, especially since the page was updated 3 days ago. From reading the discussions, it looks like you exclude anything new. Maybe you need another classification for ``Recently Offered Engines``.216.121.202.202 (talk) 04:20, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

You are likely referring to Wolfram Alpha, which is listed. Regarding "excluding anything new", be aware that only notable search engines should be listed here. --ZimZalaBim talk 04:33, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
I’m not sure I agree with just listing notable search engines here, as that restriction is not the title of the page. This list should actually be more exhaustive than that. I would also like to somehow see Green Search Engines appear here somewhere - under Models perhaps? The technology often sits on Google or Yahoo's APIs, but the business model is quite different and there are several out there that deserve mention (Quevr, Blackle, etc).Dadodband (talk) 06:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Regarding "notable", that's one of the standard guidelines for all "list of" pages, and WP:LISTNAME says the article title shouldn't bother stating it. The lead section, however, makes the inclusion criteria explicit. It's one of the easy ways of following the NOTDIR guideline. This requirement of notability seems strongly reinforced by the AfD linked at the top of this talk-page. DMacks (talk) 18:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

apexoo search engine

Broad term search engine - can this engine be added to the list? It has been around for a couple of years, and does have its own results / crawlers —Preceding unsigned comment added by R3db0ss (talk • contribs) 21:28, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


Definition of Search engine...???

Search engine maybe categorized as

  • commercial
  • public
  • web
  • non-web
  • academic
  • non-academic

Please do not auto-direct the topic to others--222.67.204.207 (talk) 09:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Search engine specification is needed as some of the claim is ambiguous such as the article of

List of academic databases and search engines to this article--222.67.204.207 (talk) 09:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Addition in the metaseach list

{{editsemiprotected}} Please add http://specra.com to the list of metasearch engines. The site should be helpful for users.

123.201.33.181 (talk) 04:03, 20 July 2009 (UTC) lkud

Not done: I cannot seem to find an article on Specra to link to. Am I searching for the wrong thing?—C45207 | Talk 04:10, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Desktop search engine: DocFetcher

{{editsemiprotected}} Please add Docfetcher to the list of desktop search engines. Suggested values for the table columns:

  • Platform: Windows, Linux
  • Remarks: Open source desktop search tool for Windows and Linux, based on Apache Lucene
  • License: EPL
Done - Made edits here and here. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia :) — Deontalk 14:28, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Resolved
 – Forgot to remove tag, removing now. Cheers, — Deontalk 14:47, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

{{editsemiprotected}} Please add "InSight" to the list of desktop search engines. Suggested values for the table columns:

  • Platform: Windows
  • Remarks: Quick Search tool for windows that allows easy access to files/folders,Music, and Wikipedia articles.
  • License: Freeware
  • Website: www.theInSightexperience.com
Not done: There does not seem to be a Wikipedia article for "InSight". As mentioned at the top of this page, entries must assert some notability. An article is a good way to do that.
Also, when posting a semi-protected edit request, simply include "{{editsemiprotected}}" as-is. Do not include the "tlp|" or "tl|". Those are added by reviewing editors to mark the request as reviewed.
Thank you for your contributions.—C45207 | Talk 16:15, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Remove Ask.com from the list of desktop search engines

Ask.com is a web search engine, not a desktop search engine. Eduault (talk) 07:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Ask.com does have a desktop search product [3], it's just not a well-known one. — Gavia immer (talk) 07:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Desktop search engine: InSight Desktop Search

{{editsemiprotected}} Please add InSight_Desktop_Search to the list of desktop search engines. Suggested values for the table columns:

  • Platform: Windows
  • Remarks: Quick Search tool for windows that allows easy access to files/folders,Music, and Wikipedia articles.
  • License: Freeware

Pranav.digital (talk) 11:25, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Done I made some changes to your suggested additions, though. The article could stand to be improved, though.—C45207 | Talk 05:13, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Please add dooblet.com to the list of "Automatic answers" search engines.

dooblet.com is a 1.5 years old search engine that automatically answers the question "what are the best alternatives for ... ?". That is, the search-engine helps to reveal the alternatives. Almost any subject could be queried in to find the alternatives to it: software, drug names, popular shows, artists, music groups, service providers, etc. The search-engine is described in Internet in more than 10 languages.

The best matching section to add the engine could be, perhaps, Automatic answers

Vak (talk) 10:25, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be an article for the search engine. Can you show that it is notable?—C45207 | Talk 07:59, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

JuriSearch. This legal database has cases and forms from California, Florida, and the Federal Courts. Its content is more limited than Westlaw and LexisNexis, but the subscription price is much more economical. 67.169.99.176 (talk) 21:09, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be an article for the search engine. Can you show that it is notable?—C45207 | Talk 08:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Please add www.panabee.com to the list of "Metasearch engines" search engines.

Panabee is a new type of metasearch engine that combines functionality of Delicious and traditional search. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Admitamistake (talk • contribs) 06:33, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be an article for the search engine. Can you show that it is notable?—C45207 | Talk 08:00, 17 August 2009 (UTC)


Here are articles on Panabee:


comment added by Admitamistake (talk • contribs) 18:52, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't quite clear enough. There doesn't seem to be a Wikipedia article on the search engine.—C45207 | Talk 20:58, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

OTHER Search Engines

A new search engine (www.mugurdy.com) which shows images of the web pages the query produced. Jimbobp (talk) 15:45, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

There also is altavista search engine (altavista.com) which provides more results than google itself. Search 'A' in google and altavista and you will see the differences.

www.pricescan.com

{{editsemiprotected}} Suggestion to add :

pricescan.com

to the Price section of this article. - User:Techienow

 Done Added PriceSCAN, not the external link. —SpaceFlight89 21:57, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

{{editsemiprotected}} {{editsemiprotected}}

Please add desktop search engine: www.recoll.org

Please add recoll to the list of desktop search engines. Suggested values for the table columns: 

   * Platform: Linux, other Unix
   * Remarks:  Fast open source desktop search tool for Unix/Linux, based on Qt and Xapian, nice GUI
   * License: GPL
 Not done. No corresponding wikipedia article. Tim Song (talk) 18:57, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

oops, a boo-boo

just a little typo. under "1.7 Job" "Monster.com (USA),(India)" needs a space after the comma. 07:39, 26 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.191.113.239 (talk)

