searching on Pistonheads PLEASE
Discussion
If you are one of those of us who tries to search for information on PH can I please urge you to look at this thread:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Can a few of you please try searching for something relevant that you can remember our forum discussing, and see if you can find it. Whether you can or not the PH webmaster needs to know. I have been doing searches on PH for about 8 years now to try to add info to past threads and i cannot seem to do it at the moment. Is it me? I want others to check!!! PLEASE
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Can a few of you please try searching for something relevant that you can remember our forum discussing, and see if you can find it. Whether you can or not the PH webmaster needs to know. I have been doing searches on PH for about 8 years now to try to add info to past threads and i cannot seem to do it at the moment. Is it me? I want others to check!!! PLEASE
I guess, from the lack of response (only glenrobbo and magpies seem to have tried) that not many members of this forum ever search for information from past threads? Is that a realistic assessment? If members do not use the search facilities then there may be little point in the webmasters spending time refining it. At the moment I am finding the new PH search arrangements pretty useless although searching by Google is still getting reasonable results.
Oldred_V8S said:
Fine for me too. Doesn't work so well on mobile devices, you don't get the option to filter on S only, but on Mac and PC's you can select S only and don't have to deselect all the other results.
I have just tried again using the format 'TVR S brake servo' written that way.It again gave me hundreds of listings which were not for TVR S, which is a rather odd logic for a 'search' engine. I tried the deselect and got the choice within TVR for S 'only', but it did not deselect everything else (I am using a modern laptop, windows 7 and up to date Mozilla). I didnt go any further.
Google found what I wanted straight away.
If this interests you then the thread to look at is
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Even more relieved! We have generated enough feedback to demonstrate to the PH webmaster that the new search arrangements are not 'fit for purpose' as they stand. Several very interesting points of principle have come up and the webmaster is going to come back to us. It will be on the webmaster link I set out earlier.
I have invented a new game (Sorry, webmaster!) I searched PH for TVR S Bonnet catches, and I then spent a few moments trying to guess how it could possibly have come up with what it did come up with. Entertaining in a warped sort of way. (Google found the post I wanted straight away)
This is really for member rsscott who has also contributed to a Gassing Station debate on this. This issue does need serious study because unless the search engine works effectively, and IN A WAY THE USER CAN UNDERSTAND, then it greatly limits the use of PH as an 'archive' of information. This post is being linked to Racing Pete the webmaster and to Haymarkets Customer Experience Manager.
I am setting out my point of view, and being 'devils advocate' to some degree, in the hope that it might play a small part in getting an effective search facility.
Let us look at the new search facility and see what happens in practice, at least from the point of view of an 'average' member of this particular forum. That 'average' member is looking for info relevant to his issue with his car, he is primarily a car enthusiast rather than a computer expert. He wants the 'computer', in the form of the PH forum to do a job, he doesnt want to need to be a computer 'geek' to do it. We want to use the search facility to find things, we do not expect to have to encode our search subject or start deleting lots of alternative search criteria in any way to meet the idiosyncracy of the search engine
An owner of a TVR S type who want to find out the latest advice on,let us say bonnet catches, is very likely to enter into his search; TVR S Bonnet Catches. Nothing more complex, there is surely an inescapable logic in that? It is what you would do on a Google search is it not? Simples??
So I put TVR S bonnet catches into the search engine. I did not get the few results you suggested. I got 44 results. (interestingly I do not get the same results each time I tried!!!)
The first result I get is related to a Griff 500, and is from 2001. You must ask yourself how a search by the above subject could prioritise that result!
The second result is indeed related to an S but is only marginally relevant to the search subject, and is from 2004! That has been well and truely superseded by later information. But the searcher wouldnt known that! That makes it potentially a dangerously misleading result.
And so on!
Of the 44 posts you may say that I can delete 19 because they are not relevant to TVR. Ok, I can do that, with a bit of effort clicking a number of boxes, but I asked the search engine to do that and it has failed to restrict itself to what I asked for.
I decided to restrict to just the posts listed which were identified as TVR. That required 16 operations! That left me with 25 listings. I open that option and I find 5 are for S type the others 20 are not. Once again the search engine is not restricting to the subject. Two more operations and I finally have 5 apparently directly relevant to the subject I put in.
let me use an analogy often used in this kind of situation. I expect a search engine to direct me to the top of a 'pyramid' of information, to list first the single best choice it finds to match my subject. It may not be quite what I wanted so I can then go down the pyramid a layer and expand.
What this search engine appears to be doing is put me at the bottom of a pyramid of items it thinks might be relevant and expects me to start deleting or chosing options which are hopefully increasingly relevant to me.
So lets look at the 5 items left. Amazingly, only one is actually about bonnet catches (and has bonnet catches in the title) and that was outdated in 2004. One of the posts listed merely referred to a schedule of S cars, one of which had a single ref 'bonnet catches'.
