Search Results

Search found 27327 results on 1094 pages for 'search results'.

Page 2/1094 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • How to get search engines to properly index an ajax driven search page

    - by Redtopia
    I have an ajax-driven search page that will allow users to search through a large collection of records. Each search result points to index.php?id=xyz (where xyz is the id of the record). The initial view does not have any records listed, and there is no interface that allows you to browse through all records. You can only conduct a search. How do I build the page so that spiders can crawl each record? Or is there another way (outside of this specific search page) that will allow me to point spiders to a list of all records. FYI, the collection is rather large, so dumping links to every record in a single request is not a workable solution. Outputting the records must be done in multiple requests. Each record can be viewed via a single page (eg "record.php?id=xyz"). I would like all the records indexed without anything indexed from the sitemap that shows where the records exist, for example: <a href="/result.php?id=record1">Record 1</a> <a href="/result.php?id=record2">Record 2</a> <a href="/result.php?id=record3">Record 3</a> <a href="/seo.php?page=2">next</a> Assuming this is the correct approach, I have these questions: How would the search engines find the crawl page? Is it possible to prevent the search engines from indexing the words "Record 1", etc. and "next"? Can I output only the links? Or maybe something like:  

    Read the article

  • Search containing "-"

    - by Gage
    It seems like whenever I go to search for a phrase containing "-" it(google) ignores it. Earlier today for example I was searching for vss -y but once I hit search it would show that it was really searching for "vss y". I know most of the tricks when searching like using +, "", etc. But I'm wondering if theres some other trick to make it not ignore these characters. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Oracle UCM GET_SEARCH_RESULTS service with full text search

    - by Lyudmil Pelov
    Newly I was working on portlet which should be able to do full text search through the UCM documents and I was experimenting with the Ridc and also with the CIS API's. There are some ticks you may take care of, for example using quotes is a very spacial case and most of situations UCM will throw an exception if you not use them well. So during my tests I was able to develop one solution which works very well for me doing full text search and here is it: final IdcClientManager idcManager = new IdcClientManager(); final IdcClient idcClient = idcManager.createClient("idc://127.0.0.1:4444"); final IdcContext idcContext = new IdcContext("sysadmin"); final DataBinder binder = idcClient.createBinder(); // populate the binder with the parameters binder.putLocal ("IdcService", "GET_SEARCH_RESULTS"); binder.putLocal ("QueryText", "dDocFullText <substring> <qsch>"+yourSearchWordOrWords+"</qsch>");  binder.putLocal ("SearchEngineName", "databasefulltext"); binder.putLocal ("ResultCount", "20"); // execute the request ServiceResponse response = idcClient.sendRequest (idcContext, binder); // get the binder DataBinder serverBinder = response.getResponseAsBinder (); DataResultSet resultSet = serverBinder.getResultSet ("SearchResults"); // loop over the results for (DataObject dataObject : resultSet.getRows ()) { System.out.println ("Title is: " + dataObject.get ("dDocTitle")); System.out.println ("Author is: " + dataObject.get ("dDocAuthor")); }Nothing special so far except the line which declares the full text search. To be able to proceed with the full text search you have to use dDocFullText attribute inside the search query. The tag <substring> is the same as 'like'. Also you have to put your searching string or words in quotes which could be a problem sometime, so I used the tag <qsch>. Using this tag you can have quotes now inside you searching string without to break the code and get parsing exceptions.To be able to test the example, you do have to enable full text search inside UCM. To do this follow the steps for example from this blog here and then re-index the documents in UCM.There is also one very nice article about how to define UCM queries if want to replace the full text search with something more specific, you can read this article from Kyle's Blog here.

    Read the article

  • Full text search with Sphider

    - by Ravi Gupta
    I am searching for a good, light weight, open source, full text search engine for php. I came across a number of options like Lucene, Zend Lucene, Solr etc but at the same time I also find out many people suggesting Sphider for small/medium side websites. I looked at shipder website a lot but unable to find out how to use it as a Full Text Search Engine.If anybody worked on it could help me to figure out whether it supports full text search or not. Edit: Please don't suggest any other alternatives for full text search.