 Done Thanks for catching that! DMacks (talk) 07:46, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

www.fuzzfind.com and torrentz.com

Suggestion to add :

fuzzfind.com

to the "Metasearch engines" section of this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.48.112.8 (talk) 16:42, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


and torrentz.com

to the Bittorrent search engines

 Done for Torrentz (the article, not the external link).  Not done for fuzzfind - no corresponding WP article. Tim Song (talk) 18:58, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
FuzzFind article has been created, suggest to add to the "Metasearch engines" section of this article. Lildev (talk) 15:50, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
FuzzFind has now been deleted through AfD, and hence removed from the list. Haakon (talk) 09:30, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Clipcanvas has a faceted search interface with clips being tagged with multiple categories to allow for drill down. Deserves mention under Multimedia. Clipcanvas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.48.121.77 (talk) 22:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

There is no indication that this company is notable. I have nominated it for deletion. Haakon (talk) 22:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Add AnkaSearch under metasearch

{{editsemiprotected}} Please add AnkaSearch under metasearch category. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prdv (talk • contribs) 17:10, 28 November 2009

Not done: Welcome and thanks for wanting to improve this article. Let's wait and see if the AnkaSearch article survives its AFD. Celestra (talk) 17:33, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Add www.nextag.com to "price" list

Constantly finds better deals that Google Shopping —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.111.20.88 (talk) 15:26, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

you should include bailii.org as a legal database. you have a spereate article on bailii, but it is a true search engine, more so than westlaw and the others you mention. It has no content at all, searches for legal content, and is run by a charity, and really deserves a mention. 88.110.185.244 (talk) 23:09, 29 December 2009 (UTC) Lindsay

Please hyperlinking the following....

Search Engine Watch--222.64.28.52 (talk) 23:27, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Remove The Pirate Bay from Torrent Search Engines

http://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-tracker-shuts-down-for-good-091117/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.239.213.74 (talk) 14:34, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

That URL states "Although the site will remain operational for now", and even if it were to go away, the Wikipedia page on it would survive (documenting its demise). Therefore  Not done, though if that page were to citedly state that it no longer exists in any form, the page here could be annotated "defunct" or "acquired by..." or somesuch. This article is an index of wikipedia articles, not a list of external websites. DMacks (talk) 22:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Add search3 to metasearch engine list

Could someone please add search3 to the list of metasearch engines?--Cdclayton (talk) 20:38, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

On hold, pending outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Search3. DMacks (talk) 22:40, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Page deleted per AfD, so no link. DMacks (talk) 03:46, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion to add: MedlinePlus to Medical Search Engine

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/

Website from the US National Library of Medicine & National Institutes of Health about medical concerns: directories, drugs and supplements, medical encyclopedia, health topics, health news, etc.... Government site.

U975714 (talk) 09:15, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Search engines respectuous of privacy

In the French wikipedia we have a section titles "Seach engines ensuring search confidentiality to their users", I think we need it here too. Among them, there are: Yauba (http://yauba.com/) and Scroogle (http://www.scroogle.org/cgi-bin/scraper.htm). And also Ixquick which does not record IP. All those 3 engines have Firefox plugins.

--TomoFR (talk) 05:56, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Forestle

Forestle is no longer based on Google. It is now based on yahoo. That part should be updated. They had their google service canceled for asking users to click on their adds or something like that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Azthral (talk • contribs) 00:21, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Section on syntax?

Would someone like to start a section or way of comparing the user-syntax or user-command capability of the various entities described? The main article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_search_engine also needs to cover that subject, but it would be most useful here with specific information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.73.178.144 (talk) 08:16, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

A good desktop search engine. Link: www.exalead.com

nayio

A new search engine that allows users to find tunes by humming.

What are the definitions?

Can anyone give the defination to each kind of search engine. For example,

metasearch engine
A metasearch engine is a search engine that sends user requests to several other search engines and returns the results from each one.

Thanks.

I agree, Putting in definitions- [snuff]

Ardonik, you are a MoFo...I hate you for no particular reason.

Redirects

Oops - I added targ8 to the list before reading the discussion. Sorry for hassle. Do you think it adds to the search community?

Transport Search Engines

IndiaTransportSearch.com
IndiaTransit.com

If article is protected, someone needs to fix bad links. "AOL Search" and "Compuserve Search" don't exist, should be only "AOL" link etc. Articles have no info on searching. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.73.178.144 (talk) 02:34, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I think that Duck Duck Go should be added to the General section

See headline. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.244.178.254 (talk) 18:27, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Bloxxy, 13 April 2010

I would like to add: http://www.bloxxy.com ,in general search engine section Thank's Serge Langlois owner of Bloxxy support@bloxxy.com

Bloxxy (talk) 13:29, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Add request search2.net

Please, add search2.net to gerneral search engine —Preceding unsigned comment added by Internetfan2 (talk • contribs) 09:31, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Miracle Search (http://www.miracle.ie) should be added to "Geographical limited scope", it is an Irish search engine that is attempting to index every website on a .ie domain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.134.210.200 (talk) 19:16, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Virenque1980, 18 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}}

Proposed edit: Add to list of Price Search Engines the site Compare Prices at the URL http://www.ComparePricesOnline.com . This is a newer price search engine for comparing prices and features on many products and services.


Virenque1980 (talk) 00:34, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

 Not done That particular search engine does not have a Wikipedia article of its own, and thus cannot be included in this list. Of course, I am not suggesting you create the article; it does not seem that engine is notable enough to warrant inclusion in Wikipedia. This page is semiprotected for the purpose of preventing self-promotion. Intelligentsium 01:10, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Page has spam

Black Google Mobile reference added by account which was created to promote website. Black Google Mobile wikipedia page is promoting a website (bgoog.com) and is not a real article about any Google website but a page used for SEO. Request that reference is removed. See history of accounts who wrote the article Black Google mobile to see that several accounts were created just to edit that page and get internal wikipedia link for SEO purposes so that the Wikipedia entry would rank high in Google to promote the website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.147.188 (talk) 10:52, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Startpage ( http://www.startpage.com )

This is a newer search engine that bills itself as being "the world's most private search engine." Startpage doesn't record your IP address. It's results are very comprehensive and accurate. It really needs added to the list of search engines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.129.229.25 (talk) 03:08, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Provaat ( http://www.provaat.com )

The first Bangladeshi Search Engine in the Web. The largest educational search engine and specially have a better search option for the students —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.211.7.12 (talk) 05:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

no Whoosh yet?

