What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 128 Stack Exchange communities.

like this one: Careers Job search near Netherland says 0 jobs near Cookeville, TN

Does this mean that stack exchange uses a soundex type search? Not that it sounds the same to my thinking.

I don't mind it finding Auckland in China, or the US or whereever - that's my problem. I just wonder why Orisi is mentioned. Surely just putting Auckland in will hone in an Auckland, doesn't matter which on.

share|improve this question
2  
I find it odd that people put in an unqualified place name and expect these things to find the right one - place names are often not unique and it's hardly surprising that by default Careers.SO searches in the USA. What happens if you search for "Auckland, New Zealand"? (assuming you mean that Auckland, of course, because there are a few, including one in California - as per the Careers location match) –  DMA57361 Sep 28 '11 at 8:44
    
@dma57361 - thank you. I've edited the question to make it more specific. –  Preet Sangha Sep 28 '11 at 9:25
    
In this context CA isn't China, it's California (USA). And from web searching it seems that Auckland, California is really tiny or something of that nature. Orosi, California is listed as a "census-designated place" (whatever that is), so I presume it is the nearest matchable "land division" to Auckland, California, hence why it is returned. As another example, if I search for one of the tiny villages near to me I get "0 jobs near <big town>, England" - I think you're experiencing the same effect. –  DMA57361 Sep 28 '11 at 9:30
    
I know CA is that place Lex Luthor tried to sink and not in China. However why would the search even bother with tell me that? It's not what asked. If place x is near place y then techincally place z near x but directly away from y could be outside the 'near y'. –  Preet Sangha Sep 28 '11 at 9:37
1  
Presumably it's just an implementation detail in how they match up jobs to locations - but we'd have to see if a team member chimes in. And I don't think it's particularly alarming that they do this by dropping the smaller and less significant locations - to anyone actually searching for a job in Auckland, CA (or any other less significant location) I suspect they would know what and where Orosi, CA (or their nearest significant town / region) was and not be surprised. –  DMA57361 Sep 28 '11 at 9:53
add comment

2 Answers 2

We are at the mercy of Yahoo's GeoData lookup service here. The more specific you can be about where you mean, the better it's able to find what you're looking for. Searching for "Auckland, NZ" or "Auckland, New Zealand" gives the correct location.

share|improve this answer
    
That's fair enough.. –  Preet Sangha Sep 29 '11 at 9:05
add comment

In this context CA isn't China, it's California (USA).

And from web searching it seems that Auckland, California is really tiny (or something of that nature).

However, Orosi, California is apparently a "census-designated place" (whatever that is), so I presume it is the nearest matchable "land division" to Auckland, California, hence why it is returned.

As an alternative example, if I search for some of the tiny villages near to me I get
"0 jobs near <big town>, England" for each of them - you're experiencing the same effect.

share|improve this answer
    
May as well upgrade my comment to an answer, since it sort of is. –  DMA57361 Sep 28 '11 at 9:34
    
Do you want to delete your original comment then? –  slugster Sep 28 '11 at 10:12
    
Unfortunately, the OP has replied to it, doing so would break the conversation thread on the question. –  DMA57361 Sep 28 '11 at 10:14
    
Ahh, I see. I just got all deja vu when reading the question, then my OCD kicked in. –  slugster Sep 28 '11 at 10:29
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .