Talk:List of Google products/Archive 1

message: We've just gotten dugg (digg.com) gentlemen, congrats.
- smartalecks
I added the part about the download accelerator slowing down comcast.net users. 
- user:k8cpa
Hi everyone.
The 'G2G Share offline' link is no longer working. Just thought I'd tell you.
- User:blank
To sum up what I've done to this page over the last day or so, I've changed all the images representing the services and tools to be the ones from the Google More page and I've reorganized everything into Services, Tools, Programs, and Downloads.
- mathwizxp
Note: You seem to have made a very complete list, but you're missing one of Google's newest additions, Joga.
- chris
:Excellent work! This article was cobbled together from a few different pages and needed a lot of reorganization. Thanks for taking care of it. Nohat 06:37, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Miscellaneous talk 

message: Hi, there was a subsection under Google Web Search called Google Features that was a direct copy-paste from Google's site.  I've included the first and last entry from that list below, or you can see what I removed in this diff.
:* Cached Links: View a snapshot of each page as it looked when we indexed it. 
:* ...
:* Who Links To You?: Find pages that point to a specific URL.  
Blurbs on the most useful tools in Google Web Search might be worthwhile, if someone wants to write them.
Cheers, TenOfAllTrades | Talk 03:43, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed copyvio section 

message: I know it was only useable for a day,but we sould write about it, dont we?
:It was only around for a very short time. It isn't really a service or tool. It's more history. Perhaps add it to an exsisting section or maybe a blurb in the corporate culture section. BrokenSegue 03:59, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  google X 

message: There are too many of them, and they're all over the article. I think it would be a good idea to
* replace external links for services that have their own article with"See also:"
* organise the rest of external links to get them out of the article text flow, maybe have little boxes with image, launch date (optionally) and link (optionally, and not necessarily external) for every service.
--Nikai 13:16, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: This article was listed on WP:VFD on 2005 March 9.  The result was keep. See also Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of Google services and tools. – ABCD 01:10, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  From VFD 

message: The article doesn't mention the fact google maps currently does covers the world, albeit in less detail than America and the UK etc. It should also mention something about the satellite imagery covering the world. I'd write it, but I'm just not in the mood today :/
:Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to…) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. This link is Broken 19:20, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maps 

message: I think the GMail section is far too large to say it has an article of it's own, Gmail --Skuld‡ insult 11:24, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Size of GMail section 

message: Orkut is listed under the "downloads" section, but I thought it was a web-based service?? --Jamesedmo 16:23, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Orkut

message: When I follow the link to print.google.com/ I get - The requested URL /sorry/?continue=http://print.google.com/ was not found on this server.
Any ideas?
Works for me. -- Sy / (talk) 20:38, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Print error message 

message: I'm not sure if the Google Sitemaps article is ready to be linked from this list, can a few wikipedians check it out? t/y
Jwestbrook 20:52, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Sitemaps 

message: :Tthe new version of Google Groups is much more advanced than the last, letting you more easily join a group, make a group, and track your favorite topics
AFAIK it was not possible to join or create groups with the original interface (which gave only access to Usenet groups, the google.* hierarchy and some technical mailing lists; it had no mail2news and no private group, so it was not necessary to "join" anything.) Apokrif 20:52, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original Google Groups interface 

message: Is the size of this logo OK for the page? Or even necessary? I added it more for completeness than anything else, but now I'm not so sure about it.
Dougal 17:55, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have changed the size of the logo to 125px, this is the size that is on the majority on logos on the page. Mporcheron 15:29, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Analytics logo 

message: For some reason there is an article about Google Suggest in Japanese -- except that Google Suggest (in English) is not mentioned outside this article.  I feel that there should be a merger, or at least a mention that Google Suggest also has a Japanese version. I already put the tags up some time ago, but I feel that bringing it here will help this.  --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:48, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Nobody has merged it for over 2 months. Where could it be merged to? I think the Japanese article is too small to care about, and that it is fairly sensible and obvious that Google Suggest is available in Japanese (Google is localized worldwide and localization is not that hard). I have added a  tag for speedy deletion under WP:CSD category 1; if you disagree, feel free to Wikipedia:revert my changes to prevent deletion, but I reiterate, it's too small to really care about OR take to WP:AfD OR merge. --unforgettableid | talk to me 22:16, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Suggest 

message: Google Local and Maps are now combined under the name "Google Local." The article should be changed to reflect this. Skiasaurus 15:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is incorrect, Google Maps is the javascript map system that runs on Google Local (and other Google Services such as Ride Finder).  The summary under services now reads Google Maps API. Mporcheron 15:29, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Local/Maps 

