2015-01-21 13:40 GMT+02:00 geni <geni...@gmail.com>: > On 21 January 2015 at 00:01, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemow...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> The two articles combined make me wonder: if I cite a Wikimedia projects >> page in a long-term document, should I link something like perma.cc or to >> the oldid? I prefer the oldid, because I think it's every website's >> responsibility to offer really permanent links. > > > Mediaviewer does not in fact offer a permanent link.
Mediawiever makes it harder to reach the permanent link (at least 1 extra click), it does not get rid of it. The problem you describe also occurs for articles moved without redirect, that's why the oldid exist. I too believe that it's every site's responsibility to offer permalinks and 3rd party services are risky, because out of both the site's and reuser's control. Strainu _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