    Read the article

  • Doubt regarding search engine/plugin(One present on the website itself)

    - by Ravi Gupta
    I am new to web development and trying to study various types of websites as case study. Right now my focus is on how search engines works for an eCommerce website. I know basic functioning for a search engine, i.e. crawl web pages, index them and the display the results using those indexes. But I got little confuse in case of an eCommerce website. Don't you think that it would be better if a search engine instead of crawling the web pages containing products, it should directly crawl the database and index the products stored in the database? And when a user search for any product, it will simply give us the rows of the table which matches the user query? If this is not the case, can someone please explain how the usual method works on eCommerce website?

    Read the article

  • How to code a 'Next in Results' within search results in PHP

    - by thebluefox
    Right, bit of a head scratcher, although I've got a feeling there's an obvious answer and I'm just not seeing the wood for the trees. Baiscally, using Solr as a search engine for my site, bringing back 15 results per page. When you click on a result, you get a detail page, that has a "Next in Results" link on it, which obviously forwards you on to the next result. Whats the best way of doing this? I've come up with a few solutions but they're either too inpractical or just don't work. I could store all the ids in a session array, then grab the one after the current one and put that in the link. But with possibly hundreds/thousands of results, the memory that array would need, and the performance hit of dealing with it isn't practical. I could take the same approach and put it into the db, but I'll still have to deal with a potentially huge array when I grab them out of the db. Or; I could do the search again, only returning the id's, and grab the one after the one we're currently looking at. I think this could be the best option? Although it does seem kind of messy, namely because of when I have to select the id thats on a different 'page' (ie the 16th, 31st etc result). Unless I pass through where it was in the results, and select from there, but that still doesn't seem like the right way to do it. I'm really sorry if this is just complete nonsense, any help is massively appreciated as always, Cheers guys!

    Read the article

  • Searching for a page with a Very Unique title, doesnt find that intended page... Why?

    - by Sam
    Dear folks, a question about appearing in search results in google: A page of mine has this extremely unique page title: Ein gutes Logo passt wie ein Handschuh auf Ihre Marke in die Hände Now, when I search the phrase: Ein gutes Logo passt wie ein Handschuh auf Ihre Marke in die Hände Then all kinds of other irrelevant pages show up having only 1 or at best two words from my unqie title appearing, although I have searched for the entire phrase! And when I search the phrase in between quotes: "Ein gutes Logo passt wie ein Handschuh auf Ihre Marke in die Hände" Then it finds 1 result, which is my page. What is going on? Why doesn't show the unique result without the quotes? Thanks: your ideas and suggestions are welcome and much appreciated

    Read the article

  • Embeding a generic google search with autocomplete - not a custom site search

    - by picxelplay
    Most people's home page is google.com. My homepage is just a custom html page hosted on my computer. I do this because I am a web developer, and I have several projects that I work on a one time, so I like to have quick links to all of them. On that page I usually just have a Link to google.com for when I want to search. But below all of my quick links, I want to add a google search box (with Autocompletions). I first used a simple iframe to embed google.com into the page, but then my search results were confined to that iframe. I wanted to search for something, then my results would open in a new tab. I then came across this code snippet but it doesn't have Autocompletions: http://www.refactory.org/s/google_search/view/2 How can I add Autocompletions to this? Or is there a better way of doing it? Thanks in advance for any advice

    Read the article

  • Embeding a generic google search with autocomplete - not a custom site search

    - by picxelplay
    Most people's home page is google.com. My homepage is just a custom html page hosted on my computer. I do this because I am a web developer, and I have several projects that I work on a one time, so I like to have quick links to all of them. On that page I usually just have a Link to google.com for when I want to search. But below all of my quick links, I want to add a google search box (with Autocompletions). I first used a simple iframe to embed google.com into the page, but then my search results were confined to that iframe. I wanted to search for something, then my results would open in a new tab. I then came across this code snippet but it doesn't have Autocompletions: http://www.refactory.org/s/google_search/view/2 How can I add Autocompletions to this? Or is there a better way of doing it? Thanks in advance for any advice

    Read the article

  • Google shows "search instead for" when searching for our website

    - by Athanatos
    Our website is new and the name is similar (only one letter different than another website) completely different type and company though. searching for xxxxxA works OK in Google and we find relatively good results. However searching xxxxxA.com finds results for the other website and gives us the following options: Showing results for xxxxxE.com Search instead for xxxxxA.com (hyperlink when clicked then it is correctly searching for our site) Questions: Do we need to contact Google to correct this and if yes how ? if not will it be corrected automatically when the site becomes more popular and what is the process? How do we make the process quicker?

    Read the article

  • Google Desktop Search problems - unable to disable indexing and no index status page

    - by Howiecamp
    I've been running Google Desktop (I've used both the regular and Enterprise versions) without issues on my Windows 7 64-bit PC for a long time with no issues. I just paved my PC and reinstalled Google Desktop (regular edition). Initially, I want to use it only for the CTRL-CTRL launcher capability - I don't want it to do any indexing. So I unchecked all the items in the configuration dialog as well as excluded c:. Despite this, it is indexing all the content on my hard drive as well as Outlook email, etc. In my previous installations I had the same options set and they worked properly. The other problem I have is that when you right-click on the Google Desktop system tray icon, there used to be an option for "Index Status" which showed you the percentage complete the index creation process was, as well as an option to clear and rebuild the index. Those are no longer there. I uninstalled the regular edition and installed the Enterprise Edition, but same problems. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Why googling by keycaptcha gives results on reCAPTCHA? [closed]

    - by vgv8
    EDIT: I'd like to change this title to: How to STOP Google's manipulation of Google search engine presented to general public? I am frequently googling and more and more frequently bump when searching by one software product I am given instead the results on Google's own products. For ex., if I google by keyword keycaptcha for the "Past 24 hours" (after clicking on "Show search tools" -- "Past 24 hours" on the left sidebar of a browser) I am getting the Google's search results show only results on reCAPTCHA. Image uploaded later: Though, if confine keycaptcha in quotes the results are "correct" (well, kind of since they are still distorted in comparison with other search engines). I checked this during few months from different domains at different ISPs, different operating systems and from a dozen of browsers. The results are the same. Why is it and how can it be possibly corrected? My related posts: "How Gmail spam filter works?" IP adresses blacklisting Update: It is impossible for me to directly start using google.com as I am always redirected to google.ru (from google.com) by my ip-address "auto-detect location" google's "convenience". The google's help tells that it is impossible to switch off my location auto-detection because it is very helpful feature. There is a work-around to use google.com/ncr (to get google.com) (?anybody know what does it mean) to prevent redirection from google.com but even. But all results are exactly the same OK, I can search by quoted "keycaptcha", I am already accustomed to these google's quirks, but the question arises why the heck to burn time promoting someone's product if GOOGLE uses other product brands for showing its own interests/brands (reCAPTCHA) instead and what can be done with it? The general user will not understand that he was cheated and just will pick up the first (wrong) results Update2: Note that this googling behaviour: is independent on whether I am logged-in (or log-out-ed of) a google account, which account, on browser (I tried Opera, Chrome, FireFox, IE of different versions, Safari), OS or even domain; there are many such cases but I just targeted one concrete restricted example speciffically to to prevent wandering between unrelated details and peculiarities; @Michael, first it is not true and this text contains 2 links for real and significant results.. I also wrote that this is just one concrete example from many and based on many-month exp. These distortions happen upon clicking on: Past 24 hours, Past week, Past month, Past year in many other keywords, occasions/configurations of searches, etc. Second, the absence of the results is the result and there is no point to sneakingly substitute it by another unsolicited one. It is the definition of spam and scam. 3d, the question is not abt workarounds like how to write search queries or use another searching engines. The question is how to straighten the googling's results in order to stop disorienting general public about. Update: I could not understand: nobody reproduces the described by me behavior (i.e. when I click "Past 24 hours" link in google search searching for keycaptcha, the presented results are only on reCAPTCHA presented)? Update: And for the "Past week":

    Read the article

  • Jokes search engine / PHP based search engine on database

    - by matt74tm
    I'm looking for a script, functioning like the Google homepage that fetches data from a database rather than the internet. This is not intended to be a search engine, but a repository of jokes that can be pulled depending on the keywords typed. No sophisticated search techniques are required - keyword based is perfectly fine. If some mechanism of up/down-voting jokes can be incorporated, that would be fantastic, but I'm presuming that will be an entirely different game.

    Read the article

  • Jokes search engine / PHP based search engine on database

    - by matt_tm
    I'm looking for a script, functioning like the Google homepage that fetches data from a database rather than the internet. This is not intended to be a search engine, but a repository of jokes that can be pulled depending on the keywords typed. No sophisticated search techniques are required - keyword based is perfectly fine. If some mechanism of up/down-voting jokes can be incorporated, that would be fantastic, but I'm presuming that will be an entirely different game.

    Read the article

  • why the difference in google search result using script for search and using a browser for search

    - by Jayapal Chandran
    I wrote a code to find the position in google search result for a search keyword. I also did the same with the browser. Both the results are different. Let me explain in detail here. I have a website and i wanted to know on which page number my domain appears for a search string. Like when i search for 'code snippets' i wanted to find in google search on which page number a certain domain appears. I wrote a php code to search page by page starting from page 1 to page n. I did the same task using a browser. The script returned page 4 and when browsed i can see the domain appearing in second page. here is the search string i use in my code. /search?hl=en&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=code+snippets&start=0&btnG= and for each request i change the start=0 to start=1, start=2, etc... and in the response i will check whether my domain appears in it. any idea for this different in search results?

    Read the article

  • SEO title tag and earning a high rank on search engines [closed]

    - by Josh White
    Possible Duplicate: What are the best ways to increase your site's position in Google? One of the most basic SEO techiniques is including accurate description below 64 characters in the tags of each page. I was wondering if is considered ethical SEO to set up the contents based on a search keyword for example. So if the user searches for 'apples pictures' for example, then the title of the webpage would be 'apple pictures'. Note that the search keywords accurately describe my website contents because the title will always relate to the body of the webpage and 85-90% of the terms searched for will return corresponding results. Is this considered a good seo practice and is it ethical? Also, can someone explain what the idea is behind "linking"? I read somewhere that it is a good seo practice to link other websites and it is good when other websites link you. Does this mean that I should include as many links to other websites as possible (that are somehow relevant to my websites goal), also if I joined forums/services and posted my website url in the signature, would that still be considered other websites linking me?

    Read the article

  • Search engine solution for Django that actually works?

    - by prometheus
    The story so far: Decided to go with Xapian as search backend because it has all search-engine features I was looking for, knows about Unicode, stemming, has few dependencies and requires no bloated app-server installation on top of it. Tried Django and Haystack (plus xapian-haystack, the backend glue code to tie Haystack to Xapian) because it was advertised on quite some blogs as "working". Did not work. Neither django-haystack nor the xapian-haystack project provide a version combination that actually works together. MASTER from both projects yields an error from Xapian, so it's not stable at all. Haystack 1.0.1 and xapian-haystack 1.0.x/1.1.0 are not API-compatible. Plus, in a minimally working installation of Haystack 1.0.1 and xapian-haystack MASTER, any complex query yields zero results due to errors in either django-haystack or xapian-haystack (I double-verified this), maybe because the unit-tests actually test very simple cases, and no edge-cases at all. Tried Djapian. The source-code is riddled with spelling errors (mind you, in variable names, not comments), documentation is also riddled with ambiguities and outdated information that will never lead to a working installation. Not surprisingly, users rarely ask for features but how to get it working in the first place. Next on the plate: exploring Solr (installing a Java environment plus Tomcat gives me headaches, the machine is RAM- and CPU-constrained), or Lucene (slightly less headaches, but still). Before I proceed spending more time with a solution that might or might not work as advertised, I'd like to know: Did anyone ever get an actual, real-world search solution working in Django? I'm serious. I find it really frustrating reading about "large problems mostly solved", and then realizing that you will never get a working installation from the source-code because, actually, all bloggers dealing with those "mostly solved problems" never went past basic installation and copy-pasting the official tutorials. So here are the requirements: must be able to search for 10-100 terms in one query must handle + (term must be present) and - (term must not be present), AND/OR must handle arbitrary grouping (i.e. parentheses around AND/OR) must allow for Django-ORM filtering before or after fulltext-search (i.e. pre-/post-processing of results with the full set of filters that Django knows about) alternatively, there must be a facility to bulk-fetch the result set and transform it into a QuerySet should be light on the machine, so preferably no humongous JVM and Java-based app-server installation Is there anything out there that does this? I'm not interested in anecdotal evidence, or references to some blog posts that claim it should be working. I'd like to hear from someone who actually has a fully-functional setup working in the real world, under real conditions, with real queries. EDIT: Let me repeat again that I'm not so much interested in anecdotal evidence that someone, somewhere has a somewhat running installation working with unspecified properties. I already went there, I read all the blog posts, mailing lists, I contacted the authors, but when it came to actual implementation of real-world scenarios, nothing ever worked as advertised. Also, and a user below brought that point up as well, considering the TCO of any project, I'm definitely not interested in hearing that someone, somewhere was able to pull it off once a vendor parachuted in an unknown number of specialists to monkey-patch the whole installation with specific domain-knowledge that's documented nowhere. So, please, if you claim you have a working installation that actually satisfies minimum requirements for a full-fledged search (see requirements above), please provide the following so that we can all benefit from a search solution for Django that actually solves the problem: exact Linux distribution, release version, exact release version of Haystack (or equivalent) and release version of search backend, exact release version of the search engine publicly (!) available documentation how to set up all components exactly in the way that your installation was set up such that the minimal requirements above are met. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Search engine solution for Django that actually works?

