Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2017 November 12
| Computing desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < November 11 | << Oct | November | Dec >> | November 13 > |
| Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
November 12
[edit]Google Books problem
[edit]Hello everybody, I am wondering how come I don't get any proper results for this since I've put the relevant term in quotes, but I don't get any corresponding hits...--Herfrid (talk) 17:16, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
- Why do you think that any "proper" results exist? Ruslik_Zero 18:08, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
- Clicking on your link I get "About 234,000 results".--Shantavira|feed me 10:32, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
- None of those results look relevant though. (They are often to do with 'government as employer', or sometimes church or university. And they are nearly all from before Google even existed.) Well at least the first 10 aren't for me, which makes me think none are. As RuslikZero said, the most likely explanation is simply that non exist and Google is trying to be helpful so doesn't treat the quotes as meaning it must only return stuff with the exact phrase Google as employer (as it does nowadays). I would note in most contexts 'google as an employer' would be a more likely phrase anyway although it still doesn't find anything. Nil Einne (talk)
- I currently get 229,000 on both "google as employer" and "as employer". Maybe many users start a search with "google" thinking it's a command to use Google, and Google therefore ignores it. But that is just speculation. To google has become a verb: wikt:google#Verb 2. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:00, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
- But the phrase still works on a normal Google search. (I get 16 without an and 72 with.) However I guess you're right, this result is somewhat different. If you try "microsoft as employer" it will expand the search to more than Google Books (and say so). If you try "mosque as employer" it will ignore the quotes, and say so. But if you try "google is an american company" it will find some results,some of which seem to match Google. Well most lack useful snippets and and I only looked at about 3 which had a similar phrase and 1 which did not seem to mention Google at all, I don't think all matched the exact phrase as some had stuff like multinational or Google, Inc although I'm not convinced this is unique to Google since it's the sort of thing which happens with generally Google searches all the time. and it's a bit surprising that "google is evil" doesn't seem to find anything, and even more surprising that "google was founded" which makes me think in some cases it's perhaps not finding things even though it should. (And actually "use google to find" also possible didn't work.) And weirdly "google dominates" ignores the quotes and says so but then weirdly the second result seems to have "google dominates not only", although at least the first few results do look like they have Google. (Well this is what happened the first time, the second time it did the expand search to more than Books but still keep the quotes thing. You can probably see somewhat similar results to mine by trying Google dominates without the quotes.) So possibly there is something special about the way Google is treated sometimes so I'm not sure that either phrase is really not present anywhere in Google Books results. Nil Einne (talk) 09:35, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
- I currently get 229,000 on both "google as employer" and "as employer". Maybe many users start a search with "google" thinking it's a command to use Google, and Google therefore ignores it. But that is just speculation. To google has become a verb: wikt:google#Verb 2. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:00, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
- None of those results look relevant though. (They are often to do with 'government as employer', or sometimes church or university. And they are nearly all from before Google even existed.) Well at least the first 10 aren't for me, which makes me think none are. As RuslikZero said, the most likely explanation is simply that non exist and Google is trying to be helpful so doesn't treat the quotes as meaning it must only return stuff with the exact phrase Google as employer (as it does nowadays). I would note in most contexts 'google as an employer' would be a more likely phrase anyway although it still doesn't find anything. Nil Einne (talk)
- Try putting a + before google as in +google as an employer. Dmcq (talk) 14:10, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
- That hasn't worked for a very long time [1]. Nil Einne (talk) 09:35, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry I see it is a search within Google Books not a general search. Yes I guess there aren't many books which have the text 'google as an employer' in them so it is just trying as best it can. Try Google Scholar instead if the normal google results just aren't up to what you want. Dmcq (talk) 12:08, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks everybody so far! @Nil Einne: I'm sorry, but some of your comments I didn't quite get: What exactly do you mean by "and says so" here? And what about the phrase "but then weirdly the second result seems to have "google dominates not only", although at least the first few results do look like they have Google" — what are "first few results" and "have Google" exactly referring to if only, as you say, the second one contains the negated form? I'm afraid, your post is a bit confusing there...--Herfrid (talk) 16:40, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
- "and says so" - I mean Google tells you that it has done so. When it's a simple case of ignoring the quotes because no results are found, Google will generally tell you in the form 'No results found for "i like kittens but not cats who woof". Results for i like kittens but not cats who woof (without quotes):' (in English, if your Google is in German it will probably say something similar in German)
- "but then weirdly the second result seems to have "google dominates not only", although at least the first few results do look like they have Google" - The second result for me for the Google Books search 'google dominates' (without quotes) has the phrase "google dominates not only" (longer obviously, I didn't see much point copying the whole thing although perhaps I should have copied at least one word before). This shows up in the snippet view. Which mean it actually does have the phrase "google dominates". So although Google Books suggests there are no results for "google dominates", it seems it does actually have at least one, it just isn't being picked up for some reason. The other first few results besides the second one may not have the exact phrase "google dominates" but for me the first few results do seem to have google somewhere in the book meaning in this case google isn't being ignored in the search. This compares to a number of other searches where google just seems to be ignored, as it doesn't look like it's in any of the results or at least not the first few. As indicated, I'm not sure about your search, or even "Google as an employer" but there are some examples I found where I personally think it very unlikely there are no results including for the exact phrase (and definitely something close). In other words, they do exist, the search just isn't finding them. I do not (as I suspect most people when doing quick tests like this) look at the results beyond the first few in most cases so am not sure all 40 results have Google somewhere in the book.
- Nil Einne (talk) 17:29, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks everybody so far! @Nil Einne: I'm sorry, but some of your comments I didn't quite get: What exactly do you mean by "and says so" here? And what about the phrase "but then weirdly the second result seems to have "google dominates not only", although at least the first few results do look like they have Google" — what are "first few results" and "have Google" exactly referring to if only, as you say, the second one contains the negated form? I'm afraid, your post is a bit confusing there...--Herfrid (talk) 16:40, 14 November 2017 (UTC)