Hi Lottie, First of all, and with appreciation, thank you for your care and forethought. We do try to maintain a certain standard and abide by policies and communal agreement on matters such as links, and it's far better to discuss these amicably than any other way. Since you don't give full details, the easiest way to start is with a general overview, and then if you have questions please do come back with them -- we'll be glad to discuss. Anyhow, here's the brief version. I'll add links to relevant pages as I go, for you to read further. Wikipedia (as you know) is an encyclopedia. That means in practical terms a few important factors kick into play that affect every edit, every editorial contribution, and every link. The following summarizes these in lay-terms; policies contain specific definitions which can be referred to for the detail: ** Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Some things, although very useful or interesting, just don't belong in it. There are policies that will summarize what sort of content is (or is not) suitable as subject matter of an article. Broadly it must be suitable content, the facts must be verifiable, and it must have a degree of notability and an ability to have a neutral article with some kind of substance written about it. ** Within articles, we document facts. The facts we include must be capable of being sourced from "reliable sources" -- that is, independent sources which one might judge are likely to report what is said, with some kind of credibility or reliability. We avoid citing facts that cannot be checked, information which is just an editor's opinion, and the like. This is why sites like IMDB are cited -- so people can check where we get the facts we state, and that they are correctly stated, their context, and so on. ** Wikipedia is neutral. We don't include or exclude things, except in extreme cases (legal, harassment etc) that take a side or a stance, as far as possible. If we did, then we would lose our value as a reference source. As a corollary, we have strict policies against self-promotion, and conflict of interest. We also are more interested in documenting subjects, than providing links to commercial suppliers, unless highly relevant -- using articles as a means to aid commercial ventures runs contrary to neutrality. We usually judge editors by how they act though; an editor capable of editing neutrally will usually be able to do so, their edits will probably receive higher scrutiny however. ** We have policies on external links. Links exist selectively, to provide valued resources as one might expect in an encyclopedia or reference source. There are many, many sites and web pages for some things. But we link only those with significant reference value on the subject. Given a choice we choose sources selectively. Useful links for these and other policies: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cite_your_sources http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars (a quick summary) If you'd like to explain in a bit more detail, then you'll get a ready response from this mailing list. But I think what matters is this: Wikipedia links to sites as a way to ensure it is basing its articles upon cited verifiable information. There is no policy that IMDB or any site must (or will) be always applicable, or any site, nor does any site have a license or "permission" to be cited. If it's appropriate to an article, fine, if not then not. Individual editors, or editorial groups working collaboratively, make decisions on this, case by case. The issue you are likely to face, if I understand your request correctly, is that you want your site linked to as a resource on various TV related matters, because it's useful. Wikipedia is more about what's factual and encyclopedic. Much useful content is simply not relevant to an encyclopedia that acts as a reference work on many subjects. We don't usually "embed" special code (RSS, rich media, etc) or custom external search tools as a norm, for the same reasons. Wikipedia aims to simply be an encyclopedia, when all said and done, and a reputation for commercial linking would harm our ability to do this as well. But without more detail what exactly you are thinking, it's hard to say more. If you have more questions, or I've misunderstood your inquiry, please do reply, Best, FT2 -----Original Message----- On Behalf Of Lottie B Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 4:58 PM To: WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] Embeds and links on Wiki pages? Hi, I'm looking for some advice about links and embeds. I see there are regular IMDB and TV.com links in the TV and film pages. I'm from the team developing the new film and TV search site LocateTV, which allows you to search for when a programme, film or actor is next on TV, online or on DVD, specific to your region. We also have embeds for bloggers to put straight on their pages linking readers to the content. I thought this could be a great addition to the Wiki pages but I understand there is a very unbranded / democratic feel to Wiki. Can anyone advise me if, considering other sites are routinely linked to, it would be possible to put these embeds up or just links? We don't want to tread on any toes! _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l