If this leads to consensus to keep the article (usually after one week), we should list it here. 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.
Timwhunt ( talk) 15:57, 9 March 2010 (UTC) I appreciate your disclosure. There is short Wikipedia article about Zuula at, but it has few/no links to it. I think it would be appropriate to add under the metasearch category. This requirement of notability seems strongly reinforced by the AfD linked at the top of this talk-page.
It's one of the easy ways of following the NOTDIR guideline. The lead section, however, makes the inclusion criteria explicit. 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. 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). This list should actually be more exhaustive than that. Zim Zala Bim talk 04:33, (UTC) I’m not sure I agree with just listing notable search engines here, as that restriction is not the title of the page. Regarding "excluding anything new", be aware that only notable search engines should be listed here. 216.121.202.202 ( talk) 04:20, (UTC) You are likely referring to Wolfram Alpha, which is listed. Maybe you need another classification for ``Recently Offered Engines``. From reading the discussions, it looks like you exclude anything new. I don`t remember its name but I expected to see it listed here, especially since the page was updated 3 days ago. It provided quantitative answers to questions. 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.
0 kommentar(er)
