This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
It is true HTTP requires caches to honour no-cache or no-store, but this doesn't as a matter of standards-compliance impact the actual user agent or end client. It would be good to replace or annotate that part of the content with references to evidence that real web crawlers such as search engines and archives are using specific directives as guidance not to store HTTP responses. -- FuzzyBSc ( talk) 15:22, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello,
After researching the subject, I see that people use the term "Deep Web" with vastly different interpretations: 1) The interpretation used in this wiki article is that deep web is web content NOT indexed by web search engines (for whatever reason). 2) People on various fora discuss the subject with the term "Deep web" meaning the web content accessible only through Tor (or freenet).
The meanings are obviously quite different. Can someone clear this up for me? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.218.173.253 ( talk) 16:45, 3 June 2013 (UTC) Agreed. However, as it stands the 2001 content is fairly-well cited, whereas the brief comment about onion/Tor content is uncited and completely at odds to the rest of the page. It seems that these should be covered as two separate topics, mentioning that the terminology is inconsistent and overlapping. AndrewBolt ( talk) 07:12, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Point two by user 88.218.173.253: Seems to me un-indexed search results can be from TOR, non-TOR...databases with restricted permissions...there are Multiple ways that search engines won't see the entire internet. TOR is another way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.86.226.34 ( talk) 18:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I am planning to input more sources for the Deep Web page on Wikipedia, I found a neat scholarly article off Google Scholar to back up a lot of information for updating the page, I will work on it and see how it goes. I have created a sandbox entry with my edit. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User:Masinich/sandbox&action=edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masinich ( talk • contribs) 01:14, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
It says that deep web is www content that is not part of the Surface Web. .Onion (TOR) sites also are part of deep web. But, are they part of www? I think they are not. So the opening statement of this article seems to be wrong. Please correct me if I am saying rabid nonsense! [User:saintthomas] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saintthomas ( talk • contribs) 13:03, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Please leave this as Deep Web (search indexing) rather than Deep Web so visitors know at a glance this is about search only. The broader Dark net / dark web is in Darknet (networking) Deku-shrub ( talk) 19:33, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
As far as "Deep Web" vs. "Dark Web", the distinction the articles currently reflect seems to be inline with the sources I'm seeing. Yes, there are many that use the terms interchangeably, but roughly 1/2 to 2/3 of the hits for "'deep web' 'dark web'" I found did distinguish them, and none reversed the definitions. For example:
So I don't think it's controversial to be definitive while also explaining that the terms are often used imprecisely.
As for where Darknet fits in:
There are still those that use all of these interchangeably, but I'm confident we should move forward with the articles as they're currently organized but move this article to Deep Web for lack of another article vying for that title. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:46, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Please slow down. You just did this despite having no support from anyone and two people opposing it. Please undo until consensus emerges. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 19:53, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Rhododendrites:It's my understanding that the deep web comprises the whole internet rather than just the hard to get bits of web. See Deep Web (search indexing)#Content types. Maybe a stronger source is needed on this? Deku-shrub ( talk) 00:16, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Example, FTP inclusion
You know what, it looks like you're right, I will leave this Deku-shrub ( talk) 00:19, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
This page occasionally uses "Deep Web" and at other times "deep Web." Which conforms to Wikipedia house style? It seems as if both or neither of the words should be capitalized. Scizzletizzle ( talk) 05:54, 15 February 2014 (UTC) Scizzletizzle
This article seems to lean heavily on Bergman's 2001 paper, and some of the other references are also from 2001. Since the web has changed quite a bit since 2001, is the information here still accurate? In particular, in the lead the phrase "searching on the internet today" could be taken to imply that the statement was being applied to the current position in contrast to earlier versions of the internet, whereas in fact the source means "in 2001". Also, it would be good to have a more recent source for the relative sizes of the surface and deep webs, and the suggestion that the deep web consists of 7,500 terabytes is presumably not current and so should not be in the present tense. Havelock Jones ( talk) 01:32, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
The usage and primary topic of Deep Web is under discussion, see talk:Dark Web -- 67.70.32.190 ( talk) 05:15, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
I think this is a more natural english term than the current one, but I'd be interested in hearing comments about this before I do so Deku-shrub ( talk) 14:04, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Natural disambiguation. When there is another term (such as Apartment instead of Flat) or more complete name (such as English language instead of English) that is unambiguous, commonly used in English (even without being the most common term), and equally clear, that term is typically the best to use.
