This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Internet This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Computing: Networking / Software / Websites This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Networking task force. This article is supported by WikiProject Software. This article is supported by WikiProject Websites.

The words are to the left rather than centered.

Zephyr103 (talk) 03:18, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is still the case today as far as Firefox 3.0.6 is concerned. :( --69.12.157.118 (talk) 23:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is not case of web browser. Rather bug in mediawiki's mechanism rendering SVG to PNG. 148.81.137.4 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:29, 24 May 2009 (UTC).[reply]

50.174.74.32 (talk) 22:58, 22 August 2014 (UTC) ////-#?#$?/BrokenLibra999 So then... should I use one or not? I am short on time...[reply]

This page is starting to get linkspam from anonymous users, just like List of search engines. I suggest we revert any URLs added by anonymous users whose most significant contribution to the Wikipedia was to add their favorite URL to our search engine pages. Any thoughts? --Ardonik 03:50, Jul 20, 2004 (UTC)

It's been about a year since I last wrote that and what was true then is still true now. Here's what I've excised from the article (with links deactivated just in case rel=nofollow is turned off.)

 ===Meta-search engines===
 *[http://www.clusty.com Clusty] – returns clustered results
 *[http://www.dogpile.com Dogpile]
 *[http://ez2find.com Ez2Find] multiple languages, clustered results and search also in the invisible web.
 *[http://www.kartoo.com Kartoo] – a map-based meta-search
 *[http://www.laplounge.com Laplounge] Very clean organized meta-search
 *[http://www.mamma.com Mamma] – one of the first metasearch engines
 *[http://www.metacrawler.com Metacrawler] – searches major search engines
 *[http://www.metaeureka.com metaEUREKA]
 *[http://www.yooci.com Yooci] – international metasearch engine
 *[http://www.search.com search.com] by CNET
 *[http://www.donbusca.com Don Busca] 
 *[http://www.everyclassified.com everyclassified.com] – search engine that re-directs user queries to the most relevant classifieds web-sites.
 *[http://www.apollo7.co.uk Apollo7] searches over the major searchenigines

I think the policy should be that only search engines that have an associated article should be listed on the page (in what is currently the ==See also== section.) This will make the page less of a target for spammers. --Ardonik.talk()^* July 3, 2005 09:41 (UTC)

I moved the list to list of search engines which seems to be checked daily for spam. Future additions of the name of a search engine to this page will be promptly removed. Josh Froelich 14:15, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:LIST. There is no such requirement in general. If I see any I think clearly appropriate I will add them back, with a justifying edit summary. if you have looked at the page history here and at list of search engines you will see that I have rather high criteria, Requiring an article first is risky these days, because short articles about products tend to be speedy deleted, and this leaves no place to start. Since none of us owns this article, and i want to avoid an edit war, I suggest we compromise by requiring a clearly appropriate annotation. This is specifically mentioned as suitable in the list guidelines. DGG 18:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was not trying to start an edit war, this was my effort to reduce SPAM in this page. I have some issues with the page in general in its poor writing and commercial orientation, lack of description about the technology, lack of references, and links to product reviews which promote certain products. If you want to reference policies go ahead, I am pretty compliant and am not concerned enough to do anything about it, I thought what I was doing was helpful. When I read this page I don't care about seeing the hottest metasearch engine or knowing why I should choose one over the other. I would expect to see what a metasearch engine is, and nothing more. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jfroelich (talk • contribs) 20:03, 9 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Stuff was all over the place so I cleaned up the layout. Dncnmckn (talk) 13:51, 20 June 2013 (UTC) I need help for my project! Whats the best way to use a metasearch engine?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.186.70.212 (talk) 13:19, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Should legality be mentioned here? Presumably you can't just take and reformat results from another search engine without permission. Equinox ◑ 19:37, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Should we move Spamdexing to a separate article? JarJarInks (talk) 15:42, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I removed some potentially inaccurate information about SavvySearch being the first metasearch engine. Feel free to revert and discuss. JarJarInks (talk) 16:39, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]