message: (according to Google, there are only 500 Researchers)
in the site they say that there are more than 500 researchers.
:Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to…) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. Martin Porcheron 15:42, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Answer 

message: Even though it's not released, should this be listed regardless? Oberiko 16:11, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just added it. --M@thwiz2020 22:09, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Writely]]

message: Google released Google Romance as April's Fool Joke (2006)... should that be included in this? 69.236.90.252 22:35, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That is included in the Google's hoaxes article -- getcrunkjuicecontribs 22:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If everything included in another article does not belong in this article, then why is GMail, with its own article, in this article? --M@thwiz2020 00:11, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Romance 

message: Hello. I wrote an article about a related topic, Google Groups. As a new Wikipedia writer, I would appreciate any feedback on my article. Please help me by posting your feedback at the Wikipedia:Article Feedback Desk. If you wrote an article and are seeking feedback on it, please post your article at the Article Feedback Desk as well. If you could suggest better ways for me to seek feedback on my article, do leave a note at my talk page.  --J.L.W.S. The Special One 13:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Seeking feedback on [[Google Groups]] article

message: I think it makes a lot more sense to create a sub cat.--J2000ca 13:25, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Another reason oposing split is that digg.com links hear and so the article as is has significance--E-Bod 22:46, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I think everything should be split up, currently, for example we have two Gmail sections which are not the same. Martin Porcheron 17:42, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Split and summarize. I just think that a short summary of each (and the logo) should remain on this page, so it is still a list, but everything else moved to separate pages. Forexample, Froogle, Gmail, and Google Video all have their own articles - this will cause confusion if there's two - as Pocheron said of Gmail. –-  kungming·2 (Talk) 18:03, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have finished an updated version of a draft mentioned previously on this talk page.  The draft page can be found at Talk:List_of_Google_services_and_tools/Draft_1.1. Comments on this should be made in the previous category where this design is beign discussed. Martin Porcheron 18:11, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not keep the current format (non-table format) and just split into separate articles? --M@thwiz2020 20:02, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

text: If we do split, though, we'd have to decided on the difference between a "tool" and a "service". --M@thwiz2020 20:05, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Splitting" does not address the issues that this is a list article.  If you want a narrative-style article, a new one probably should be created with a name something like Google services and tools. Then this article can be reformatted to be an actual list. IMHO. Rfrisbietalk 20:16, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I Still (But I already Voted earlier) Oppose Split because This article is great.  However I do not object to creating a separate Page that Solely serves as a split page.  This article has It's Purpose and Splitting it would serve a different service.  We can Benefit from both services by having a different page that Solely lists and keeping this page.  Both Pages can note each other on the top--E-Bod 20:29, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just another idea; perhaps we leave everything on the page, but we just link to the separate pages and have a one sentence summary. e.x. GMail - GMail is an e-mail service offered by Google with an unheard of 2 GB of storage space. (see GMail) -AtionSong 13:55, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is what i've tried to achieve in the most recent draft (1.2) and if a decision is made upon a table format I think we should also create seperate articles which go into more detail. Martin Porcheron 17:22, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I support Martin's suggestion.  Many "main articles" already exit. The others easily can be made with a cut-and-paste from the applicable section in this article. If no one objects, I believe it's about that time to move forward. Rfrisbietalk 18:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just thought we really need to seperate the Downloads and Features section from this list.  It's called services and tools and that's what it should be.  I think we should create an article (List of Google downloads and (using draft 1.2 format) create a list.  I also think that the features section should be dropped, it is simply a copy, reword and paste job from the Google help section. Martin Porcheron 16:33, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine with me.  Who wants to pull the trigger? Rfrisbietalk 16:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about move everything (features, services, tools, downloads, hardware, and "other") to List of Google products and put them all in a list format?  And before anyone "pulls the trigger", we should have a week-long straw poll. --M@thwiz2020 17:33, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with M@thwiz2020, I'm pretty new to Wikipedia so someone who's a bit better than me should start a straw poll, M@thwiz2020? Martin Porcheron 09:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Google Services as a Sub Cat & Split

