Talk:Redzee

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] POV-Pushing

I did this revert [1] as it appears to be POV-pushing original research from someone who has a beef with this search engine. Blog posts aren't necessarily reliable sources (and how they're formatted almost appears to be an attempt of linkspamming. Please don't re-add unless you can build concensus. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 20:16, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I saw this dispute listed at WP:3O. I disagree with 72.193.96.82 on his inclusion of this text, which I consider to be highly POV and inappropriate. However, if this text was made more neutral, I could see some of it being included. KazakhPol 20:31, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Do not continue to remove the facts that I have included about this search engine.

redzee claims kid-friendly porn blocking. The fact is that only some porn-related terms are blocked from being used as search terms. Porn sites are not blocked from the search results.

redzee offers a tool bar. This tool bar, when installed, will cause redzee top 3 ppc results to be inserted into the top 3 organic listings of Google, Yahoo or MSN searches. Redzee does not inform users of this behavior.

redzee generates false traffic to advertisers paying for position in the top 3 ppc program. This is determined by the 100% bounce rate experienced by advertisers who have researched their logs.

The links that I have added are, in no way, link spamming or any attempt of such. They are relevant and support the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.193.96.82 (talk • contribs).

Please note that any content added needs to be cited from reliable sources, and that your claim that these are "facts" isn't sufficient. Please stop reverting and either respect consensus or work to build it in your favor. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 21:28, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I have listed sources. These sources include actual advertisers and a 3rd party review of the search engine that included additional advertisers.

I would also like you to note that the original content is not cited. There is no proof that the search engine is popular among anybody.

Do not remove my content. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.193.96.82 (talk • contribs).

Please sign your comments with ~~~~. Plesae review the neutral point of view policy. Please review the reliable sources policy. I have re-written the entry to include mention of the criticism in a neutral manner, but proper citations are still needed. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 22:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Your edit is acceptable. Citation added. 72.193.96.82 22:40, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Please explain the removal of the citation, which was the fist page of redzee search results for the search term happy teens. The results listed several porn sites. Is this not proof enough? 72.193.96.82 22:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Links to search engine results pages are to be avoided and constitute original research rather than reliable sources. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 22:48, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

In this particular article, however, it is the search engine, redzee, that is the topic. Furthermore, a subject of this article calls to question the ability of the search engine to remove adult-oriented content from it's results. The link of the search engine's result page, that I provided as a citation, containing links to adult-oriented web sites resulting from a search phrase seemingly unrelated to adult-oriented material is, in this case, a citation of the original source and must, therefore, be considered reliable and relevant.

In fact, my citation that you removed, proved beyond doubt that the search engine does not have the ability to remove adult-related content from it's results. There is no question about it.

For the reason of not posting a link to adult-oriented content, I shall refrain from replacing the citation because, without question, the link to the redzee search engine results does contain adult-oriented content.72.193.96.82 05:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I haven't even seen a reliable source stating the intent of the search engine is to filter adult content in the first place, so this criticism might be moot anyway. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 05:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)