5 ms·

Wasn’t there an option at one time to tell Google to hide results from a certain domain? I feel like I haven’t seen that in years though

feanaro 6y ago
Just add `-site:example.org` to your query.
- joegahona 6y ago
  I have done this throughout COVID for the NYTimes' content, as it's behind a paywall.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - ashleshbiradar 6y ago
    Interestingly, if you use Brave, it lets you hop to the tor versions of sites, and since NYTimes has a tor version, if you visit that, it’s paywall free.
    - dgeiser13 6y ago
      I use Brave. How do I hop to the Tor version of a site?
      - intellirogue 6y ago
        If you go to a site that advertises (via HTTP header) that it has a Tor version, you'll get an "Open in Tor" button at the end of the address bar. Examples are nytimes.com and dw.com
smoe 6y ago
It still works -site:pinterest.* Even with wildcard tld, otherwise it is still all Pinterest But it is interesting that those kind of Google/search engine feature hardly ever get talked about these days whereas in the past they were considered crucial to get decent results.
- foobarian 6y ago
  I don't know what the pathway for this is but just -pinterest does it for me.
  - leereeves 6y ago
    -pinterest removes pages that contain the term pinterest, so pages from a pinterest.* domain, plus articles about pinterest, etc.
    - dylan604 6y ago
      Sounds pretty good to me. If I'm searching for a term, but don't want results from pintrest, then I'm probably not wanting to read an article about pintrest either.
      - whatshisface 6y ago
        "Here's a picture I took today. I also posted it on Instagram and Pintrest."
      - jbay808 6y ago
        If you wanted to read an article about Pinterest, it would probably be hard to search for it in any other way.
      - CompuHacker 6y ago
        Except that the word "pinterest", like pinterest.* results, appears in all the nooks and crannies of the rest of the Web. Excluding the domain like that succeeds in narrowing the scope of the search without excluding content unduly.
russh 6y ago
It was too effective.
tobyjsullivan 6y ago
You can hide sites with a flag in the query. No idea if it works on image search but I assume it does. -site:pinterest.com
Udik 6y ago
I don't get why Google doesn't give an option to permanently remove or downgrade certain domains, straight from the results page. There are results I am never interested in. It could also work as a further signal for their ranking, if used with some caution.
- visarga 6y ago
  Probably Google would do good to give up total control and obscurity and put people in the driving seat of search customization. Maybe that would even save them from the anti-trust push (one indexing and retrieval back end + multiple ranking, filtering and UI front ends). But I'm wondering if this would not be better implemented at browser level. Can we have the white/black list run locally in the browser, re-ranking results on web pages and hiding what we don't want to see? Not just on Google, but also on the rest of the web, like ad blocking extensions.
caymanjim 6y ago
There use to be an easy way to configure your account to always block certain domains, but that's gone now, so you have to use -site per-query. Maybe there are browser plugins that help? I miss the old functionality. I only had to block about a dozen sites to get great search results. Maybe it'd be less viable now; I'd probably have to block hundreds or thousands of sites, and they'd keep breeding new ones.
- giancarlostoro 6y ago
  You used to be able to tweak part of the URL in the Firefox google search thing, and append queries I thought so as well.
- kazinator 6y ago
  Just make a search that excludes all the domains you despise. Don't include any search terms or just a dummy one. Then save it as a bookmark. e.g. "-site:foo.* -site:bar.* ..." Use that bookmark as your search engine: click on it, then fill in search terms.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
aendruk 6y ago
Yep. Google removed it. https://github.com/codyogden/killedbygoogle/issues/674 https://github.com/codyogden/killedbygoogle/issues/674

feanaro 6y ago

Just add `-site:example.org` to your query.

joegahona 6y ago
I have done this throughout COVID for the NYTimes' content, as it's behind a paywall.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ashleshbiradar 6y ago
  Interestingly, if you use Brave, it lets you hop to the tor versions of sites, and since NYTimes has a tor version, if you visit that, it’s paywall free.
  - dgeiser13 6y ago
    I use Brave. How do I hop to the Tor version of a site?
    - intellirogue 6y ago
      If you go to a site that advertises (via HTTP header) that it has a Tor version, you'll get an "Open in Tor" button at the end of the address bar. Examples are nytimes.com and dw.com

smoe 6y ago

It still works -site:pinterest.* Even with wildcard tld, otherwise it is still all Pinterest But it is interesting that those kind of Google/search engine feature hardly ever get talked about these days whereas in the past they were considered crucial to get decent results.

foobarian 6y ago
I don't know what the pathway for this is but just -pinterest does it for me.
- leereeves 6y ago
  -pinterest removes pages that contain the term pinterest, so pages from a pinterest.* domain, plus articles about pinterest, etc.
  - dylan604 6y ago
    Sounds pretty good to me. If I'm searching for a term, but don't want results from pintrest, then I'm probably not wanting to read an article about pintrest either.
    - whatshisface 6y ago
      "Here's a picture I took today. I also posted it on Instagram and Pintrest."
    - jbay808 6y ago
      If you wanted to read an article about Pinterest, it would probably be hard to search for it in any other way.
    - CompuHacker 6y ago
      Except that the word "pinterest", like pinterest.* results, appears in all the nooks and crannies of the rest of the Web. Excluding the domain like that succeeds in narrowing the scope of the search without excluding content unduly.

russh 6y ago

It was too effective.

tobyjsullivan 6y ago

You can hide sites with a flag in the query. No idea if it works on image search but I assume it does. -site:pinterest.com

Udik 6y ago

I don't get why Google doesn't give an option to permanently remove or downgrade certain domains, straight from the results page. There are results I am never interested in. It could also work as a further signal for their ranking, if used with some caution.

visarga 6y ago
Probably Google would do good to give up total control and obscurity and put people in the driving seat of search customization. Maybe that would even save them from the anti-trust push (one indexing and retrieval back end + multiple ranking, filtering and UI front ends). But I'm wondering if this would not be better implemented at browser level. Can we have the white/black list run locally in the browser, re-ranking results on web pages and hiding what we don't want to see? Not just on Google, but also on the rest of the web, like ad blocking extensions.

caymanjim 6y ago

There use to be an easy way to configure your account to always block certain domains, but that's gone now, so you have to use -site per-query. Maybe there are browser plugins that help? I miss the old functionality. I only had to block about a dozen sites to get great search results. Maybe it'd be less viable now; I'd probably have to block hundreds or thousands of sites, and they'd keep breeding new ones.

giancarlostoro 6y ago
You used to be able to tweak part of the URL in the Firefox google search thing, and append queries I thought so as well.
kazinator 6y ago
Just make a search that excludes all the domains you despise. Don't include any search terms or just a dummy one. Then save it as a bookmark. e.g. "-site:foo.* -site:bar.* ..." Use that bookmark as your search engine: click on it, then fill in search terms.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

aendruk 6y ago

Yep. Google removed it. https://github.com/codyogden/killedbygoogle/issues/674 https://github.com/codyogden/killedbygoogle/issues/674