message: As far as my feelings on the split up, I think that:
* The following sections should be moved to their own separate pages
** Features
** Programs/Hardware
* The following articles should remain on this page:
** Froogle
** GMail
** Groups
** Images
** Labs
** Maps
** News
** Video
** Web search
* The following articles should be moved to the separate pages:
** Other Search Features
*** Blog Search
*** Book search
*** Personalized search
*** Scholar
*** Search history
*** Special Searches
*** Suggest
*** University Search
*** Zeitgeist
* Website Tools
** Analytics
** Page Creator
** Ad Sense
I don't know what to do with the rest. This is just some beginning ideas. -AtionSong 21:45, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think everything should be split up, currently, for example we have two Gmail sections which are not the same. Martin Porcheron 17:42, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Split and summarize. I just think that a short summary of each (and the logo) should remain on this page, so it is still a list, but everything else moved to separate pages. Forexample, Froogle, Gmail, and Google Video all have their own articles - this will cause confusion if there's two - as Pocheron said of Gmail. –-  kungming·2 (Talk) 18:03, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have finished an updated version of a draft mentioned previously on this talk page.  The draft page can be found at Talk:List_of_Google_services_and_tools/Draft_1.1. Comments on this should be made in the previous category where this design is beign discussed. Martin Porcheron 18:11, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not keep the current format (non-table format) and just split into separate articles? --M@thwiz2020 20:02, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

text: If we do split, though, we'd have to decided on the difference between a "tool" and a "service". --M@thwiz2020 20:05, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Splitting" does not address the issues that this is a list article.  If you want a narrative-style article, a new one probably should be created with a name something like Google services and tools. Then this article can be reformatted to be an actual list. IMHO. Rfrisbietalk 20:16, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I Still (But I already Voted earlier) Oppose Split because This article is great.  However I do not object to creating a separate Page that Solely serves as a split page.  This article has It's Purpose and Splitting it would serve a different service.  We can Benefit from both services by having a different page that Solely lists and keeping this page.  Both Pages can note each other on the top--E-Bod 20:29, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just another idea; perhaps we leave everything on the page, but we just link to the separate pages and have a one sentence summary. e.x. GMail - GMail is an e-mail service offered by Google with an unheard of 2 GB of storage space. (see GMail) -AtionSong 13:55, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is what i've tried to achieve in the most recent draft (1.2) and if a decision is made upon a table format I think we should also create seperate articles which go into more detail. Martin Porcheron 17:22, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I support Martin's suggestion.  Many "main articles" already exit. The others easily can be made with a cut-and-paste from the applicable section in this article. If no one objects, I believe it's about that time to move forward. Rfrisbietalk 18:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just thought we really need to seperate the Downloads and Features section from this list.  It's called services and tools and that's what it should be.  I think we should create an article (List of Google downloads and (using draft 1.2 format) create a list.  I also think that the features section should be dropped, it is simply a copy, reword and paste job from the Google help section. Martin Porcheron 16:33, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine with me.  Who wants to pull the trigger? Rfrisbietalk 16:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about move everything (features, services, tools, downloads, hardware, and "other") to List of Google products and put them all in a list format?  And before anyone "pulls the trigger", we should have a week-long straw poll. --M@thwiz2020 17:33, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with M@thwiz2020, I'm pretty new to Wikipedia so someone who's a bit better than me should start a straw poll, M@thwiz2020? Martin Porcheron 09:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split Up 

message: Someone needs to extend the Google Ride Finder page and also and a summary to this page.  I cannot do this as this service isn't available in the UK. Mporcheron 15:29, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Ride Finder 

message: There should probably be an entry for Google Zeitgeist, but I'm not sure whether it would count as a service or a feature
:It would definitely be a service - features are the cool things Google does from the search bar (e.g., searching a zip code brings up weather, searching an address brings up a map, searching a tracking # brings up FedEx/UPS/something else, etc.).  I'll add it in a minute.  Thanks for pointing that out! --M@thwiz2020 23:17, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Zeitgeist 

message: I don't really seen any benefit from the features section, it is basically a reworded (only in some cases) section of .
Maybe a link to this page should be included from the web search paragraph under services.Martin Porcheron 17:31, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Features section 

message: :Please add any new version links to the older versions and the to do list. Rfrisbietalk 23:55, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I prefer the current layout as I feel the table doesn't allow the article to 'flow' as such, but that's just my humble opinion. Martin Porcheron 15:41, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree it doesn't allow the 'flow' of an article.  However, this is a list.  If a narrative-style article is preferred, a new one probably should be created with a name something like Google services and tools, IMHO. Rfrisbietalk 15:52, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

text: After reading Rfrisbie's comment I have to agree.  I have redesigned your table slightly (see Talk:List of Google services and tools/Draft 1.1). I have basically removed the logo column and changed some of the links. Martin Porcheron 18:17, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm fine with most of the changes in Draft 1.1 except for removing the wikilinks in the Service column and adding them to the "More information" wikilinks.  Common practice is to link the terms in a list, which is the Service column in this case.  "More information" is hard to tell what it's about, or whether it's a wikilink or external link, if you're unfamiliar with the display differrences.  Are you willing to make that revision to D1.1 or should I start D1.2? Rfrisbietalk 19:54, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have changed this slightly and called it D1.2 (link).  If you have any more suggestions just make your own version and update the list in the current ones (just needs a link adding for reference). Martin Porcheron 22:30, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can go for Version 1.2. Rfrisbietalk 01:59, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I belive a tool to be something like Google Blog Search and a service to be something like Gmail where it is closed off and membership required. Martin Porcheron 06:16, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed table-based list 