"It changes the subject to being about searching the deep web when the subject of the article as written is about the deep web"
Deep Peep no longer exists, I read in a comment somewhere it closed due to lack of funding in 2012. But can't find a cite for that right now, in any case it doesn't work, page should say this, anyone got more info? Robert Walker ( talk) 15:58, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
It's mentioned on the talk page for DeepPeep that it no longer exists and closed in 2012: Talk:DeepPeep Robert Walker ( talk) 16:00, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
There are several instances of vandalism in this article. Someone more knowledgeable (than I am) needs to read through and fix. Thanks. 210.132.235.42 ( talk) 04:09, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Per WP:TITLE, the title should be sentence case: Deep web, not Deep Web. NE Ent 00:55, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved. It was mentioned it was not the primary topic, but not demonstrated. ( non-admin closure) © Tbhotch ™ ( en-2.5). 19:38, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Deep web (search) → Deep web – This is a primary topic for "Deep web". TvojaStara ( talk) 13:34, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved to Deep web. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 23:13, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Deep web (search) → ? – Let's get all this about what is to be where, sorted out before making any more contradictory move requests. Move Deep web (search) to Deep web (unsearchable web areas) or similar? Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 10:34, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
help help
A search on Google for the phrase in quotes "deep internet" brings up pages almost exclusively for "deep web" with this Wikipedia article being at the top of the search results, so Google considers it an alternative term. However, a search for "deep internet search" brings up results with the phrase meaning a very thorough search deeply into the Internet, pages that are indexed, but are not popular and not showing in the search results and can only be found by creatively using search terms. It is even a job description or service offered: "must have experience doing deep Internet research." I just wanted to note this, since the article says "deep web" only applies to non-indexed content. 5Q5 ( talk) 18:32, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
I think the size of the deep web has been seriously overestimated. Why I believe the size of the deep web is overestimated? Imagine that the deep web is 1,000 times larger than the surface web. Then we expect that : - People spend 1,000 times more time using the deep web than using the surface web. But most internet users spend plenty of time on the surface web but no time on the deep web. - People spend 1,000 times more time creating content for the deep web rather than the surface web. But most people who create content for the web create no content for the deep web. - The deep web requires 1,000 times more bandwidth than the surface web. But most bandwidth is used for the surface web. - The deep web requires 1,000 times more storage space than the surface web. Storage space costs money. So the cost for storing the content of the deep web would be prohibitively large. 213.113.112.240 ( talk) 18:21, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
I've recently read that the deep web makes up 96% of the Internet ( http://www.ict-summit.jp/2012/pdf/pdf_Mr_jenkins_en.pdf, page 7), but this number is pretty outdated (2012). Is there a more recent estimate of the relative sizes of the surface and deep webs? MaigoAkisame ( talk) 12:44, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Deep web. Please take a moment to review
my edit. You may add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 01:48, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
I want to know how to hack and code
King knight ( talk) 16:24, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
I am use for dep web but,How to new so I confusd setting and login session... Ahmed Riyadh10 ( talk) 02:37, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Deep net is increasingly used to refer to 'deep neural network'. I'm not sure having 'Deep net' redirect to this Deep web article is still helpful. What's the view on this? Thanks for your consideration, Phil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.39.31.74 ( talk) 18:13, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
The pink diagram in the article - what is it supposed to mean? I understand that it's supposed to show that Wikipedia is not a website, but it comes from Google or Bing, which is possibly some special relay in the internet that connects websites and Facebook together... Or Bing is somehow that connects websites and Wikipedia? And... Onion protocol is a part of deep web because...? And social services which mostly don't appear in search engines is not a dark web, right?
However I try to understand it, it's so wrong. Even when I'm serious, it's clearly wrong and for people who want to learn about it... They will know less after analyzing it.
And if you need formal rule - it's unsourced and it contradicts sources present in article. 89.71.222.65 ( talk) 22:21, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
"The first conflation of the terms "deep web" with "dark web" came about in 2009"
Apparently people were already conflating the terms in 2005 according to Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Deep_web&oldid=9764070
"DropDeadGorgias (talk | contribs) at 19:51, 6 January 2005 (clarify difference from dark web)."
194.207.86.26 ( talk) 09:51, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 08:37, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
←what is this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.145.225.242 ( talk) 07:50, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
hacking gaming id jk;uhjoorpnkjh;sdkfggoijgri kj;klkogaklpop[tpoiokp[ppotiokjurtopa ogta viditkjag
hacking genaBold textrator — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.152.55.253 ( talk) 14:29, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
@ Saturnalia0, MisterSanderson, and Luan: I propose to merge the deep web (this article) and surface web articles into a new article called deep web and surface web (like on the Portuguese Wikipedia; see the previous discussion here) because I think these articles are currently too small to be kept separate at the moment and because only 54 articles currently link to the former article, and only 16 to the latter. -- PK2 ( talk) 06:46, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
It is true HTTP requires caches to honour no-cache or no-store, but this doesn't as a matter of standards-compliance impact the actual user agent or end client. It would be good to replace or annotate that part of the content with references to evidence that real web crawlers such as search engines and archives are using specific directives as guidance not to store HTTP responses. -- FuzzyBSc ( talk) 15:22, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello,
After researching the subject, I see that people use the term "Deep Web" with vastly different interpretations: 1) The interpretation used in this wiki article is that deep web is web content NOT indexed by web search engines (for whatever reason). 2) People on various fora discuss the subject with the term "Deep web" meaning the web content accessible only through Tor (or freenet).