The post I was actually looking for wasnt on the final 5, nor on the original 44. Yet that post was current (June 2015) and had all the words TVR, S, Bonnet, Catches, in the title!
So what I am asking, or saying, is this: would the average PH member, who is a car enthusiast but not necessarily a computer expert let alone well versed in search engine logic, find the current search engine helpful in finding what he wanted. I contend that he would NOT.
Using the example above I could not find the most 'relevant' post.
I asked a few other people to try. None of them found it either.
I asked those same people to try via Google. They all found it easily.
Q.E.D. ?
I am setting out my point of view, and being 'devils advocate' to some degree, in the hope that it might play a small part in getting an effective search facility.
Let us look at the new search facility and see what happens in practice, at least from the point of view of an 'average' member of this particular forum. That 'average' member is looking for info relevant to his issue with his car, he is primarily a car enthusiast rather than a computer expert. He wants the 'computer', in the form of the PH forum to do a job, he doesnt want to need to be a computer 'geek' to do it. We want to use the search facility to find things, we do not expect to have to encode our search subject or start deleting lots of alternative search criteria in any way to meet the idiosyncracy of the search engine
An owner of a TVR S type who want to find out the latest advice on,let us say bonnet catches, is very likely to enter into his search; TVR S Bonnet Catches. Nothing more complex, there is surely an inescapable logic in that? It is what you would do on a Google search is it not? Simples??
So I put TVR S bonnet catches into the search engine. I did not get the few results you suggested. I got 44 results. (interestingly I do not get the same results each time I tried!!!)
The first result I get is related to a Griff 500, and is from 2001. You must ask yourself how a search by the above subject could prioritise that result!
The second result is indeed related to an S but is only marginally relevant to the search subject, and is from 2004! That has been well and truely superseded by later information. But the searcher wouldnt known that! That makes it potentially a dangerously misleading result.
And so on!
Of the 44 posts you may say that I can delete 19 because they are not relevant to TVR. Ok, I can do that, with a bit of effort clicking a number of boxes, but I asked the search engine to do that and it has failed to restrict itself to what I asked for.
I decided to restrict to just the posts listed which were identified as TVR. That required 16 operations! That left me with 25 listings. I open that option and I find 5 are for S type the others 20 are not. Once again the search engine is not restricting to the subject. Two more operations and I finally have 5 apparently directly relevant to the subject I put in.
let me use an analogy often used in this kind of situation. I expect a search engine to direct me to the top of a 'pyramid' of information, to list first the single best choice it finds to match my subject. It may not be quite what I wanted so I can then go down the pyramid a layer and expand.
What this search engine appears to be doing is put me at the bottom of a pyramid of items it thinks might be relevant and expects me to start deleting or chosing options which are hopefully increasingly relevant to me.
So lets look at the 5 items left. Amazingly, only one is actually about bonnet catches (and has bonnet catches in the title) and that was outdated in 2004. One of the posts listed merely referred to a schedule of S cars, one of which had a single ref 'bonnet catches'.
The post I was actually looking for wasnt on the final 5, nor on the original 44. Yet that post was current (June 2015) and had all the words TVR, S, Bonnet, Catches, in the title!
So what I am asking, or saying, is this: would the average PH member, who is a car enthusiast but not necessarily a computer expert let alone well versed in search engine logic, find the current search engine helpful in finding what he wanted. I contend that he would NOT.
Using the example above I could not find the most 'relevant' post.
I asked a few other people to try. None of them found it either.
I asked those same people to try via Google. They all found it easily.
Q.E.D. ?
Glad we could make you feel a little younger again
I think that trying to ensure PH continues to work well for us, plus my recent brush with Jeremy, have made me feel even older;)
Some considerable effort has been made, initiated by members before me, to use PH to maintain an archive of information regarding these cars, and to keep that archive updated and in a form where newer members can access the most up to date info as readily as possible.
To do that we have to encourage members to add to existing threads, or link to existing threads. If we cannot do that then we get a plethora of unlinked bits, efforts to reinvent the wheel, and confusing advice. Clearly we cannot expect members to add or link if they cannot readily find the threads concerned. It appears that most (and that includes respected and able members) cannot readily do so.
There is also an issue for some of us in that there are also owners on Facebook who are not on PH, or do not regularly use PH. Facebook is nothing like as good a forum for use as a reference source, yet questions do get asked every day on Facebook. Those questions are either 'answered' by people who do not know the depth of information on PH (which has often been bad, outdated or confusing advice), or one of the experienced PH members answers in detail which is an additional demand on their time, or one of us refers them to a link on PH. The problem now is to locate that link on PH. I regularly refer enguirers on Facebook to a PH thread which has the accumulated and updated information they want, but I have to try to find it via Google, I simply cannot find it quickly enough through the PH search engine
Thanks for the positive response. I cannot respond with examples just now but I will endeavour to give you the examples you need over the next few days. I assume I can continue to respond via this thread, is that Ok for you?