message: Google Labs consists of all of Google's experimental technologies. Google Labs is akin to a directory page that links to all Google technologies under development or in beta that have not yet been made widely available. (Emphasis mine)
Is this wording really correct? Google Base, among other Google services in beta, is not listed anywhere on the Google Labs main page.
--24.46.65.161 01:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Labs 

message: I was wondering if there was a way to include the Google Store link somewhere in there. I think it's very interesting. MacUsr 21:10, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure Google Store comes under either the Services or Tools category, it might be best starting an article (one currently redirects to the list page). Martin Porcheron 16:42, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did make an article, then yesterday, it was linked to the list page page. MacUsr 21:10, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I added an Other section to it and added it with a short description. MacUsr 01:19, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Store 

message: I am building a minimalistic but comprehensive list of Google products and services (intended to be more complete than the specific article). It can be found at User:Tacvek/Google. While I will try to keep it up to date, I would appricate having others look over that page, and updating it as nessisary. Please do read the notes at the top of the page before editing. Thanks. Tacvek 17:35, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  More complete list of products and services. 

message: I reverted the headings back to the equalses. The Manual of Style says, "Use the == (two equal signs) style markup for headings, not the  (triple apostrophes) used to make words appear bold in character formatting" (Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings)#Markup).Foxjwill 20:16, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We did that to shorten the TOC. --M@thwiz2020 21:00, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought so, but doesn't it look better this way? Also, with a full TOC readers are able to quickly navigate the article. Foxjwill 23:00, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Headings 

message: Noticing the argument about splitting this article, I decided to make my own contribution to the discussion. However, since the current discussion is so cluttered, I decided to start a new "thread."
Most lists on Wikipedia include a description of each entry along with a Main Article link. So far, that seems to be what we have here. Why not create separate pages for the entries that lack them. The description on this page would be kept and would link to the new page.
Also, it would look much better if the external links to each service were only on their page opposed to their description. Foxjwill 20:16, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation and List 

message: --220.255.19.77 13:26, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lost a lot of thing!!!!! 

message: Right, this hasn't being done yet and it should have been so here goes. Who here supports the split of the current article at to change the current page to that of Draft 1.2 in which a summary of each service will be provided or to a simple text list. The choices are Oppose, Support Draft 1.2 or Support a simple list.  This poll will end on 1st June (one week) 2006 (no votes will be accepted after this date, any added on this day are included).
Martin Porcheron 15:37, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split Article (Poll) 

message: Google Mail is on the article page twice - have I overlooked something, or is it not meant to be like that?  JD 17:26, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem we have is defining what is a tool and what is a service, is Gmail a tool or a service or both?  That's why it's on twice, maybe Draft 1.2 should list everything in one table.  Martin Porcheron 11:57, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  How is it defined as a tool?  JD 14:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't quite know, but it all depends on a users perception of the word 'tool', maybe Draft 1.2 should just be one table instead of one for services and one for tools. Martin Porcheron 16:51, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do a Gooogle search for Gmail.  The description (written by Google) says, "Google-owned, web-based email service that includes over 2 gigabytes of storage (and growing)."  It's a service, not a tool.  I will fix that in the article. --M@thwiz2020 19:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gmail's there twice 

message: I think this article should be organised into headings. I have devised a possible solution to the headings' hierarchy, and it should be ok to implement it. However, due to it being such a radical change, I think it should be discussed, along with other possible ways of improving the article.
Here is the structure I have created (along with examples of heading content):
#Advertising: AdWords, AdSense, Click-to-Call
#Applications: Earth, Picasa, Browser Tools
#Office Suite: Spreadsheets, Writely, Calendar
#Social: Gmail, Orkut, Talk
#Web Development: Analytics, Code, Sitemaps
#Web Searching:
##Analysis (zeitgeist, trends)
##Maps (maps, ride finder, transit)
##Subject-specific search engines (finance, froogle)
##Media-specific search engines (images, video)
There are, of course, other options. A logical idea would be to split the page into two new articles of "Services" and "Tools". But then, the hard thing would be maintaining both pages, ensuring each new service or tool has been placed onto the "correct" page.
My final idea would be to delete the logo thumbnails, and replace it with more useful information, such as development stage (labs, beta, final etc.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by  (talk • contribs) 
: This all sounds good really, so maybe you would like to set up a Talk:List of Google services and tools/Draft 2 for the page? And then we can send it through a voting process Martin Porcheron 06:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've started it on the draft 2 subpage (see martin's post), and i will let everyone know once it is ready to replace the current design. --Joe C 13:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Okay, it should be ready for replacement now. Personally, I think it is more suited to the idea of a "list", because it is set out in the recommended Wikipedia way. It also makes the page size smaller, because it was getting slightly over the limit. I am pleased with the headings I have used, so I would like to put this forward as a replacement. --Joe C 00:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The draft article is now available  here. --Joe C 11:36, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The draft article is now available  here. --Joe C 11:36, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Headings, Please (and other organisational concepts) 

