Talk:Job search engine

There should be some criteria toward what sites should be listed under the "Examples of traditional job boards" section. Many self-promoters are adding themselves there yet their claims of being "an example" are not inaccurate - it's just that they aren't relevant. There are 40 thousand sites that are job/career related - they can't/shouldn't all be listed on this page... only job search engines should be listed here.

why is this web site locked!!!!! i cant believe that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.138.23.180 (talk) 01:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Thinking this article should be renamed - people don't really think of sites like Monster.com as "search engines" and they don't perform any of the traditional search engine functions: crawing the web, indexing files, etc. these sites are respositories of resumes and job postings which are searchable, but they aren't search engines. --mtz206 21:11, 7 April 2006 (UTC)


 * If we were to be precise, we would call Monster.com and its ilk a "job board". However, some of the other sites mentioned (simplyhired.com and indeed.com) are search engines in the traditional sense that they index other job boards (thousands) and aggregate those results.  When you search in one of them, the targets of your search are actually job listings from other boards.  On the other hand, it could be argued that at google, the target of your search is a web site.  At monster, the target of your search is a job posting.  If a search engine is merely a method of connecting the user to their target, then montser fits the definition as well as google.
 * --maplebed 00:55, 30 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with mtz206. Some sites like FlipDog.com could accurately be called "job search engines" since they index job boards (like Monster.com, CareerBuilder.com, etc.), but don't store job postings themselves.  I think the definition should be reworked to reflect this.  I absolutely do not think of employment websites (what maplebed calls job boards, another good term) as job search engines.  They are more like searchable databases. I don't think we want the defintion to be so broad that Monster and Google could be considered the same thing. &mdash; Frecklefoot | Talk 14:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm in the staffing industry and the standard term is "job board". I vote for a change. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.215.162.119 (talk) 01:33, 5 October 2007 (UTC)


 * A change would be suitable if it created a second page for "job boards" while leaving true "job search engines" like Indeed.com and SimplyHired here. That'd be more representative of the differences in the industry and perhaps remove some of the confusion as to why people add job boards to this page. I'd define a "job board" as a service that accepts direct job postings from employers and recruiters etc. while a "job search engine" is a service that offers search of job postings from job boards, classifieds, newspapers, and other websites. &mdash; bornintoit —Preceding comment was added at 00:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)