I think that trying to ensure PH continues to work well for us, plus my recent brush with Jeremy, have made me feel even older;)
Some considerable effort has been made, initiated by members before me, to use PH to maintain an archive of information regarding these cars, and to keep that archive updated and in a form where newer members can access the most up to date info as readily as possible.
To do that we have to encourage members to add to existing threads, or link to existing threads. If we cannot do that then we get a plethora of unlinked bits, efforts to reinvent the wheel, and confusing advice. Clearly we cannot expect members to add or link if they cannot readily find the threads concerned. It appears that most (and that includes respected and able members) cannot readily do so.
There is also an issue for some of us in that there are also owners on Facebook who are not on PH, or do not regularly use PH. Facebook is nothing like as good a forum for use as a reference source, yet questions do get asked every day on Facebook. Those questions are either 'answered' by people who do not know the depth of information on PH (which has often been bad, outdated or confusing advice), or one of the experienced PH members answers in detail which is an additional demand on their time, or one of us refers them to a link on PH. The problem now is to locate that link on PH. I regularly refer enguirers on Facebook to a PH thread which has the accumulated and updated information they want, but I have to try to find it via Google, I simply cannot find it quickly enough through the PH search engine
Thanks for the positive response. I cannot respond with examples just now but I will endeavour to give you the examples you need over the next few days. I assume I can continue to respond via this thread, is that Ok for you?
Just to add another members experience
mikestvrs1 said:
Hi Guys,
.....
I am sure that this issue has been raised previously but I am not getting far with searching through the forums.
What has happened, the current PH search engine is a nightmare, I had trouble even finding any of my previous topics.
mikestvrs1 said:
Hi Guys,
.....
I am sure that this issue has been raised previously but I am not getting far with searching through the forums.
What has happened, the current PH search engine is a nightmare, I had trouble even finding any of my previous topics.
OK RacingPete you wanted examples. A guy came on the TVR S group on Facebook asking for advice re seat belts. I wanted to post him to existing advice on PH. I Googled using TVR S seat belts, nothing else. The first search result is the PH D forum and gives 4 results, it is immediately clear that 2 are of low relevance (one is old and the other says seat belt 'pads'). I pick one, it is correct. I also notice of further checking that there are links between them. I copy that PH ref and give it to the guy, and he follows it up.
An important point to me is that it keeps the PH data as the prime data for TVR S owners, we are not duplicating or going off at tangents.
I then tried the same on the PH search using exactly the same search subject. I got 94 results! None of the first 25 (the displayed list) was the least bit relevant. I could find no good reason for some to have been selected as 'relevant' at all. The one I knew I wanted turned up at 47th on the list.
I decided to see what happened if I deselected options (quite why I have to deselect and work up the pyramid rather than select more and work down I do not know). The 'hover' didnt work, nothing happened. So I deselected 12 options (12 operations) and got down to 49 choices, the one I wanted was now 25th. But only 4 had both seat and belt in the title. I opened a couple and they had only the most marginal relevance, or non at all.
I unchecked TVR and rechecked S only. Mine is now 8th out of 12, only 2 have both seat and belt in the title. Quite what 'relevance' several had to my search subject defeats me. Remember I am being offered results by RELEVANCE, but some are clearly not of significant relevance.
A marginal reference to seatbelts in a post about a different make of car entirely (never mind a different model of the same make) is more 'relevant' that one that has all the elements of my search subject in it. That is a patent nonsense.
I change the option from Relevance to Last Update Time, but of course it then lists in the next column by Ascending rather than Descending date, so I change again to Descending order of time, and mine is now 4th. NONE of the first 3 have seats and belts in the title!
As Devils Advocate I would say, how can the 'ordinary' person see this as better than what we had, or of any use for 'ordinary' searches.
An important point to me is that it keeps the PH data as the prime data for TVR S owners, we are not duplicating or going off at tangents.
I then tried the same on the PH search using exactly the same search subject. I got 94 results! None of the first 25 (the displayed list) was the least bit relevant. I could find no good reason for some to have been selected as 'relevant' at all. The one I knew I wanted turned up at 47th on the list.
I decided to see what happened if I deselected options (quite why I have to deselect and work up the pyramid rather than select more and work down I do not know). The 'hover' didnt work, nothing happened. So I deselected 12 options (12 operations) and got down to 49 choices, the one I wanted was now 25th. But only 4 had both seat and belt in the title. I opened a couple and they had only the most marginal relevance, or non at all.