message: Could the list be renamed to List of Google products ?
I think 'products' can include both tools and services, because they are all productions from Google. A website is essentially a product.
A big advantage of the rename would be that its easier to access from the search page. --Mambo Jambo 11:25, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you. It's very tedious to have to go to the google page and then there if you can't remember the name. Foxjwill 18:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename to Google products 

message: In what way should inofficial (made by Google of course) products and improvments to current services be handled?
I was wondering as I found a function for the news service, serving the news as "XHTML" for mobiles.
Though there is a large chance that I've just screwed up and that it is in fact the page which is used by the Google Mobile News service, anyone able to confirm either?
Anyway the real question is about the handling of inofficial Google products.
--81.216.155.158 15:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe put them in a separate section on the page? Foxjwill 18:10, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Handling of beta products? 

message: We have had a similar poll in the past (1st June) which resulted in the current article format however MamboJambo has created list format, this was orignally an option although a draft was never created.  The options are Keep to keep the current and Change to change to this simple list format.
I will, on the 25th total the votes.  Noone can vote twice.  There must be a majority, if there is a stalemate then the current format will stay.
The poll will end on the 24th July 2006 (midnight, UTC). Martin Porcheron 15:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Article Change (Straw Poll) 

message: But I still could find any information about 'em.--Greasysteve13 08:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Image Search is in the list, yes. It was agreed that several pages had to be deleted (here) I didnt think they should be merged into the actual Google search article, as that would have made it messy, so I re-sorted this article. If you believe Image search and others should redirect to the respective page anchor, then feel free to change them. Mambo Jambo 11:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Google Image Search]] and [[google Images]] both link here: 

message: Google's Image Labeler "game" isn't really a product. Users don't go there seeking information, like they do the rest of Google's products and services. Instead, its just Google saying "help us sort this stuff out," and users provide free labor to Google. In the long run, it might be beneficial if these tags are added to the images in G's index as meta data, but on its own, not a product. </rant> ZimZalaBim (talk) 14:22, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who produced Image Labeler? Google. Therefore, it's a product from Google. No? --Mambo Jambo 23:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image Labeler 

message: Are anyone going to add Google Project Hosting? --ReCover 18:59, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is part of the Google Code service. Martin Porcheron 21:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Project Hosting 

message: Perhaps the Sitelinks section might be better in Google search, maybe under a new heading called Features. Try it out. --Mambo Jambo 09:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sitelinks? 

message: What do people think the headings should be in the list? The ones I put on are only temporary. Perhaps, in the Web Applications section, have "For Site Owners" (things like Webmaster Tools etc.), "For Developers" (Google Code), and "For General Use".
What do you reckon? --Mambo Jambo 20:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Headings in the list 

message: I think Writely and Spreadsheets should be merged in the "Docs and Spreadsheets" row. I was not sure so I haven't done it yet but I think it should be done.Pongo489 05:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did this yesterday, after seeing the proposal. --Mambo Jambo 21:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At the beginning, the article mentions :"This list also includes previous products (excluding name changes) of ones that have either been merged or discarded." So, it lists Writely as a service that was. I think that some distinction should be made for past Google services and current ones. Also, as a user posted above, something should be done to handle the beta products. --ase 13:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My mistake, I didn't actually merge the listings on this page. I merged the actual Writely article itself. As for this list article, I was the one who wrote its introduction. Perhaps, if some people agree, we should make it just for current Google products? As for the handling of beta products, we could have a reordering of headings called "Gold", "Beta" and "Labs", which would nicely refer to the list's introduction. --Mambo Jambo 16:10, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the idea. But i think we should consider the headings order: are we ordering first by the service status ("Gold", "Beta" and "Labs") or by the current service categories? Or do we just label in the list each service with its GBP status? I would like to hear people's thoughts.--ase 20:20, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Writely & Spreadsheets 

message: Instead of listing old products with the active products I think they should be seperate in a section at the end of the page.  I think name changes should also be included in the list. Martin Porcheron 15:41, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's quite a good idea. If you're going to do it, remember Compute and Writely, and perhaps make a new Spreadsheets row. Call it "old", "former" or "past" products (something like that). --Mambo Jambo 22:17, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old products section 

message: Google Moon is a joke.  Zoom in all the way to see what I mean.  I left a little note next to it.
:Google Moon contains a joke yes, we all know that. But the whole product isn't a joke. That's just trivial information that belongs in the main article, not this concise list. --Mambo Jambo 15:27, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jokes 

message: Google has just acquired Jotspot (a wiki) someone might wanna put it up. - Pongo489 21:14, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit.  I have added JotSpot, but in the future you may add or change anything to deem to be helpful.  Thanks for the prompt though (i forgot about checking to see if it was added). Martin Porcheron 22:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jotspot 

message: omg you can hi it's jb im holding auditions for my next music video.
On the list we have:
* Google Code Search
* Google Web API
* Google Web Toolkit
These are all "sub-products" of the Google Code product.  While they in themselves are products we need to either add all Google APIs (unrealistic) or have none.  Same goes for the Code Search, while it is a seperate product in the sense of it, it is still part of Google Code.
What do you think? Martin Porcheron 22:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes I agree with pretty much all of that. Funny, I was just thinking the same thing (like, what about the Data APIs?) But, however, I do think that Code Search should stay. It's the only one that is not library or API-related. If needs be, it could be placed under the Search heading. --Mambo Jambo 23:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, these should all be done now. I've created an "APIs" row to the products list, because I think it's necessary to distinguish them slightly. Also, the Google Code article will probably need quite a cleanup now. --Mambo Jambo 23:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Code Products (should they be removed?) 

message: I am planning on starting to add some mobile products to the list (seeing as we have desktop and online).  I have exams at the moment however so if someone else wants to start it be my guest.  I'll try and help when I can. Martin Porcheron 18:28, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mobile products 

message: Is this article too long (as well as too many KB)? I'm starting to like it at the moment, with all the new products etc, but perhaps it's not very readable for people who are new to the article...
Is there any way we could split it up... I can't think of a way, myself. --Mambo Jambo 15:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the readability issues, i think it's because of the ammount of information crammed into the table.  However, unlike other company product lists we need to provide some info (a line or two) on all the products because not all the products have their own seperate wiki pages.
We could split them up in to types of products (differnet pages), eg, List of Google programs, List of Google websites and List of Google mobile products. Martin Porcheron need help? just ask! 21:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too Long? 

message: Shouldn't the Google Talk service be also listed? Currently, only the Google Talk client is listed under the Windows section, but the service on itself is also accessible by other Jabber/XMPP software on other platforms and thus not only accessible on Windows only, nor by Google software only. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NaturalBornKiller (talk • contribs) 16:09, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps mention the service inside the Google Talk summary, instead. Mambo Jambo 00:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Talk 

message: The Google Store is not on the list. 
:I took it off, along with Google Space and Google Current, because they're not particularly dealing with the "applications" part of Google. It neatens up the list a bit more. I hate having to have "Misc" headings in articles - it's just not user-friendly. But I'm not going to be a power freak, so add it in if you wish. Mambo Jambo 00:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Store 

message: Okay, it's taken me pretty much a whole day, but I hope you all like what you see. It's reordered, articles merged, a subtle change in the format, and generally simpler and now should be a recommended file size. Enjoy. --Mambo Jambo 16:42, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Massive cleanup 

message: Hi,
The current version of the article is getting quite large and difficult to read and therfore, taking an idea that MamboJambo did a while ago I've created a proper list format version.
You can find the draft list in my user area.  I was wondering if anyone has any objections to making the change.  If you want to change something on the draft then go ahead! Thanks, Martin Porcheron need help? just ask! 17:50, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was wondering when you would be persuaded towards the list! :-) Yes, I think it's definately easier to read. I'm just about to make some changes to the draft - mainly to the headings. Mambo Jambo 21:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've decided I don't like the idea of having a Mobile Products section. I think it's rather pointless. Instead, they should be mentioned in the related main articles. It makes the list unnecessarily longer. Mambo Jambo 21:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you want to make it live or me?  Martin Porcheron need help? just ask! 19:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I've just made the final changes. Feel free to publish it. Well done! Mambo Jambo 23:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Done, it's about 7,000KBs smaller than the previous design (which was over 30KB). Martin Porcheron need help? just ask! 22:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Different layout 