    - by prometheus
    The story so far: Decided to go with Xapian as search backend because it has all search-engine features I was looking for, knows about Unicode, stemming, has few dependencies and requires no bloated app-server installation on top of it. Tried Django and Haystack (plus xapian-haystack, the backend glue code to tie Haystack to Xapian) because it was advertised on quite some blogs as "working". Did not work. Neither django-haystack nor the xapian-haystack project provide a version combination that actually works together. MASTER from both projects yields an error from Xapian, so it's not stable at all. Haystack 1.0.1 and xapian-haystack 1.0.x/1.1.0 are not API-compatible. Plus, in a minimally working installation of Haystack 1.0.1 and xapian-haystack MASTER, any complex query yields zero results due to errors in either django-haystack or xapian-haystack (I double-verified this), maybe because the unit-tests actually test very simple cases, and no edge-cases at all. Tried Djapian. The source-code is riddled with spelling errors (mind you, in variable names, not comments), documentation is also riddled with ambiguities and outdated information that will never lead to a working installation. Not surprisingly, users rarely ask for features but how to get it working in the first place. Next on the plate: exploring Solr (installing a Java environment plus Tomcat gives me headaches, the machine is RAM- and CPU-constrained), or Lucene (slightly less headaches, but still). Before I proceed spending more time with a solution that might or might not work as advertised, I'd like to know: Did anyone ever get an actual, real-world search solution working in Django? I'm serious. I find it really frustrating reading about "large problems mostly solved", and then realizing that you will never get a working installation from the source-code because, actually, all bloggers dealing with those "mostly solved problems" never went past basic installation and copy-pasting the official tutorials. So here are the requirements: must be able to search for 10-100 terms in one query must handle + (term must be present) and - (term must not be present), AND/OR must handle arbitrary grouping (i.e. parentheses around AND/OR) must allow for Django-ORM filtering before or after fulltext-search (i.e. pre-/post-processing of results with the full set of filters that Django knows about) alternatively, there must be a facility to bulk-fetch the result set and transform it into a QuerySet should be light on the machine, so preferably no humongous JVM and Java-based app-server installation Is there anything out there that does this? I'm not interested in anecdotal evidence, or references to some blog posts that claim it should be working. I'd like to hear from someone who actually has a fully-functional setup working in the real world, under real conditions, with real queries. EDIT: Let me repeat again that I'm not so much interested in anecdotal evidence that someone, somewhere has a somewhat running installation working with unspecified properties. I already went there, I read all the blog posts, mailing lists, I contacted the authors, but when it came to actual implementation of real-world scenarios, nothing ever worked as advertised. Also, and a user below brought that point up as well, considering the TCO of any project, I'm definitely not interested in hearing that someone, somewhere was able to pull it off once a vendor parachuted in an unknown number of specialists to monkey-patch the whole installation with specific domain-knowledge that's documented nowhere. So, please, if you claim you have a working installation that actually satisfies minimum requirements for a full-fledged search (see requirements above), please provide the following so that we can all benefit from a search solution for Django that actually solves the problem: exact Linux distribution, release version, exact release version of Haystack (or equivalent) and release version of search backend, exact release version of the search engine publicly (!) available documentation how to set up all components exactly in the way that your installation was set up such that the minimal requirements above are met. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • website particular url suddenly disappeared from google search result

    - by Ragavendran Ramesh
    i have a website , in that a particular page url was indexed in google search result in the first 10 results , but suddenly it disappeared , not that page is not even in the 100results , what would be the reason. i am feeling that the page has be spammed by our competitors . is it possible to avoid that , or can i find that page has been spammed or not. Is it possible to find the particular page in a website is spam or malicious.