I unchecked TVR and rechecked S only. Mine is now 8th out of 12, only 2 have both seat and belt in the title. Quite what 'relevance' several had to my search subject defeats me. Remember I am being offered results by RELEVANCE, but some are clearly not of significant relevance.
A marginal reference to seatbelts in a post about a different make of car entirely (never mind a different model of the same make) is more 'relevant' that one that has all the elements of my search subject in it. That is a patent nonsense.
I change the option from Relevance to Last Update Time, but of course it then lists in the next column by Ascending rather than Descending date, so I change again to Descending order of time, and mine is now 4th. NONE of the first 3 have seats and belts in the title!
As Devils Advocate I would say, how can the 'ordinary' person see this as better than what we had, or of any use for 'ordinary' searches.
Sorry Pete, I had had enough by then and ran out of time. The link I did give earlier in the day re seat belts was http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
I will try to give you more examples but I have pretty well given up using PH search engine as a means of finding threads to link people to for access to existing advice.
I am sorry Pete, I really have tried but I just cannot see how any search angine worthy of the name would select many of the highest listed items as in any way 'relevant'.
To take the example of seat belts again; how the casual mention in a thread of someone having fitted new seat belts in a car of a different make can possibly come up in a search as of MORE relevance than a thread specifically about the make and model of car in the search subject, and which has the specific search words in the thread TITLE, is quite beyond me.
I will try to give you more examples but I have pretty well given up using PH search engine as a means of finding threads to link people to for access to existing advice.
I am sorry Pete, I really have tried but I just cannot see how any search angine worthy of the name would select many of the highest listed items as in any way 'relevant'.
To take the example of seat belts again; how the casual mention in a thread of someone having fitted new seat belts in a car of a different make can possibly come up in a search as of MORE relevance than a thread specifically about the make and model of car in the search subject, and which has the specific search words in the thread TITLE, is quite beyond me.
Thanks Pete, I would really appreciate it if you would. I certainly want to see a PH search facility which can readily be used to direct people to existing information resources. At the moment I simply cannot use it to find those resources quickly enough, and it certainly appears that this applies to most other members of this forum.
Thanks guys, RacingPete is the guy in charge of the PH search engine project, the more info we give him about our own experiences the better chance we have of getting the search engine working as we need it.
So I do urge members to try to find a post that know to exist and see if the search engine helps them find it. At least RacingPete now knows it isnt just my 'incompetence', but a genuine issue for us.
So I do urge members to try to find a post that know to exist and see if the search engine helps them find it. At least RacingPete now knows it isnt just my 'incompetence', but a genuine issue for us.
Sorry Guys, it looks as if the PH search engine isnt going to work for us. I have tried to keep the issue alive but it appears that the search engine cannot deal with S in the description!
I have just tried 6 searches as an experiment. All 6 I knew had recent threads. The results were frankly bizarre. I have absolutely no idea how any search engine could possibly have rated some of those results as relevant. In each case the one I wanted was in there somewhere but what a job to find it! Even where the search subject was precisely the same as the thread title it didnt rate it as particularly relevant.
I also monitor what goes on on the Facebook group of S owners. I often point them to information which is well documented on PH to save reinventing the wheel. But they cannot find it using the PH search engine. There have been quite a few impolite comments about PH as a result!
I have given up for the time being and just Google using TVR S as a prefix and look for the Pistonheads results it finds for me, easier, quicker and actually finds what I want! A useful feature of a search engine!!!
Sorry RacingPete, I know you have tried.
I have just tried 6 searches as an experiment. All 6 I knew had recent threads. The results were frankly bizarre. I have absolutely no idea how any search engine could possibly have rated some of those results as relevant. In each case the one I wanted was in there somewhere but what a job to find it! Even where the search subject was precisely the same as the thread title it didnt rate it as particularly relevant.
I also monitor what goes on on the Facebook group of S owners. I often point them to information which is well documented on PH to save reinventing the wheel. But they cannot find it using the PH search engine. There have been quite a few impolite comments about PH as a result!
I have given up for the time being and just Google using TVR S as a prefix and look for the Pistonheads results it finds for me, easier, quicker and actually finds what I want! A useful feature of a search engine!!!
Sorry RacingPete, I know you have tried.
Dont know if Racing Pete is still watching this thread but is it correct to presume you did not find a way to adapt the search engine to meet our needs? I saw reference on another Gassing Station post to you continuing to have trouble in a few areas, and the S was mentioned.
I just tried a couple of searches but the results seemed frankly bizarre.
I presume we have to assume we wont get the search engine working for us, and we will have to do the best we can with google, but I would like that confirmed so we know exactly where we stand.
I just tried a couple of searches but the results seemed frankly bizarre.
I presume we have to assume we wont get the search engine working for us, and we will have to do the best we can with google, but I would like that confirmed so we know exactly where we stand.
Gassing Station | S Series | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff