Talk:Vertical search/Archives/2016

Complaint
This entire page feels like an outdated term paper written by a junior-college business student - it is simply awful and increasingly useless. Somehow it is also promotional, like it could be used in said business student's first proposal to an IT department. Example: Like consumers, businesses use the Internet for a variety of needs.

Seriously?

If the dentist performs a Google search on the keyword "ceramics",

I would think a dentist would be a bit more specific with searches, unless they actually want to find cermaics of all possible kinds.

This article is an embarassment to Wikipedia. I would completely revise it, but after reading the article, I actually feel I know less about this subject. As noted on this talk page I also have a sneaking suspicion that my edits would be reversed. --Elikser (talk) 07:12, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Scottwrites (talk) 22:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC) I'm thinking this article is a bit dated. It mostly considers "vertical" search as a business function. What about Web vs. Blogs vs. Video vs. Forums, etc. These are all what most seem to consider vertical aspects of search. In this case, it's by multimedia type. Then there's things like local and other geographic search, not to mention more esoteric specialties like chemicals or other non-textual type searches. (I'd maybe refer to these as "Symbolic Search." (Yeah, I think I like that.)

Anyway, I'm thinking this whole article needs to be re-cast in light of how the term vertical search is being used. I'll wait and see if there's any discussion here before I consider a major revision.

Test Should search engines created with Google Coop be considered as vertical search sites? I don't think so, but maybe I'm wrong. (unsigned comment by Kiani 2006-12-05T23:15:59 )

Rupert Black (talk) 13:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC) I have been trying to post a link in the references section to a download of the "Vertical Search Survey 2008" and it keeps getting taken out by an editor - I find this quite annoying as the survey contains good information, and is similar to the download facility used by other contributors to this page. Rupert Black   Rupert Black (talk) 13:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Its a Survey, not a resource about the subject. see NOT--Hu12 (talk) 14:53, 16 January 2008 (UTC)