On 30 March 2010 12:49, Charles Matthews
<charles.r.matthews(a)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