message: I noticed that some common words are filtered by Google Suggest, such as sexually offensive "fuck". What other kind of words are filtered? I was surprised to see the word "black" filtered. Is there any option to disable filtering for us who prefer it uncensored? 213.100.22.50 14:38, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strict filtering of words by Google Suggest 

message: Shouldn't Google News be in 'Aggregation'? Now is in 'Search'. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.6.210.203 (talk) 14:05, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Debatable, but I'd say keep it as it is. For example, you use Google News to SEARCH for news content (even though the latest news is there), but the likes of Google Reader is much more precise and customised in what you want - it's an aggregator of web feeds. Mambo Jambo 16:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google News 

message: IMHO Google Checkout isn't searching service. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.6.253.8 (talk) 02:19, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I put it in search. I don't think it belongs there either, but Google says it is. It's under search on this page...  --Mambo Jambo 13:38, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GCheckout is in "Search" 

message: I'm new here and I can see there has been a lot of discussion, but I don't see anything about Blogsearch. Am I just not finding it, or have I missed something? --TMH 23:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I think you've missed it. It's in the Search section, under "B". Mambo Jambo 21:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Blogsearch missing? 

message: I see a edit war breaking out over the format of the links.  Let's discuss it first.  The current format is inline links.
* Keep This is the sort of page where the utility of the page is in the convenience and the descriptiveness of the links.  The links are not footnotes but integral to the article content. patsw 17:04, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Format for links 

message: I believe we should add Mobile products to the list because they make the list complete, we currently have desktop, online and hardware products, so why not mobile?  This list is meant to be a list of [all] Google products. Martin Porcheron need help? just ask! 10:03, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Go for it Martin! I'll let you this time, lol. No, you're totally right, mobile is the next big thing for Google, so we may as well make it obvious. Mambo Jambo 18:52, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: Mobile Products 

message: I was just curious... do you think this article could ever be put forward as a featured article? Is the content useful enough; what can be done to improve it? Mambo Jambo 23:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean Featured List. I think that of the criteria, the only potential problem I think is 1(c), as this article doesn't cite its sources. There are some claims here that would require backing up. --Merzul 12:13, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feature Article 

message: Do you think iGoogle needs its own article? There's now more features, such as Community Gadgets and themes, and clearer background information. Think it's about time? Mambo Jambo 23:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have put a merge proposal on the Igoogle, IGoogle, and List of Google products pages.
Bballoakie 22:50, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't think it does, iGoogle, in the words of Google, isn't really a product as such and more of a "feature".  There really isn't all that much to talk about with regards to iGoogle Martin Porcheron need help? just ask! 16:45, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, you're right. It's definately one of the smaller Google products out there. Anyone fancy doing the merger? Mambo Jambo 23:14, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

text: WP:AfD says "Consider making the page a useful redirect or proposing it be merged rather than deleted. Neither of these actions requires an AfD.".  Deleting this article is the wrong decision, it should be redirected/merged into List of Google products. It seems to be the concenus that we don't need a seperate article so i'm going to merge them. Martin Porcheron need help? just ask! 17:28, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good. You're right! Thank you for doing it! :) I will put back the section anchor, and this issue should be done and over with. --Merzul 22:23, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New iGoogle article? 

message: Can anyone recommend reputable sources, apart from the official Google blog, so we can start adding some references to this list? Mambo Jambo 17:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reputable sources 

message: Reborn of Google Answers, only in Russian. From Russian Google blog: http://googlerussiablog.blogspot.com/2007/06/google.html --ajvol 14:15, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Otvety (Answers) Beta 

message: Why is there a redirect page from google suggest?!  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ygb6147 (talk • contribs).
: Because there is not enough information for a seperate article. Martin Porcheron talk to memy edits 14:58, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  redirect 

message: What about GOOG-411? That's not on the list.
O2mcgovem 16:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GOOG-411 

message: why is google adwords print ads (http://www.google.com/adwords/printads/index.html) not listed? it seems like worth noting! --78.128.199.9 (talk) 21:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  google adwords print 

message: I think that Google's widget based ads (http://www.google.com/adwords/gadgetads/index.html) should be mentioned under the advertising section.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebness86 (talk • contribs) 00:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Google Gadget Ads

