Talk:ChaCha (search engine)

message: I added a couple of linkshttp://www.srajaram.com/images/chacha_m.jpghttp://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/31/chacha-ditches-guided-search-model-i-love-to-hate-this-startup/
to show how ChaCha.com appeared in its original, failed form as a web search guided by paid humans (but these may not be a proper wikipedia linking which may need correcting).  This proved to be as archaic as the short reign of the pony express and now the mail service that replaced it. If ChaCha.com goes on to become a lasting player in the internet search world via its human text message business model then seeing how it first operated is as interesting as a image of Ford's first car or Apple's first desktop computer.  Historically I am intrigued by the integration of paid human input into the internet experience which could be seen as a significant resistance to the current dominance of machines because search engines rule the internet world unfortunately.  (This also relates to the survival or the "human search engine" mentioned below)  Harpervi (talk) 21:35, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical Significance 

message: This article should not be deleted based on a month and a half old four-person AfD.  I believe the subject is now notable enough to be included in Wikipedia.  Although it should probably be under ChaCha (search engine). -- goatasaur 15:39, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone is planning on deleting this again post a NEW AfD request before doing so. (e: revote not nec.)  Subject of article has changed considerably since September 6th, which was less than a week after the website launched.  ChaCha currently has over 5000 guides, and many users, with an expected 50,000 guides by year's end.  -- goatasaur 15:55, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  AfD 

message: As the site gets bigger, more and more people are pulling prank searches for fun on ChaCha and posting them around the 'net. It seems to be a phenomina big enogh to be worth mentioning.
:Feel free to add that information with a proper source if you'd like. --Maxamegalon2000 21:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Lollerz, pranking the guides must be at least 8x as fun as blanking Wiki's. Luksuh 22:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Added something about pranking. Spread the good word! Citation-ish used. Hard to find citations for prank percentage. For the record, ChaCha was not helpful in finding this number. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pictish (talk • contribs) 23:34, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Shouldn't ChrisB or someone be put on this? --Clorox (talk) 01:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prank Searches 

message: Doesn't the logo of ChaCha have a little stamp thing on it that says, "BETA" on it? I saw it at the website. ANNAfoxlover 19:55, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  logo 

message: i wanted to add chacha's public discussion policy but it was removed, also how in the past chacha's search time dropped from an infinite amount of time to 6 minutes of searching.  Lastly, regarding the prankster issue, i included a link to a 3rd party  opinion piece about ChaCha search engine that discusses this issue in detail.  but all was removed.
ChaCha themselves will not cooperate in disclosing this information. This article is not balanced and seems to be a promotional article on chacha. --Icobi 18:35, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  chacha issues 

message: we need to document the anti chacha sentiment that's growing from current and ex guides. This wiki page shouldn't just be a promotional peice on chacha. There are many controversial issues regarding this search engine that need to be addressed. Anybody agree? Icobi 07:54, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, we shouldn't document the sentiment until a secondary source documents it first. If you can find some reputable sources on these controversial issues, feel free to add them to the article. --Maxamegalon2000 16:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Since neither the link or the website hosting is seems to be valid anymore, I'd say no. ;) Banaticus (talk) 04:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: the URL got messed up some how, "SPAMLINK" was inserted into the middle of it for some reason....remove the SPAMLINK from the URL to fix it.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.165.243.53 (talk) 01:44, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

text: I completely understand and agree with you. Amybeth007 (talk) 08:57, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Anti ChaCha sentiment on the web

message: This is spilling over from a discussion about the term, and the fate of the Human Search Engine page itself (see its talk page and AfD for details). DMacks (talk) 07:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The site itself doesn't mention human search engine at all, it uses social search. Until otherwise, I believe that it should be changed back to social search.  Jac roeBlank 21:18, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

text: The press refers to ChaCha as a human search engine. Below is one of many instances where they do this:
http://frostfirebuzz.com/chacha-recevies-8-million-funding-but-will-need-a-lot-more-real-time-human-search
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.154.110.167 (talk) 
In all content of that article, it is a "human-powered search engine"—the title is the only place it's "human search engine". Editors (who are sometimes people not familiar with the topic) often omit words from key phrases when writing titles. DMacks (talk) 16:25, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Human Search Engine" revert-war 