    Read the article

  • Good library for search text tokenization

    - by Chris Dutrow
    Looking to tokenize some text in the same or similar way in which a search engine would do it. The reason we are doing this is so that we can run some statistical analysis on the tokens. The language we are using is python, so would prefer a library in that language, but could probably set something up to use another language if necessary. Example Original token: We have some great burritos! More simplified: (remove plurals and punctuation) We have some great burrito Even more simplified: (remove superfluous words) great burrito Best: (recognize positive and negative meaning): burrito -positive-

    Read the article

  • Does your company name in an article title damage Search Engine relevance

    - by user492681
    I've been wondering about this for a while but never come across a solid answer. Many websites include their name in all the title tags of their articles. This is often apparent in word-press blogs etc. eg: Tsunami hits Japan and leaves thousands homeless | My Website Name The issue I have is that Search engines strip the stop words out of this sentence to leave the words in which it compares to the body text. So if I want my article to rank well and be relevant, in this case about the terrible Tsunami that has recently struck Japan what is to STOP the MY WEBSITE NAME section of the title de-valuing the relevance of the article. Am I over-worrying? Or should I take this in to consideration? Thanks for advice in advance.

    Read the article

  • Need to add 30K new pages to a 10K page website - troubles ahead? (SEO)

    - by Jurga
    We have a situation with a website where we plan to add a huge amount of new pages. The domain is over 10 years old, approximately 10 thousand indexed pages, and the planned addition is approx. 30K new pages. Any idea how we should go about it? Must we schedule a gradual data release? Have you heard of any industry standards as to how many new pages per day / week / month should be added in order to appear natural and not get in trouble with Google? I.e. should we plan a bi-weekly addition of 5K?

    Read the article

  • Annoying Search Behavior - Search Companion

    - by David Stein
    I'm running Windows XP Professional, and ever since the last service pack I've had a searching problem. When I want to search a network drive, I get the following message: This folder is not indexed. To search this directory plase use Search Companion or add this directory to your index via options. Basically, I have two questions. Is there some way that I can use the indexed search where appropriate and then have it switch over to the Search Companion automatically? Second, how does a programmer look at this code and think this is a good idea? I realize that this question is rhetorical. However, I must enter my search string into one search, receive the error, and then click "Search Companion" to bring up the new search window. This window doesn't even take the defaults from the previous one so I have to specify the search string and drive again.

    Read the article

  • Annoying Search Behavior - Search Companion

    - by DavidStein
    I'm running Windows XP Professional, and ever since the last service pack I've had a searching problem. When I want to search a network drive, I get the following message: This folder is not indexed. To search this directory plase use Search Companion or add this directory to your index via options. Basically, I have two questions. Is there some way that I can use the indexed search where appropriate and then have it switch over to the Search Companion automatically? Second, how does a programmer look at this code and think this is a good idea? I realize that this question is rhetorical. However, I must enter my search string into one search, receive the error, and then click "Search Companion" to bring up the new search window. This window doesn't even take the defaults from the previous one so I have to specify the search string and drive again.

    Read the article

  • Google Sites page never shows up in Google Search organic results?

    - by gus
    I use Google Sites (i.e.: https://sites.google.com/site/EXAMPLE/ ) as a convenient way to maintain up-to-date info on several residential properties, info that's often requested by my property agents, its been around for about 1 year, but I still can never get it to appear in organic Google search results or Bing, even if I search the specific keywords such as the street names. I submitted the URL manually to search engines, knowing that my Sites page probably has very few incoming links. Is this expected behavior? The content of my page has simple formatted text, and outgoing links to Picasa/G+/imgur photo albums. Am I doing something wrong or do all GoogleSites pages have poor organic search rank? Thank you very much.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >