Comments for Wayback Machine Beta FAQs

Comment on How can I have my site removed from the Wayback Machine? by Ichabod Mudd

Ichabod Mudd — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 17:37:11 +0000

Brilliant answer, on the fly checks for robots.
nice design too.
i tested it, and it works.

Comment on What’s the difference between the classic Wayback Machine and the new BETA test version? by Neil

Neil — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 12:39:16 +0000

Spectacular. The WayBackMachine has always been an incredible resource. The Beta version is a vast improvement to something that was already great. Kudos!

Comment on How can I have my site removed from the Wayback Machine? by wayback

wayback — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 19:29:37 +0000

Hi dnm,
I think perhaps you’ve misunderstood how the robots.txt block works. When someone tries to view a site through the Wayback Machine, *before* we display the archived site to them we first go to the live web site and check the live robots.txt file to see whether it tells us to block showing the site. The “answer” from your live site may be saved for up to 24 hours, so changing your robots.txt file isn’t instantaneous but it should take effect for blocking content from the Wayback within about 24 hours.
Thanks,
Alexis (IA)

Comment on How can I have my site removed from the Wayback Machine? by dnm

dnm — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 06:29:52 +0000

Lawrence’s point still stands — the robots.txt file only helps for NEXT TIME you bother to crawl the site. In some sites’ cases, that can be months. What if we want our sites removed right now? That should be an automated process we can perform, not something we have to e-mail about, nor wait until the next crawl.

Even a, ‘check my site now’ button would help so that the robots.txt can be picked up for the new sites and wipe out old content.

Comment on What’s the difference between the classic Wayback Machine and the new BETA test version? by L Jack

L Jack — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 17:44:00 +0000

I preferred the old Wayback Machine. Calendar is not cool, it wastes a lot of space with nothing on it except for maybe one date that is hardly even highlighted. I prefer the old Wayback Machine because it did acquire the old pages and if it was parked you could search and find the archived website in the dates before it was parked, and/or before it changed hands. It truly archived the internet. This new version only gives a snapshot not an archive.

Is there anyway to bring the Wayback Machine back to it’s original higher standard?

That said thank you for trying

Comment on My site’s not archived! How can I add it? by Macrobiotic Cooking

Macrobiotic Cooking — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 17:22:50 +0000

Thank heavens for your service. As valuable as your site is, it is disappointing that you don’t get more publicity. So many people I talk with do not even realize that archive.org is available.

Comment on What is the Wayback Machine? by Sue

Sue — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 19:02:42 +0000

Thank you for an amazing resource – i have just managed to find a pattern i really wanted which is no longer available in the ‘now’. Absolutely delighted.

Comment on What’s the difference between the classic Wayback Machine and the new BETA test version? by M

Tue, 18 Oct 2011 23:39:21 +0000

I vastly prefer the classic version’s display of available pages.

Comment on What’s the difference between the classic Wayback Machine and the new BETA test version? by jim

jim — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 05:52:57 +0000

The only disappointment, I cant access website made from 1994 and 1995…

Comment on What’s the difference between the classic Wayback Machine and the new BETA test version? by rleens

rleens — Sat, 24 Sep 2011 02:24:48 +0000

forgot a great big happy Thank you!!! awesome People.
helpers
love if only a little ronnie before i move to anewway of being I wood love to let you all a enjoy a gift helpsomething to payit foward

lovvvvvvvvve ronnie