The meanings are obviously quite different. Can someone clear this up for me? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.218.173.253 ( talk) 16:45, 3 June 2013 (UTC) Agreed. However, as it stands the 2001 content is fairly-well cited, whereas the brief comment about onion/Tor content is uncited and completely at odds to the rest of the page. It seems that these should be covered as two separate topics, mentioning that the terminology is inconsistent and overlapping. AndrewBolt ( talk) 07:12, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Point two by user 88.218.173.253: Seems to me un-indexed search results can be from TOR, non-TOR...databases with restricted permissions...there are Multiple ways that search engines won't see the entire internet. TOR is another way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.86.226.34 ( talk) 18:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I am planning to input more sources for the Deep Web page on Wikipedia, I found a neat scholarly article off Google Scholar to back up a lot of information for updating the page, I will work on it and see how it goes. I have created a sandbox entry with my edit. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User:Masinich/sandbox&action=edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masinich ( talk • contribs) 01:14, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
It says that deep web is www content that is not part of the Surface Web. .Onion (TOR) sites also are part of deep web. But, are they part of www? I think they are not. So the opening statement of this article seems to be wrong. Please correct me if I am saying rabid nonsense! [User:saintthomas] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saintthomas ( talk • contribs) 13:03, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Please leave this as Deep Web (search indexing) rather than Deep Web so visitors know at a glance this is about search only. The broader Dark net / dark web is in Darknet (networking) Deku-shrub ( talk) 19:33, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
As far as "Deep Web" vs. "Dark Web", the distinction the articles currently reflect seems to be inline with the sources I'm seeing. Yes, there are many that use the terms interchangeably, but roughly 1/2 to 2/3 of the hits for "'deep web' 'dark web'" I found did distinguish them, and none reversed the definitions. For example:
So I don't think it's controversial to be definitive while also explaining that the terms are often used imprecisely.
As for where Darknet fits in:
There are still those that use all of these interchangeably, but I'm confident we should move forward with the articles as they're currently organized but move this article to Deep Web for lack of another article vying for that title. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:46, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Please slow down. You just did this despite having no support from anyone and two people opposing it. Please undo until consensus emerges. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 19:53, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
@ Rhododendrites:It's my understanding that the deep web comprises the whole internet rather than just the hard to get bits of web. See Deep Web (search indexing)#Content types. Maybe a stronger source is needed on this? Deku-shrub ( talk) 00:16, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Example, FTP inclusion
You know what, it looks like you're right, I will leave this Deku-shrub ( talk) 00:19, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
This page occasionally uses "Deep Web" and at other times "deep Web." Which conforms to Wikipedia house style? It seems as if both or neither of the words should be capitalized. Scizzletizzle ( talk) 05:54, 15 February 2014 (UTC) Scizzletizzle
This article seems to lean heavily on Bergman's 2001 paper, and some of the other references are also from 2001. Since the web has changed quite a bit since 2001, is the information here still accurate? In particular, in the lead the phrase "searching on the internet today" could be taken to imply that the statement was being applied to the current position in contrast to earlier versions of the internet, whereas in fact the source means "in 2001". Also, it would be good to have a more recent source for the relative sizes of the surface and deep webs, and the suggestion that the deep web consists of 7,500 terabytes is presumably not current and so should not be in the present tense. Havelock Jones ( talk) 01:32, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
The usage and primary topic of Deep Web is under discussion, see talk:Dark Web -- 67.70.32.190 ( talk) 05:15, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
I think this is a more natural english term than the current one, but I'd be interested in hearing comments about this before I do so Deku-shrub ( talk) 14:04, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Natural disambiguation. When there is another term (such as Apartment instead of Flat) or more complete name (such as English language instead of English) that is unambiguous, commonly used in English (even without being the most common term), and equally clear, that term is typically the best to use.