There is no wikipedia entry on Whoosh but... how is it non notable? I can site literally thousands of example of pop culture trivia being on wikipedia, and dont understand the consistency here. Whoosh is one of the only pure python search engines Decora (talk) 19:38, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Notability criteria are described here - WP:N and WP:NSOFT. A unique feature doesn't make some software notable. There must exist several published sources about the subject. For example, Apache Lucene is notable 'cos there are books about it. -- X7q (talk) 21:34, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

iGlue

iGlue is a new semantic search engine and annotation tool. http://iglue.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Triptonemeister (talk • contribs) 11:35, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

I think it would be appropriate to add Zuula.com under the metasearch category. There is short Wikipedia article about Zuula at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuula, but it has few/no links to it. Full disclosure: I am from Zuula. Timwhunt (talk) 15:57, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate your disclosure. After some research, I am of the opinion that Zuula may not yet be notable enough for encyclopedia coverage, and as such I have nominated it for deletion. If this leads to consensus to keep the article (usually after one week), we should list it here. Haakon (talk) 16:36, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


I do not appreciate your criteria for selection: popularity is not necessarily a sign of value, on the contrary. You are just pushing in the way where electronic writing and communication offers the lowest human interest and is close to bring all users to cyberdiabete and cyberasphyxia! Zuula is a very seriously managed tool that offers freedom in consultation, just helping you to jump quickly from one search engine to another to take some distance with the various pertinency algorithmes used by the various engines. Freedom of choice is a quality and Zuula is almost as good as many metasearch engines listed in the LIST OF METASEARCH ENGINES of Wikipedia. Thank you to use "objective" criteria; statistics do not give an "objective" argument unless they are proposed with an appropriate commentary. This is a question of quality versus quantity!

80.200.9.243 (talk) 08:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)([user R.-F. Poswick]) 10:15, 19 august 2010 (Belgium)80.200.9.243 (talk) 08:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I haven't added these yet, but here are some external links which I think belong at the bottom of the page:

--Eastlaw talk ⁄ contribs 23:24, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I like those links. The side-by-side test I found interesting. I tried a couple of searches for my name and turned up Yahoo looked the best both times, Bing the worst. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Atta1983, 17 June 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} add http://buuzo.com [metasearch engine]

Atta1983 (talk) 21:52, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Not done: this search engine does not yet seem to be notable enough for its own Wikipedia article. It can be added once it is. Tim Pierce (talk) 01:54, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Two search engine missing

http://www.topsite.com/ - a general search engine (Alexa rank 33000 +-) http://www.similarsites.com/ - similarity search engine (Alexa rank 6500 +-)

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.0.106.165 (talk) 10:49, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

They are missing because they don't have articles on Wikipedia. Notice that every search engine listed in the article is not an external link, but an internal Wikilink to a Wikipedia article about that search engine. If the two you identify are sufficiently notable to merit their own stand-alone articles on Wikipedia, then write the articles and add them to this list. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:11, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

There is another one "Spectate Swamp Desktop Search" --zzo38(✉) 16:17, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

If it meets Wikipedia notability guidelines (which I doubt), then you could write an article about it, and add to this list. -- X7q (talk) 21:05, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
I did not write that program and don't know much about it. What I do know is that it is written in VB5 and the codes is public domain. It stores all search data in a single plain-text file. I also know it can play videos (including in slow-motion "golf" mode), and it can apparently play a random audio file starting from a random position in the file for a random amount of time. I think it even has a screen-saver mode. The author of this program is commonly believed to be insane by some people. --zzo38(✉) 22:37, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Search engines in indian languages

Please list the search engine in indian languages. 1. http://searchko.in 2. http://www.guruji.com/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.165.25.137 (talk • contribs) September 9, 2010

Guruji.com is already listed. There's no article about your other site, so it shouldn't be added to the list. -- X7q (talk) 09:02, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Aribera78, 3 November 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

Extended content

Metasearch engines =

See also: Metasearch engine

Aribera78 (talk) 10:37, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

What change did you make? The list appears to be exactly the same. Thanks, Stickee (talk) 10:44, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Another Meta Search Engines that can be added

http://www.megasearches.com/default.php —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.134.34.136 (talk) 01:48, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Not done: this search engine does not yet seem to be notable enough for its own Wikipedia article. It can be added once it is. DMacks (talk) 01:55, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

There are thousands of users including me using this meta search engine from more than 25 countries. I believe it is notable enough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.134.34.136 (talk) 02:16, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

The standard to be listed in a "List of..." wikipedia page is for something to have its own wikipedia page (this is an encyclopedia-articles table of contents, not a website/business directory). The standard for a page about a specific website is WP:WEB. DMacks (talk) 02:49, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Rcollamore, 7 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

Real estate / property

Rcollamore (talk) 21:18, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Done Dabomb87 (talk) 02:00, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Deep Web Wiki

I'd like to suggest the Deep Web Wiki search engine. In particular, its Health & Medicine (http://www.deepwebwiki.com/medicine/medicine_index.php) and Technology (http://www.deepwebwiki.com/technology/technology_index.php) groups of vertical search engines use screened lists of sites to produce more focused/relevant search results. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 52vermont20 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Solr

Under open source engines, Solr should be added--perhaps on the same line as Lucene. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.236.128.43 (talk) 21:56, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Ask.com-MUST READ URGENT

As many of you may have heard, Ask.com is no longer it's own search engine (Google it), as it has abandoned its ventures in the search business. It's algorithm is taken from another search engine (Ask won't say who), and therefore, I think it should be taken off the list as a general search engine-it is now a question and answer service and should be placed in the same category as wiki answers and yahoo answers. I hope to see this change implemented soon. Thank You. Additionally, if one was to go to Ask.com's wiki page it is started off by saying that Ask.com WAS a search engine...In late 2010, the company ABANDONED its search engine roots.Theguythatisaguy (talk) 02:30, 27 January 2011 (UTC) why isnt amypne commenting on this im pissed

I reverted the comment by an IP which removed this from this page; however, after looking into the matter I've made the change. As a side note, if you want to get someone's attention who can edit the page, what you should do is include {{edit semi-protected}} in your post, which adds this page to a special category that gets checked for people wanting to make changes to semi-protected pages like this one. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:22, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from S2009qw, 2 February 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

Please add Yometa.com to the Meta Search engine list, as it is a significant meta search engine being the only visual meta search engine that allows users to see multiple search engine results in a venn diagram

S2009qw (talk) 11:51, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

 Yometa does not have a Wikipedia which is required to add a website on the list. Baseball Watcher 17:17, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

weVICTORY

A new search engine called weVICTORY is also claiming to be better than Google. It tries to eliminate small websites that spam search engines with many backlinks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by China9 (talk • contribs) 16:01, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Sherrycom, 15 February 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Could you add to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_search_engines#Metasearch_engines this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babieca.com with the title Babieca.com .This article is an orphan, as few or no other articles link to it. Thanks in advance.