message: ChaCha does not have any way to cancel your account and when i contacted them to do so, my email was ignored.  Can we create a section about this? Simon.uk.21 (talk) 01:42, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you referring to the spam that ChaCha sends you after you send a query to them?  Text "STOP" (all in capital letters, no other characters) and it'll stop. Banaticus (talk) 04:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: no, i mean, when you set up an account to log into etc, there is no way of deleting the account.  you know the way on many sites like google you can 'delete my account'  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simaloko (talk • contribs) 01:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cancel Account 

message: The snippet I and my colleague added to the "Other" section has been repeatedly removed. I've checked the External_link_spamming article and the link therein is no more promotional than a link to any other news story. Does this mean that external citations cannot be added to Wikipedia at all? Welkin19 (talk) 13:51, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: For those of us who don't want to come through edit histories, want to post the link here?  Why do you want to post it, what purpose does it serve -- how does it add to the article? Banaticus (talk) 04:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The content was a press release sourced to a non-notable marketing company about non-notable activities. It's easy enough to trace the edits based on the date of the above posting or the editor's history. Flowanda | Talk 07:37, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

text: So... someone deleted a portion of an article and they happened to be from the same town as the website the article is about? Additionally, you're telling me that you can't revert the edit because it was a good edit? Is it possible that it's a coincidence that the editor was from that city? Are you sure they weren't just following the many Wikipedia rules about such content found in Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view? Simply because an American removes negative opinionated content on the Foreign_policy_of_the_United_States page doesn't mean they have a conflict of interest, now does it? Also, wouldn't any removal of any negative comments from the Criticisms_of_wikipedia page be a Conflict of Interest; since the person removing it would also be a supporter of Wikipedia by definition? I think it's clear that you're in violation of the Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith guideline. Instead of making such broad assumptions, it might be in everyone's best interest if you ask questions rather then point fingers.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.23.80.194 (talk) 17:09, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your comments... However, my allegations also stem from user 64.255.241.78's edit history on this article... including news and information that would only be available to an employee of this company, and the use of language that portrays this company in a purely positive light.  I posted my suspicions about this possible COI over a week ago here and on the user's Talk page, and this is the first response it has received.  I'm not trying to start trouble or be disruptive, and I take offense at your accusation of bad faith.  I stated some information, in hopes that someone can revamp this article... I am not qualified nor experienced enough as a Wiki-editor to do so.  208.188.176.72 (talk) 22:32, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fast pitch award 

message: With the changes in fall of 2008, to more automated answers, less pay for the guides, the restriction of users to 20 questions per month from previously unlimited questions, and the severe degradation, to ~10% of their previous service to both guides and users (continuing for ~2 weeks prior to and as of Nov. 14), and the addition of ads to their service, and the rapid deletion of anything negative about the company, many people are claiming chacha is dying and hiding it. 
  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.94.48 (talk) 18:59, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please only add information that can be attributed to reliable sources; forum posts (even if they are "official" forums) don't meet the criteria. Also keep in mind that Wikipedia articles are meant to be encyclopedic, not a source for breaking news, commentary, rumors or other poorly sourced edits. Please see WP:NOTNEWS and check out Wikinews for adding information concerning current events. Flowanda | Talk 02:51, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What if the information is posted by the Company themselves in their own blog site? Amybeth007 (talk) 08:56, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Con

message: Please note all resources quoting "Inside Indiana Business" or "Grow Indiana Media Ventures"- 50% of company is owned by principal Scott Jones and thus citation is biased.  "The host and creator of Inside INdiana Business television, Gerry Dick also serves as president and managing editor of Grow INdiana Media Ventures, LLC, a diverse media company focused on producing and distributing Indiana business news and information through multiple media channels. Gerry and technology entrepreneur Scott Jones are owners of the company."  http://www.insideindianabusiness.com/authors.asp?id=161 October 2009Clarification3 (talk) 05:34, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Inside Indiana Business

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 04:10, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:ChaCha.com US Homepage - August 2011.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on ChaCha (search engine). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100208035229/http://www.adtechblog.com/blog/detail/akamai-chacha-announce-parties-at-new-york-adtech/ to http://www.adtechblog.com/blog/detail/akamai-chacha-announce-parties-at-new-york-adtech/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:27, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The lead says "ChaCha is a human-guided search engine..." but isn't it more correct to say "ChaCha is a Q&A website"? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:54, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Search engine of Q&A website? 

message: Hysteresis 197.239.4.48 (talk) 20:31, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electrical science