"It changes the subject to being about searching the deep web when the subject of the article as written is about the deep web"
Deep Peep no longer exists, I read in a comment somewhere it closed due to lack of funding in 2012. But can't find a cite for that right now, in any case it doesn't work, page should say this, anyone got more info? Robert Walker ( talk) 15:58, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
It's mentioned on the talk page for DeepPeep that it no longer exists and closed in 2012: Talk:DeepPeep Robert Walker ( talk) 16:00, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
There are several instances of vandalism in this article. Someone more knowledgeable (than I am) needs to read through and fix. Thanks. 210.132.235.42 ( talk) 04:09, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Per WP:TITLE, the title should be sentence case: Deep web, not Deep Web. NE Ent 00:55, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved. It was mentioned it was not the primary topic, but not demonstrated. ( non-admin closure) © Tbhotch ™ ( en-2.5). 19:38, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Deep web (search) → Deep web – This is a primary topic for "Deep web". TvojaStara ( talk) 13:34, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved to Deep web. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 23:13, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Deep web (search) → ? – Let's get all this about what is to be where, sorted out before making any more contradictory move requests. Move Deep web (search) to Deep web (unsearchable web areas) or similar? Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 10:34, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
help help
A search on Google for the phrase in quotes "deep internet" brings up pages almost exclusively for "deep web" with this Wikipedia article being at the top of the search results, so Google considers it an alternative term. However, a search for "deep internet search" brings up results with the phrase meaning a very thorough search deeply into the Internet, pages that are indexed, but are not popular and not showing in the search results and can only be found by creatively using search terms. It is even a job description or service offered: "must have experience doing deep Internet research." I just wanted to note this, since the article says "deep web" only applies to non-indexed content. 5Q5 ( talk) 18:32, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
I think the size of the deep web has been seriously overestimated. Why I believe the size of the deep web is overestimated? Imagine that the deep web is 1,000 times larger than the surface web. Then we expect that : - People spend 1,000 times more time using the deep web than using the surface web. But most internet users spend plenty of time on the surface web but no time on the deep web. - People spend 1,000 times more time creating content for the deep web rather than the surface web. But most people who create content for the web create no content for the deep web. - The deep web requires 1,000 times more bandwidth than the surface web. But most bandwidth is used for the surface web. - The deep web requires 1,000 times more storage space than the surface web. Storage space costs money. So the cost for storing the content of the deep web would be prohibitively large. 213.113.112.240 ( talk) 18:21, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
I've recently read that the deep web makes up 96% of the Internet ( http://www.ict-summit.jp/2012/pdf/pdf_Mr_jenkins_en.pdf, page 7), but this number is pretty outdated (2012). Is there a more recent estimate of the relative sizes of the surface and deep webs? MaigoAkisame ( talk) 12:44, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Deep web. Please take a moment to review
my edit. You may add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 01:48, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
I want to know how to hack and code
King knight ( talk) 16:24, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
I am use for dep web but,How to new so I confusd setting and login session... Ahmed Riyadh10 ( talk) 02:37, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Deep net is increasingly used to refer to 'deep neural network'. I'm not sure having 'Deep net' redirect to this Deep web article is still helpful. What's the view on this? Thanks for your consideration, Phil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.39.31.74 ( talk) 18:13, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
The pink diagram in the article - what is it supposed to mean? I understand that it's supposed to show that Wikipedia is not a website, but it comes from Google or Bing, which is possibly some special relay in the internet that connects websites and Facebook together... Or Bing is somehow that connects websites and Wikipedia? And... Onion protocol is a part of deep web because...? And social services which mostly don't appear in search engines is not a dark web, right?
However I try to understand it, it's so wrong. Even when I'm serious, it's clearly wrong and for people who want to learn about it... They will know less after analyzing it.
And if you need formal rule - it's unsourced and it contradicts sources present in article. 89.71.222.65 ( talk) 22:21, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
"The first conflation of the terms "deep web" with "dark web" came about in 2009"
Apparently people were already conflating the terms in 2005 according to Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Deep_web&oldid=9764070
"DropDeadGorgias (talk | contribs) at 19:51, 6 January 2005 (clarify difference from dark web)."
194.207.86.26 ( talk) 09:51, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 08:37, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
←what is this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.145.225.242 ( talk) 07:50, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
hacking gaming id jk;uhjoorpnkjh;sdkfggoijgri kj;klkogaklpop[tpoiokp[ppotiokjurtopa ogta viditkjag
hacking genaBold textrator — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.152.55.253 ( talk) 14:29, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
@ Saturnalia0, MisterSanderson, and Luan: I propose to merge the deep web (this article) and surface web articles into a new article called deep web and surface web (like on the Portuguese Wikipedia; see the previous discussion here) because I think these articles are currently too small to be kept separate at the moment and because only 54 articles currently link to the former article, and only 16 to the latter. -- PK2 ( talk) 06:46, 15 August 2020 (UTC)