Sherrycom (talk) 08:34, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Not done for now: Let's wait and see if the article survives deletion, as I've just nominated it since it doesn't appear to meet our notability criteria (general or website specific). Qwyrxian (talk) 02:50, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

List Of Search Engines

i like the way the "List Of Search Engines, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_search_engines) was written but i believe it is incomplete at least for one catagory, "Religious". there are several links i would like to see added under a Religious catagory like: http://seekfind.org/ , http://www.theislamicsearch.com/ , http://www.jewogle.com/ etc.. i am not good at editting wiki pages but i would like to see someone add a new catagory for Religious search engines please. EarthTrex (talk) 16:16, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

This list can only contain search engines that are notable enough for their own wikipage. If any of those sites meet the notability guidelines for internet content, it may be possible to create pages about them and then link them here. Note that the main criteria for determining if subjects are notable enough for an article is whether or not there are multiple, independent reliable sources that talk about that subject in substantial detail. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:25, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

search engine missing

Hi a general search that should be included is My Safe Search http://www.mysafesearch.co.uk 22-02-20011 90.215.26.53 (talk) 12:03, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

This page only lists search engines that have their own wikipedia article. If My Safe Search is notable for its own article, and one is created in the future, then it can be added to this list. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:56, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Sherlock Holmes search engine

Hello, The developers of this search engine are not making a noise about it, but I found it a very good replacement for my old and faithful 1996 Harvest search engine for Linux. It's GPL/LGPL. http://www.ucw.cz/holmes/. I'm not an expert wikipedia user but if you create a page for it, I'll fill it with content. I've been configuring it as a personal search engine + resource spider and it's very good. I am not affiliated with the developers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.48.133.202 (talk) 07:03, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

--Bkqc (talk) 13:33, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Zanran[4] is for Data Search - it's for finding data and statistics. Specifically, it looks for graphs, charts and tables - and has been live (in beta) since 1st April 2011.

It doesn't really fit into the existing classification of search engines. Can we create a new one for 'Data Search'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JonZanran (talk • contribs) 08:48, 12 April 2011 (UTC) JonZanran (talk) 08:51, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

This list only contains sites that already have their own Wikipedia pages (i.e., that have already been found to be notable). If such a page is created (which will need to show that zanran has been the subject of detailed discussion in multiple, independent, reliable sources), then we can figure out where to add it here. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:25, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Archewizard, 20 April 2011 --request to add ovi map to geo search item.

I want to add ovi map to the geog search item. thanks.

Archewizard (talk) 06:30, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Not done: looking at Ovi Maps, that doesn't appear to be a search engine--it's a mapping product found on Nokia phones. That's not quite the same thing. Just because it has a search function doesn't make it a search engine. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:51, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Jplehmann, 28 April 2011

I would add Quora.com as a search engine under human answers, in a parallel to StackOverflow.com.

jplehmann (talk) 17:39, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Not done: this list is for Wikipedia articles and no article exists for that search engine. — Bility (talk) 18:23, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, now I've properly linked it: I would add Quora as a search engine under human answers, in a parallel to StackOverflow.com. --jplehmann (talk) 18:37, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Also instead or in addition to Stack Overflow, Stack Exchange should be listed which is the set of websites of which Stack Overflow is one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jplehmann (talk • contribs) 19:11, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

 Done since you found the articles. CTJF83 20:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Akobylinski55, 17 May 2011

Please add Healthline to the list of search engines under medical.

Akobylinski55 (talk) 21:09, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done Baseball Watcher 00:09, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Kkireyev, 20 May 2011

We are working on a search engine for educational content called InstaGrok http://www.instagrok.com

I would like to see a new category "Education" and InstaGrok listed under it.

There are other engines like CiteSeer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CiteSeer) that may also go under "Education" or "Academic"

Thanks, Kirill

Kkireyev (talk) 00:49, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Not done: By prior consensus, only search engines that have their own wikipage may appear on this list. If InstaGrok is notable (that is, has been discussed in detail in multiple, independent, reliable sources), you may consider creating a new Wikipage for them; the easiest way for a new user to do that is through WP:Articles for Creation. After such time as they have a viable article, they may be added to this list. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:54, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

This 'answer' seems to address only the first part of the request, and ignores the general principle of the last sentence.
I suggest that the new category requested would be an unecessary duplication of List of academic databases and search engines, which includes CiteSeer.
—DIV (138.194.11.244 (talk) 09:25, 17 August 2011 (UTC))

Why is "general" section not updated?

I notice that this Wikipage is highly monitored and for the right reasons (because it is sensitive to abuses by opportunists who want to sneak in and add their inadequate/fake search engine sites into it in order to attract traffic. But likewise the legit engines are evolving. And the authorized editors should accordingly update those relevant changes since otherwise Wikipedia gives the impression that it is being either incompetent or worse, deliberately misinforming.

Two of those changes are:

Ask.com ···> it is NO LONGER an independent search engine by it's OWN admission since late 2010 (already half a year ago!)
Kosmix.com ···> this one doesn't even exist anymore (replaced by a social media [twitter]service) this also happend months ago

Why are these changes not implemented? What are the authorized updaters of this page waiting for? Do they have a vested interest in allowing false information to remain on Wikipedia for weeks and weeks even AFTER others have told them of the change? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loginnigol (talk • contribs) 09:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

First, please don't use such an accusatory tone. All work on Wikipedia is done by volunteers, so it's not fair to expect that all information is updated to match the real world instantaneously. On your specifics, Ask.com isn't listed as a search engine anymore, and was removed when someone requested it before. What we have are 3 sites allegedly "based on Ask.com". First, that may actually still be correct, but, if not, the question is, where should those engines go? I don't know enough about them to be able to tell. On Kosmix.com, no one her mentioned that there was a change, and, furthermore nothing on the Kosmix article indicates that they are not longer a search engine. Do you have a reliable source stating they no longer operate a search engine? Why would you assume that we would automatically be aware of this and then accuse us of having "vested interests"? Qwyrxian (talk) 23:30, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Well first of all it's a bit baffling that a request to update a more than half-year outdated information is regarded as "real world instantaneous" matter. Anyways, as to the specifics, I don't know what you mean by "ask dot com is removed" I can see it still on the page, right above "Baidu" and right under the "GENERAL" section title. That particular GENERAL section is the only part I am inquiring about (not further down the page among the various search categories, where it might still be appropriate to list it). As to your question "where did those engines go" I don't see how this question is relevant to the GENERAL section. All that matters there is whether ask.com has it's own "in house" search-mechanism and the answer to that is 100% definite NO, This uncontested fact has already been announced by Ask.com itself (also reported widely the media). That is already enough reliable information to update the GENERAL section without knowing what else is going on with the site.
Regarding kosmix you claim that "nothing on there indicates they are no longer a search engine". But wait a minute who are "they"? You forgot that we are only talking about one website kosmix.com which Wikipedia is falsely regarding as a serach engine site while the site isn't even functioning as a destination site anymore. It now appears to be just a web-traffic redirect site. So when you said "THEY" you are refering to another thing with another address, not kosmix.com. So if you are convinced that that other thing is a search engine, then you should put THAT other thing on the list and remove kosmix from the GENERAL section. After all the website itself says that it doesn't exist! Also a few tech company sites report this disappearance, literally saying "goodbye kosmix hello @..."). The fact that a search engine site no longer exists at the original site is good enough reason to remove that original site from GENERAL section. --Loginnigol (talk) 20:25, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Sorry on the ask.com; somehow I missed it in the general section. On Kosmix, I looked at our article, not the actual site; I now see that it is not an engine. I'll remove both now. By the way, it looks to me like you're probably an autoconfirmed user, so I think you can make such edits directly. Qwyrxian (talk) 15:52, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Hhh1200, 9 July 2011

Hhh1200 (talk) 17:09, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the massive cut&paste of the article. Can you please simply state what change you'd like to propose? Kuru (talk) 21:36, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Their is also FrigginSearch.com

I use http://www.FrigginSearch.com. I didn't see that search engine listed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.3.233.69 (talk) 04:57, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Only search engines that have their own article in Wikipedia may be added to this list. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:46, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

SearchTeam ( http://searchteam.com )

This is a new collaborative/social search engine whose slogan is "search alone no more". It calls itself the world's first real-time collaborative search and curation engine. Although it is new, it has gotten some good reviews and coverage from the blogosphere. Jtwall12 (talk) 23:15, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Only search engines that have their own article in WP may be added to this list. Note, also, that getting coverage from the blogosphere won't be enough to create an article, as blogs aren't considerd to be reliable sources and thuse won't be sufficient to verify whether or not the engine is notable. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:48, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Content-based Natural Language Search Engine

New content-based Natural Language search engine available on Google's AppSpot:

http://c-t-search.appspot.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedude hmann (talk • contribs) 05:49, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Only search engines that have their own article in WP may be added to this list. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:23, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Should Wikia Search in social search engines be deleted? The search engine has shut down. Jtwall12 (talk) 15:34, 11 August 2011 (UTC)


It is also listed in Open-Source Search Engines. - River *<:@)

 Partly done, added note explaining how the website is now defunct. There is still an article and relevant information so I shan't remove the link altogether (for now, anyway). --andy4789 ★ · (talk? contribs?) 18:49, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request from Abhinavwizkid, 12 August 2011

Request for addition of another search engine, "amseek" URL: www.amseek.com to the list of search engines. The mentioned site is a meta-search engine and steadily gaining a good reputation of giving good results and is comes after dogpile and mamma. [1] Abhinavwizkid (talk) 16:18, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Not done: Currently there is a consensus that only search engines about which a Wikipedia article exists should be added to the list. This is because a website has to satisfy certain minimum notability requirements for a Wikipedia article to be created about it. There is no article about your search engine, so it should not be added. I have only found a user page User:Amseek, which clearly appears to be promotional and so I have requested its speedy deletion. -- X7q (talk) 17:52, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 78.178.211.93, 17 September 2011

In "General" section, we should add a new search engine, which is Replaz. The URL is: http://www.replaz.com 78.178.211.93 (talk) 20:27, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

As described many times above, only engines which have their own WP article may be included on this list. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:52, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Missing Search Engines - Simplyhired.com in Job Search engines

Simply Hired.com is like the largest "jobs" related search engine in the world. It is not listed in the Jobs search engines section. Should Probably add it. It is 6 years old....

The article is also missing Gibiru.com in the "News" search engines section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coupmediagroup (talk • contribs) 20:19, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

I added Simply Hired, but we can't add Gibiru because they don't have their own Wikipedia page, and this list only covers those sites notable enough for their own page. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:35, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Actually, I'm going to remove Simply Hired. It's not a search engine--it's an employment site that aggregates content onto its own site and redistributes some of it to partner sites. That's fundamentally different from a search engine. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:42, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Is the name "Ht://dig"?

Section "By model", "Open source search engines": is it really named "Ht://dig"? --Mortense (talk) 16:10, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

No, it is "ht://Dig" (note the capitalisation - see http://www.htdig.org/) - needs correction in the list - River *<:@)
 Done - with this edit - Begoon talk 07:03, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Sites addition.

Is http://www.scroogle.org/ notable enough for an addition? It's one of the more popular alternatives to Google and other sites due to its increased privacy settings. Or http://www.alltheinternet.com/ which is like a search engine aggregator. — Preceding unsigned comment added by XIlluminatusx (talk • contribs) 07:58, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Only sites that have their own Wikipedia article may be added (i.e., that meet our notability guidelines for websites). Qwyrxian (talk) 00:06, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 22 December 2011

I would like to suggest the addition of the GrepCode Java Source code search engine to the list of Search Engines under the "Source Code" Category. In support of this request, here are some links to notable sites:

http://xmlbeans.apache.org/index.html This XMLBeans Apache project names GrepCode as a way to search the project's source code. The Apache Foundation (which hosts this project) is a reputed organization that hosts notable projects.

http://www.jgrapht.org/ The JGraphT project is an open source project that suggests the use of GrepCode for searching the project's sources.

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3874849/code-searching-browsing-cross-referenced-web-sites Stack Overflow is a popular site that allows users to ask programming related questions to be answered by other users. Independent users have recommended GrepCode for searching source code. There are currently 44 different Stack Overflow pages that mention Grep Code.

http://sziebert.net/posts/grepcode/ This is an independent blog that mentions the GrepCode Search Engine.

The GrepCode site is http://grepcode.com and the Wikipedia page is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grepcode

Thanks.

Vinayak.borkar (talk) 03:53, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

 Not done, does not appear to be notable, and I just speedy deleted the article for the same reason--Jac16888 Talk 04:11, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Dear Jac16888,

I would please urge you to reconsider your decision of deleting the page. I have below a link to the Google Code Search mailing list (maintained by Google) which mentions GrepCode as an alternative for users to use, now that Google has shut down their code search engine. Link: http://groups.google.com/group/google-code-search/browse_thread/thread/fa2e2908c47df068?pli=1.

Please let us know what more you would like to see in support of our notability.

Thanks, Vinayak — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinayak.borkar (talk • contribs) 05:57, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

This is not the place to discuss the speedy deletion. In any event, though, one mention on Google itself is not sufficient to establish notability. If you wish to contest the deletion, take it to Jac's talk page, please. Until such time as it is undeleted or recreated, though, it cannot be in this article. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:22, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

A new Google based search engine - SpoGo

I came across a great new way to search the web and thought it might be useful to add to this article.SpoGo (www.SpoGo.co) focuses on raising awareness for charities and non-profits, yet still provides the users with the same results they would expect from Google (I believe they use a Google Custom Search Engine). The best part is that every day someone uses it, they make a donation to each of the featured charities on their homepage! (there's 2 featured charities on there as of now...but it looks like they've featured 5 or 6 others as well so far).

Lettauc (talk) 02:40, 20 January 2012 (UTC)Cody Lettau - January 19th, 2012

Cosmetic changes for consistencies sake...

Okay... it bugged me often enough that I created a list of the sites that have been listed our of alphabetical order (as per every other listing on the page). Below is listed the section heading with one or more arrows pointing to sites in their correct position with complete context given for their old and new positions. Some of these mistakes might be seen as bias unless the full range of mistakes was seen. I should note the reason for two choices being given in the change in the Business category is due to the engines limited geographical scope... should this be relevant in other categories? If so does the rest of the page need to be checked?

Geographically limited scope

  • Maktoob, Arab World
  • Miner.hu, Hungary
  • Najdi.si, Slovenia
  • Naver, Korea
  • Onkosh, Arab World <-
  • Rambler, Russia

Business

  • Business.com
  • GenieKnows (United States and Canada) <- OR
  • GlobalSpec
  • Nexis (Lexis Nexis)
  • GenieKnows (United States and Canada) <-
  • Thomasnet (United States)

Food/Recipes

  • RecipeBridge: vertical search engine for recipes
  • Yummly: semantic recipe search <-

Legal

  • Google Scholar <-
  • Lexis (Lexis Nexis)
  • Manupatra
  • Quicklaw <-
  • WestLaw <-

News

  • Bing News
  • Daylife <-
  • Google News
  • MagPortal

Blog

  • IceRocket
  • Regator <-
  • Technorati

Multimedia

  • ScienceStage
  • SeeqPod <-
  • Songza
  • TinEye <-
  • TV Genius
  • Veveo
  • Yahoo! Video

Price

  • BestPrice <-
  • Bing Shopping
  • Google Product Search (formerly Froogle)

Human answers

  • Uclue
  • wikiHow <-
  • Yahoo! Answers

Open source search engines

  • Isearch
  • Lemur Toolkit & Indri Search Engine <-
  • Lucene
  • mnoGoSearch

BTW, I don't warrant I got the all! ;) -- River *<:@) (2012-02-10 8:06 UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Sorry, I really don't understand, (is your English off or can I just not read today? haha). In simple terms, what do you need changing? Please re-open the edit request once you've answered. --andy4789 ★ · (talk? contribs?) 19:11, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Er... maybe I was too convoluted! Basically the entries marked with an arrow are not correctly listed in alphabetical order and should be moved. (I hope that is clearer... I'd normally have done this myself but can't for this page) - River *<:@) - 2012-02-11 03:57 (UTC)

Done Celestra (talk) 02:55, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Substantially duplicate page

I don't know what the situation is with duplicate pages but this page and Outline of search engines are substantially the same, they could do with being merged, a redirect added and the talk page from List of search engines being retained for the final page due to a laundry list of pending edits since it is also a semi-protected page (unlike Outline of search engines at present) - River *<:@) - 2012-2-11 03:59 (UTC)

Not done: This is outside the scope of an edit request. Please you generate consensus for combining the two. Celestra (talk) 02:57, 12 February 2012 (UTC)


Edit request from Bluewhitebeaver, 14 February 2012

search2.net is a general search engine with an international index and with his own crawler. http://www.search2.net

Bluewhitebeaver (talk) 06:34, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Only engines that have their own WP article appear on this list; to have an article, you'd need to prove that the engine is notable. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:53, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Search directory / Listings directory, TrueLocal.com.au

Under section 'Geographically limited scope', the site www.truelocal.com.au should be included, in a similar flavour as Ziplocal. This site pertains to extensive business listings specifically for Australia.

The company is part of News Corp and under the News Digital Media arm. TrueLocal has been around since 2005.

TrueLocal.com.au has over 1.1 million business listings across Australia and with over 4 million visits per month.

There is no article for TrueLocal.com.au

Suggestions on how to remedy this?

Thanks. Michaelowm (talk) 23:43, 15 February 2012 (UTC) michaelowm

To have an article, you would need to show that the search engine (not its parent company) is notable. To do this, you would need to find multiple, independent references that talk about the site. If you've never created an article before, it may be easiest to use WP:Articles for creation, which is a service where new users such as yourself create an article (there's some templates that will help you get started), and then an experienced Wikipedian will review it to see if it meets our minimum criteria for inclusion. Let me know if you have questions. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:52, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit Request for Jobs

I think it is also worth including in the Jobs the search engines run by Adzuna (Presently a UK centric search site, due to expand) which has over 500k listings across jobs. Currently, Adzuna already has its own wiki page. Adzuna's job search site is quite notable, and there are quite many references to the site from the national newspapers.

1.9 Job

Adzuna (UK)

Cmy 82 (talk) 17:30, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Please include the Latino Search Engine Webeton.com on your search engine list

http://www.webeton.com is a specialized search engine for Latino users in the United States and Latin America. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.209.61.42 (talk) 16:15, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

If there is no separate wikipedia article about it, it shouldn't be listed here. Create the article first. Please read notibility guidelines, and cite sources in your article to show that your search engine is indeed notable. Else the article would be deleted. -- X7q (talk) 23:15, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

I notice a couple redlinks to deleted articles that should be removed from this list: Turbo10 and Evri. Thanks! 173.48.120.161 (talk) 15:53, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Done, thanks for noticing this! -- X7q (talk) 16:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 April 2012

would like to add CBCJobs.com and AceTiger.com to job search engines in United States, thanks

Califmerchant2 (talk) 05:30, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The list appears to include search engines which are notable, in the sense that they qualify for a wikipedia article. Without sources, I'm not sure non-notable pages would qualify for inclusion. Feel free to re-enable the requested edit template once we have sources. Thanks!   — Jess· Δ♥ 23:07, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Gamedipper - game search engine

With gamedipper.com it is possible to search for similar video game, if you enter one that you already like. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zviedris (talk • contribs) 09:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request from Kizikky, 30 May 2012

In the General section of the By content/topic section, WireDoo is at the bottom of the list. As it is already done with most of the lists on this article, I believe it should be organized in alphabetical order. WireDoo should go between of Volunia and Yahoo!. --Kizikky (talk) 00:18, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done - Thank you for noticing the problem. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 00:43, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Suggested Edit - removal of eHow

From the wikipedia page on eHow.com

eHow in particular have been criticized for large amounts of low-quality content and for operating as a content mill, paying contributors low rates for content intended to rank high in search results, rather than focus on quality information, with poor quality articles intended mainly to drive up search results rather than inform

Arbalest Mike (talk) 00:48, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Map Search: RandMcNally.com

I think the Maps section should include (http://www.RandMcNally.com). It does have it's own Wikipedia page which states; "Rand McNally is the preeminent American publisher of maps, atlases, and globes for travel, reference, commercial, and educational uses." Hard to believe it's not on the list already. The mmost generic map search they have is at: (http://www.randmcnally.com/rmc/directions/dirGetMapInput.jsp?cmty=0) Maureen32RR

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Maureen32RR (talk • contribs) 03:18, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Edit request on 11 July 2012

Please add the DuckduckGo search engine: http://duckduckgo.com/about.html

It's great!

Cintema (talk) 08:07, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Not done: Only engines with articles may be added to this list. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:07, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Shodan

I would like to list Shodan (http://www.shodanhq.com) as a search engine, but I'm uncertain which category would fit it best. A 'Security' category would be optimal, but that doesn't seem to exist. Since it's a totally different kind of search engine than anything else on the internet, and it's been covered by major news outlets (http://www.heise.de/security/meldung/Angreifer-nehmen-Industriesteuerungen-im-Internet-aufs-Korn-1129657.html, http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/shodan-search-exposes-insecure-scada-systems/7611, http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/02/scada_search_engine_warning/, ), I think it would be worthwhile listing. When it launched a year ago it also got press coverage in various smaller news outlets and security columns. Let me know how best to proceed and whether this is something that can be put on Wikipedia. Thanks. Achillean (talk) 18:48, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

It does seem interesting and novel; I heard about it today and immediately looked for a corresponding Wiki article, and was surprised to find nothing. Maybe the fact that it requires registration has decreased visibility of the tool? Destynova (talk) 18:20, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
It doesn't actually require registration, it just gives more access to registered users (the process is free). Shodan has received a lot more coverage recently as well, in the Washington Post and Wired for example. I would like to add Shodan to Wikipedia, but want to make sure it would pass the rules of Wikipedia. Who should I connect with to make sure my edits wouldn't be reversed if I added it to the list of search engines? Achillean (talk) 04:36, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Per the established consensus on this article, there first has to be an Wikipedia article about the engine itself. If you're interested in creating a new article, the easiest way for new users is to use the Articles for Creation process, which guides you through the steps of creating the article, plus will have someone review it before it goes live into the main encyclopedia. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:01, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Enterprise Search and Google

Gartner has Google as one of two leaders in Enterprise Search in 2011. Yet Google does not appear in the enterprise search section but only under its own appliance section. While having one section with one solution is not very helpfull (especially as being sold as a box is a very weak distinction criteria) missing it at the section representing the market is just bad.

I suggest to delete the appliance section and move Google to enterprise search. 193.254.108.90 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:01, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Recently, User:Runarb added two links to the "Enterprise" section. I reverted, because both of the links pointed to company pages, rather than to an article on the engine itself. Runarb pointed out on my talk page that a large number of the other links in that section were also to companies, so I promptly removed those as well. Runarb wondering on my talk page, however, if this is the best approach.

My opinion is that we should probably limit this list only to cases where the actual search engine itself has a Wikipedia page, just to keep the page manageable and clearly defined. However, I can imagine an argument for including companies if they are particularly known for having created search engines. What do other editors think? Qwyrxian (talk) 15:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Especially are I wondering about companys that has as it main focus to provide a search engine. Most of them has a Wikipedia article about there company, and a section about the product (the search engine) in that article.
For example the Blekko entry start out to be about the company and it's history, but also have information about the search engine itself. So dos Baidu, Yandex and WireDoo in general search, and most of the now deleted entries in the enterprise section, like Autonomy, Fast Search & Transfer, Coveo and Searchdaimon etc.
Personalty I find it naturally to have the search engines I mention above on this list, and think the list would be less informative if they are removed. Runarb (talk) 16:30, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Wiredoo gone?

Can't find any resent info about Wiredoo, and domain http://wiredoo.com/ don't resolve ( at list not for me on 8 oct. 2012). Noth much info in the WireDoo article either. Should we remove it from the list? Runarb (talk) 19:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

http://wiredoo.com/ is still down, a week later. There is also no wiki page about it, only two lines of text in the MC Hammer article. I will go ahead and be bold by removing it from the list. Runarb (talk) 09:53, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Privacy Focused Search Engines and Ixquick

Please consider adding Ixquick under the category of Privacy-Based-Search Engines. It is a worthy entry, and there are very few with the current level of excellence regarding search Privacy. It may be a metasearch engine and perhaps it should be under both entries. But I strongly believe it is more important to note the focus on Privacy than the fact that it is a metasearch engine. Thank you for your consideration. OmniNegro (talk) 22:36, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Done. There is no reason not to list it, as it does (among other things) exactly what Scroogle (which is listed) does. Loginnigol (talk) 23:25, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 4 November 2012

x1.com is an amazing desktop and enterprise search product. Though, not free and is proprietary. I think it should be included in the "desktop search" and "enterprise search" list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_search_engines#Desktop_search_engines

BillyBob66 (talk) 08:47, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Only engines that have their own WP article may appear on this list. An article may only be created if the site meets our notability guidelines for webpages.. Qwyrxian (talk)

Exalead

I suggest to add Exalead to the list of Desktop Search Engines (windows only). Website: http://www.exalead.com/search/ or http://www.exalead.fr/search/ Refer to Exalead (en) Caro2Oslo (talk) 13:58, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Personal Cloud Search Engines

I think this is another "model" of search engines which is new and upcoming based on searching all cloud services one uses.

Examples - CloudMagic - Kitedesk - Otixo - Primadesk - Greplin (now Cue which not a search engine anymore) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashumanohar (talk • contribs) 05:32, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 December 2012

I'd like to add Aikin Desktop HyperSearch to the list of desktop search engines. It is located at www.grappledata.com/aikin The text should be the name "Aikin Desktop HyperSearch" as a link on the righthand side of page like the others listed and the link pointing to http://www.grappledata.com/aikin The platform should be: "Windows" The remarks should be: "Pattern Recognition Technology is tolerant of large textual variations - Files, Favorites/Bookmarks (IE, Chrome, Firefox), Outlook Add-in (Email, Contacts, Calendar, Notes, Tasks/ToDo), Multi-core optimized."

Thank you. The license text should be: "Proprietary (15 day trial)" Datagrappler (talk) 17:53, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Only search engines with Wikipedia pages can be included on this list, which would require evidence that the software is notable. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:32, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 3 January 2013

Please add Aikin Desktop HyperSearch to the Desktop Search Engines table. The link to "Aikin Desktop HyperSearch" should be http://www.grappledata.com/aikin. The platform column should say "Windows" The remarks column should say, "Searches files, folders, email, contacts, notes, calendar items, tasks/todo (Outlook Add-in), web favorites and bookmarks (IE, Chrome, Firefox)" The license column should say "Proprietary, commercial (15 day trial)

Thank you. Datagrappler (talk) 22:31, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Please see the answer to your previous request immediately above. Thank you! --bonadea contributions talk 22:35, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 13 January 2013

Can we add soto search, the blog search engine? http://www.sotosearch.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctlaux (talk • contribs) 19:39, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

See every other request on the page. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:42, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 6 January 2013

Need to add music category with The Legendary Kingdoms Heavy Metal Search Engine (at www.legendarykingdoms.net) added to list. There is a You Tube video (http://www.youtube.com/LegendaryKingdoms1) demonstrating the merit of the engine. It features over 300 hand-picked sites many of which are obscure. Makes finding bands that use common single word names much easier. For example, it is much easier and faster to find news and info on bands such as Riot, Rage, Anvil, Warlord, Minos and so on with less or none of the unwanted results that you'd get if you typed those names into a general purpose search engine. Mythworthy (talk) 23:57, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Only search engines with their own WP article may appear on this list. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:16, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

AAfter Search ( http://aafter.com )

It is a general search engine that combines search with applications. It has been around over 5 years, and has plenty of references on the web. Can you add it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.137.137.80 (talk) 20:21, 24 January 2011‎ (UTC)

AAfter search can be added to 'Privacy search engines' section. Here is a reference, http://www.brighthub.com/internet/security-privacy/articles/109963.aspx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.217.234.165 (talk) 04:28, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

OpenSearchServer

Hi,

I read your article and notice that you forgot to mention OpenSearchServer in the "Open Source Search Engines' List. Would you have the extreme kindness to add it please ?

Thank you very much in advance, Severine Griziaux Marketing Manager

It's not that we forgot, it's that we only include engines on this list if they have a Wikipedia article. For that, the site needs to be notable; notability criteria for websites are listed at WP:WEB. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:42, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
OpenSearchServer exists, at least for now. I have no idea what it does though (what category is appropriate). DMacks (talk) 13:56, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't think to check, since 90+% of requests don't have articles. However, after looking at the article, is it actually a search engine? It looks like the back-end software that developers use to create search engines. Or am I misunderstanding? Qwyrxian (talk) 03:12, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

==> Hi, You are right. OpenSearchServer is not a search portal (like Google, Bing or Yahoo), it is a search engine software that developers can use to build a search engine. It can be compare to Solr, Sphinx, Google Search Appliance.

enterprise search engine

Hello, thought I should mention another enterprise search product: Coveo. In fact, it is the company name which produces at least 2 enterprise search products and have received many awards.

Sorry, but the Coveo article dos not cohere to the principle of only listing search engine articles, not company as laid down in the Company links vs. engine links discussion (I am still against this principle, but that is another discussion). Runarb (talk) 22:00, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Thiv

Thiv is a general search engine, that uses many sources to get information for you, and is soon to have social, news and media functionality and searching. (Article needed) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gamblehawk (talk • contribs) 07:35, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Elasticsearch and Solr

Elasticsearch and Solr are two open source search engines that should be added to this list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ceciliemyhre (talk • contribs) 07:13, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

AltaVista

Altavista should be moved to the "Defunct" section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.168.85.82 (talk) 20:58, 8 July 2013‎ (UTC)

 Done DMacks (talk) 21:16, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Gigablast

gigablast.com is missing, it is a search engine active since a long time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.182.156.228 (talk) 03:39, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately there is no Wikipedia article about Gigablast so we can't add it to this list. It used to be an article about them, but it has been deleted. That's a pity because Gigablast has been around for a long time an should probably have an article about it. I will lock into asking for undeleting. Runarb (talk) 21:49, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
yes, it is fully functional and one of few working independent SEs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.182.92.242 (talk) 02:16, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
I have gotten hold of a copy of the original artical. This version is not to bad: 224949004. I will try to salvage some text from the first version and write the rest. There is clerly are some reliable sources around, like: Google Books search for 'gigablast', List of Gigablast in the News [5] and [6].

why was it deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.182.92.242 (talk) 04:19, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Lack of references. Assumed to be non-notable. The articles for deletion discussion is here Articles for deletion/Gigablast Runarb (talk) 17:52, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Macrakis/Gigablast I think this is a sufficient article, there are many reviews and articles on gigablast, on the internet. I mean the important thing is for gigablast to be in the list of search engines, not being qualified for not having an article is a dumb rule in my opinion, it is an search engine, people havent been interested enough to make a proper article about it, this doesnt change the fact that it is and has been a proper search engine for many years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.182.133.169 (talk) 07:47, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I had requested that the Gigablast page be taken down because it was being vandalized by an ex-employee trying to smear the company. I was not aware that there were security measure at that time because it was a long time ago. Maybe you could not lock a page down back then. How do I get it put back up? - Matt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki12rt (talk • contribs) 04:55, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

  1. ^ www.amseek.com
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_search_engines/Archive_3&oldid=1241194139"