On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 6:10 AM, Fred Bauder <fredb...@fairpoint.net> wrote: >> On 30 March 2010 12:49, Charles Matthews >> <charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote: >>> Carcharoth wrote: >> >>>> That probably misses the flux. How many links are added and then >>>> almost immediately removed? That won't be picked up in something like >>>> that, I don't think. >> >>> Anyway, the point is not that external links are systematically >>> persecuted (they may be patchily persecuted); but that they now have >>> few >>> actual rights. >> >> >> I'm not at all convinced there's an actual problem here. >> >> Prospective useful links and references can (and should) go on the talk >> page. >> >> >> - d. > > Yes, that disposes of them. The point is to have external links and > further reading available to users of the reference at the foot of the > article. The consensus to routinely remove such material arose a few > years ago and it diminishes the utility of Wikipedia as a reference work. > > Fred Bauder
I don't think there's such a consensus, site wide. I have seen articles where someone OWNs it and there is a local consensus. Keep in mind that we risk ending up with our articles web link farms which is are not maintained in any consistent manner. I support good links, and add them. But there's a downside there too. -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
