Useful Google search trick

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Craigus

Established Member
Joined
17 Dec 2014
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Location
Wellington, Somerset
I'm sure you've found the search function on most forums is Pants.

I learned a useful trick the other day. For example, if you want to search for a thread on a certain subject on here, say Sapele, go to google and type in the search bar "Sapele site:www.ukworkshop.co.uk" and it will only give you results from this website.

This obviously works for any website, and you can search any page by extending the address line i.e. "<keyword(s)> site:www.bbc.co.uk/news/england/somerset"

Some of you probably know this already, but just thought I'd share as it has been very useful of late.
 
Agree. Usually want to find an old thread here but never get good results from the forum search. It never seems to search on all words. Using Google as above seems to find stuff much easier.
 
If you use that big blue search box up there ^^^ (not the one on the right>>>) it gives you a Google site search.

On the other hand, the site search is good if you want to limit results to one sub-forum, or a particular member.
 
If you want to search a certain subforum just extend the address line like this "site:www.ukworkshop.co.uk/forums/general-woodworking" and include their username as a keyword.
 
A good tip Cragus but I'd just like to add this can actually be used for all searches on all search engines. Basically what is happening is you are giving google (in my case) a much more defined set of search parameters by using the " " - I'm sure you are aware all search engines work in a very non specific way, and include all sites with references using the words provided.

By using "site:www.ukworkshop.co.uk/forums/general-woodworking" you aren't telling it to go to this specific site directly, what you are doing is giving the search engine a fixed set of parameter filters that has the DESTINATION of this site, it's a subtle but important difference. The difference between telling someone to drive to London and giving someone a detailed map that ends in London.

Using " " (quotes) with additional words INSIDE those quotes you are telling the search engine to look for sites that only have that set of words (you could even mix up the order of words without the dots and it would have no effect on the result) . The more words you use, the more specific it gets, like world co-ordinates, give just latitude and say "go there" it could be any point along that line - give 5 sets of numbers and you'll be within spitting distance, give all 6 and you're dead on.

Next time you want to search for something, try adding more words that you think are relevant to that search and you'll spend a lot less time trawling through sites that aren't relevant (although sometimes that journey can be just as fun).

Just thought I'd expand on that good tip :)
 
rafezetter":qb4pnkcn said:
A good tip Cragus but I'd just like to add this can actually be used for all searches on all search engines. Basically what is happening is you are giving google (in my case) a much more defined set of search parameters by using the " " ...snip

Using " " (quotes) with additional words INSIDE those quotes you are telling the search engine to look for sites that only have that set of words (you could even mix up the order of words without the dots and it would have no effect on the result) . The more words you use, the more specific it gets, like world co-ordinates, give just latitude and say "go there" it could be any point along that line - give 5 sets of numbers and you'll be within spitting distance, give all 6 and you're dead on.
snip..


Are you sure about that? I've always thought that the " " were to find an exact quote...

To find the multiple words putting a +each side of them+ was the way to do it, and if they were really strongly connected then connect-the-words-with-hyphens.

(Of course I could be talking about some strange dialect of SQL, :D (hammer) )
 
Craigus":hxvm9khd said:
I'm sure you've found the search function on most forums is Pants.

I learned a useful trick the other day. For example, if you want to search for a thread on a certain subject on here, say Sapele, go to google and type in the search bar "Sapele site:www.ukworkshop.co.uk" and it will only give you results from this website.

This obviously works for any website, and you can search any page by extending the address line i.e. "<keyword(s)> site:www.bbc.co.uk/news/england/somerset"

Some of you probably know this already, but just thought I'd share as it has been very useful of late.

Thanks for this post, i have used " " before to try narrow down a search before but didnt know i could use them in this way, good tip , cheers :)
 
Higon":1blck2hm said:
rafezetter":1blck2hm said:
A good tip Cragus but I'd just like to add this can actually be used for all searches on all search engines. Basically what is happening is you are giving google (in my case) a much more defined set of search parameters by using the " " ...snip

Using " " (quotes) with additional words INSIDE those quotes you are telling the search engine to look for sites that only have that set of words (you could even mix up the order of words without the dots and it would have no effect on the result) . The more words you use, the more specific it gets, like world co-ordinates, give just latitude and say "go there" it could be any point along that line - give 5 sets of numbers and you'll be within spitting distance, give all 6 and you're dead on.
snip..


Are you sure about that? I've always thought that the " " were to find an exact quote...




To find the multiple words putting a +each side of them+ was the way to do it, and if they were really strongly connected then connect-the-words-with-hyphens.

(Of course I could be talking about some strange dialect of SQL, :D (hammer) )

Hmm now you've got me wondering... I'll admit it's been a while since my computer studies course, I could have got them mixed up. I've always tended to use " " to get more accurate results, but I also use the "-" to remove things from a search I know might otherwise be included, so the "+" for multiples could well be the more accurate advice.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top