message: Este trabalho aborda a incidência do cãncer de colo de útero no município de Marituba no período de 2005 a 2006, por meio de um estudo descritivo documental retrospectivo, com o objetivo de analisar aspectos epidemiológicos e citopatológicos relacionados ao câncer de colo de útero. Na análise estatística foi calculada a freqüência das variáveis definidas, número total de coletas no município, número de 1ª vez, número de gestantes, pacientes em controle, resultado negativo para células neoplásicas, citologia inflamatória, número de NIC I, II, III, carcinoma in situ, carcinoma epidermóide, adenocarcinoma, células neoplásicas e o número de coletas insatisfatórias. A casuística foi de 13.676 mulheres que foram submetidas ao exame do Papanicolau no período de estudo. Entre as mulheres estudadas, observou-se com esta análise a importância do estudo epidemiológico do câncer do colo do útero. Pois o município necessita de açõrs em Saúde Pública para implementar o diagnóstico precoce, identificando alterações citopatológicas, dando o tratamento correto para cada tipo de lesão ginecológica. Com essas ações, como o Programa de controle do câncer cérvico uterino (PCCU), haverá redução da incidência de câncer do colo do útero, assim como sua mortalidade  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.13.239.227 (talk) 03:05, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abstract 

message: No info on Google Chart API?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.181.37 (talk) 12:35, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chart API 

message: I suggest that a mention of Google Doctype be added.
http://code.google.com/doctype/
"
Google Doctype is an open encyclopedia and reference library. Written by web developers, for web developers. It includes articles on web security, JavaScript DOM manipulation, CSS tips and tricks, and more. The reference section includes a growing library of test cases for checking cross-browser and cross-platform compatibility.
Google Doctype is 100% open.
    * Open source
    * Open content
    * Open to contributions from anyone
"
http://sites.google.com/site/io/introduction-to-google-doctype-an-encyclopedia-of-the-open-web
Mathiastck (talk) 18:18, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Doctype 

message: Lively is under Web Products (accessed by Browser), when it is more of a download. Should it be moved? Jerr (talk) 06:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Lively is actually being discontinued (http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/lively-no-more.html) and should be moved to previous products, I never used it but I feel bad for the people who do. Google may be a reliable company as in they will always be out there but I'm finding it harder to rely on some of their products but I'm pretty sure it's safe to say that gmail and iGoogle will always be there. --DrM4rio (talk) 18:10, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lively in Wrong Section? 

message: "Google co-operation PowerWord Edition" is Kingsoft and Google translation of the market-oriented joint development of the Internet, apply to individual users of free translation software.
Not a great advert for the abilities of this translation software!--Sergeirichard (talk) 16:19, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kingsoft / Google Dictionary (Windows XP/Vista)

message: Recently, the alpha for Chrome has been released for Mac and Linux, I have several sources cited:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/google/5454080/Google-Chrome-comes-to-the-Apple-Mac.html, http://www.macworld.com/article/140998/2009/06/chromemac.html, and here are the download sites for mac:http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/eula_dev.html?dl=mac,linux:i386: http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/eula_dev.html?dl=unstable_i386_deb, and AMD64:http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/eula_dev.html?dl=unstable_amd64_deb. I acknowledge that these are alpha releases and not entirely stable, but they are chrome releases nonetheless.--Austinbparker (talk) 18:07, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Chrome  

message: Google is with 85 % of years income of the Mozilla Foundation by far the most important sponsor, but sponsorship doesn't equal ownership. It's akin to saying GM owns a newspaper because the car company is the biggest advertiser.
Source: 
http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/08/28/mozilla-extends-lucrative-deal-with-google-for-3-years/  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.130.6.237 (talk) 10:44, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Firefox a de-facto-Google-product 

message: The contacts part of gmail is also a serperate service, http://www.google.com/contacts 87.212.16.222 (talk) 14:54, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Contacts 

message: Google Pinyin isn't an IE plugin, as stated. Maybe there's another version I don't know about, but it's a... Windows extension? 87.228.4.66 09:06, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Although it may not run in IE it does require IE to be run.  See  under the list of requirements.   Martin Porcheron need help? just ask! 11:02, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

text: There have been standalone win32 apps that put IE in their requirements list, ex. Kaspersky_Anti-Virus#System_requirements. As an Input method, Google Pinyin is standalone. Zat'n'ktel (talk) 07:56, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google Pinyin is standalone 

message: Just wondering why it isn't on this article. Seems to be enough credible sources on the net to at least be listed with maybe (under development) next to the listed entry?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.254.218.39 (talk) 12:04, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  GDrive / Google Drive 

message: goo.gl
:Google URL Shortener
Google URL Shortener at goo.gl is a service that takes long URLs and squeezes them into fewer characters to make a link that is easier to share, tweet, or email to friends.
--Alex131089 (talk) 18:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  goo.gl 

message: http://www.demoslam.com  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benvewikilerim (talk • contribs) 08:59, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  google demo slam