Re: OT: Why the net Sucks: Stonehenge
On 1/13/04 5:37 AM, "Paul Morgan" wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 09:06:25AM +0000, Clive Menzies wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>> The net is best for finding out what books to read;)
>>> I wouldn't suggest that the net is better than an authoratitive book but
>>> a quick search on stonehenge history produced:
>>> http://www.britannia.com/history/h7.html as the first entry and many
>>> more besides. How you search is key to finding the best information.
>>
>> Yeah, that is better.
>> I think link #2 is even better:
>> http://www.anima.demon.co.uk/stones/stonehen/history.html
>>
>> but these aren't exactly deep; these are more like the Travel
>> Brochures you see in hotel lobbies. None of the other links are very
>> good at all.
>>
>
> I don't see any problem. I found, I think, the sort of thing for
> which you were looking in just a few seconds.
>
> Googled on (without the quotes) "stonehenge history research" and found
> this (the 6th link down), and the first one I went to based on the
> extracts on the google search results:
>
> http://www.aboutstonehenge.info/index.php
>
I found quite a bit by just going to http://www.historychannel.com and using
their search engine.
I would have to agree though on many of the search engines, using one
keyword is not an efficient way to search, you need to narrow down the
keywords and phrase to truly get the right results. I doubt you would type
in New York to find out about the Statue of Liberty.
--
Thanks!!
David Thurman
List Only at Web Presence Group Net
Reply to: