Talk:Naver

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Bkim512. Peer reviewers: Bkim512.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Naverscreenshot.png

Image:Naverscreenshot.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

"benchmark"

The use of this word in the text may be incorrect. If it is correct, the claims of features being benchmarked by others search engines need further clarification. 188.100.199.70 (talk) 05:40, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Came in here to say the same thing. Benchmark does not mean 'stole' 209.12.104.146 (talk) 19:00, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Advertising

Naver lists commercial ads along with search results - is it worth adding info on its advertising platform under a separate section or within the existing first section of this article? --Beastieboy (talk) 23:06, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Contradicting references

StatCounter appears to contradict the annual report of NHN, Naver's owner. Anyone got any ideas on which to trust. NHN is obviously not independent... but who are StatCounter? And NHN are quoting KoreanClick, who are they? Yaris678 (talk) 09:28, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Current ranking

Yandex's article puts it as the number 5 search engine worldwide, citing data from 2012 (which I couldn't find). The current ranking of Naver and Yandex can't be the same, so can Naver's be updated please? Is it now number six?? —DIV (138.194.11.244 (talk) 02:49, 6 July 2012 (UTC))

-i agree, but in defense it must be said that the statement refers to a 2007 article--Crossswords (talk) 16:56, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Merge from Knowledge Search

As written (i.e. pretty badly), Knowledge Search, a Naver service, fails Wikipedia:Notability. I am not sure if it is the same service as Naver KiN (http://kin.naver.com) as it does not even link to it... (if it is about this topic, the Naver Knowledge service seems to be notable, just like Google Questions and Answers). But perhaps it may be rescued by being merged here? Or is it so bad we should nuke it? Thoughts? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:04, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

NAVER services: ( http://www.navercorp.com/en/index.nhn ) include 'Comprehensive Search', 'Knowledge iN' and 'Real-time Rising Keyword'. NAVER has many applications for a wide variety of services, the mobile messenger LINE through LINE Corporation, NAVER's subsidiary. NAVER's Webtoon service, launched in June of2004 in Korea, went global on July 2, 2014. Source: https://medium.com/the-headline/korean-webtoons-go-global-with-line-b82f3920580e

Yes, it should be merged. However, I question whether a generic term like knowledge search should redirect to Naver. Wolfram Alpha could be characterized as a knowledge search engine. Also, generic terms such as comprehensive search and knowledge search should be lower case. Content relating to Naver appears to be written by Naver's PR folks, not by ordinary, unbiased Wikipedians.—Finell 16:26, 5 October 2016 (UTC)  Done Klbrain (talk) 07:32, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Naver's v-live app

I was wondering if this was going to be added at some point or if it isn't considered relevant or a part of naver.Peachywink (talk) 00:25, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Naver Encyclopedia or Dictionary? (And 3 million entries claim)

Our article claims it had 3 million articles in 2017, yet it is not in Category:Korean encyclopedias, and I don't see it mentioned at ko:네이버의_서비스. ko:네이버 사전 suggests that it is a "an online dictionary service provided by Naver . It is largely composed of a language dictionary, encyclopedia ( ' Naver Knowledge Encyclopedia '), and a translator ". There is more at ko:네이버_지식백과 (not sure how exactly those services differ). "Rather than a single encyclopedia, it is taking a method of providing multiple dictionaries comprehensively.... Unlike Wikipedia, Naver Knowledge Encyclopedia is a service that collects and provides various encyclopedias and specialized dictionaries as a database . 2,700 specialized dictionaries, including < Doosan Dong-A Encyclopedia > (360,000 entries), < Korean National Culture Encyclopedia > (70,000 entries), and < Korean Folklore Encyclopedia > (6,000 entries). In addition, the 'art work' function provides photos of works and simple basic information by establishing a DB (170,000 works) of famous works of art published at home and abroad, such as Wikimedia Commons and the French National Museum Association . "

So, first, we need to c/e our entry, and second, the 3 million number may be a gross exaggeration, as it may includes duplicate entries, media (image pages), dictionary entries or maybe even redirects. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:03, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

“the world's first online Q&A platform, Knowledge iN”

According to the article, Naver iN started in 2002. However, Experts Exchange, an online Q&A platform for IT professionals went live years before (Wikipedia says 1996). 223.118.50.105 (talk) 06:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

"Naver Enter" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Naver Enter has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 25 § Naver Enter until a consensus is reached. Rusalkii (talk) 19:58, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

The current "History" section doesn't actually contain any historical information.

The current "History" section doesn't actually contain any historical information. Instead, it describes features or services. That's why I believe it should be renamed or restructured to reflect its true content. ElsieHewitt (talk) 18:10, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

It plainly gives a chronological timeline of the company. That is history. Kindly stop removing this and reorganizing the article into bullet points rather than prose text, that is plainly against the WP:MOS and is unhelpful. MrOllie (talk) 18:19, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

In August 2000, Naver launched its 'comprehensive search' service, which allows users to get a variety of results from a single search query on one page, organized by type, including blogs, websites, images, and web communities.

The current "History" section doesn't actually contain any historical information. Instead, it describes features or services.  ElsieHewitt (talk) 18:25, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

The date that the search service was launched certainly is history. Why do you keep copy and pasting the same text into your replies? MrOllie (talk) 18:27, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

So, my point is, since the service items are already listed separately below, I'm wondering if it's really necessary to write the same content twice. I think it would be better to rename "History" to "Features." The content seems much more aligned with features than with history, in my opinion. ElsieHewitt (talk) 18:58, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Let me repeat my question, you haven't responded to it: "Why do you keep copy and pasting the same text into your replies?"

Repeating the same point over and over and ignoring what others are saying is not a way to build consensus. MrOllie (talk) 19:02, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm not dismissing your point. I'm simply sharing my perspective based on the topic we're discussing. Also, the current "History" section is entirely about services. The "History" section should be focused on the background of the History, not a list of services. Why are you so fixated on this article? It's largely incomplete and poorly structured. ElsieHewitt (talk) 03:04, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

You still haven't answered my question. Why did you keep copy and pasting the same messages over and over, here and on your user talk page? MrOllie (talk) 03:09, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

I agree with your opinion on this matter. Cressida0 (talk) 05:27, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

As editors we need to make sure our article follows the sources rather than our own opinions or assumptions. Cressida0 (talk) 05:59, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Do not edit war. Once discussion has begun, restoring one's original edit without taking other users' concerns into account may be seen as disruptive. If you encounter several reverts, it is best not to escalate the situation by reverting again. ElsieHewitt (talk) 07:55, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

I have reported this apparent sock puppetry at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Yamamomo kakijiroo. MrOllie (talk) 13:08, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

It is better to seek help in addressing the issue than to engage in edit warring. When disagreement becomes apparent, one, both, or all participants should cease warring and discuss the issue on the associated talk page. ElsieHewitt (talk) 13:15, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Why are you so fixated on this article? ElsieHewitt (talk) 13:27, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Asks the person who has been running sockpuppet accounts to edit war. MrOllie (talk) 13:28, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

You still haven't answered my question. Why are you so fixated on this article? ElsieHewitt (talk) 14:40, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

I reject the premise of your loaded question, and I am not inclined to answer your questions any further while you continue to ignore mine, and while you evade your existing blocks with sockpuppet accounts. MrOllie (talk) 15:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

"I'm really curious—why do you keep bringing up unrelated topics instead of actually talking about the issue at hand?" ElsieHewitt (talk) 15:46, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

The current "History" section is entirely about services. The "History" section should be focused on the background of the History, not a list of services. ElsieHewitt (talk) 16:06, 8 June 2025 (UTC)