On Jan 9, 2004, at 10:36 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote:
Graham Burnett wrote:
"External links within the article are against wiki policy."
Earlier today I used external links in an article, but I didn't really like it. And I found myself doing something really bad -- but I caught myself.
I wrote something like...
In [http://www.whatever.com/ this article], so-and-so says such-and-such.
that's really bad because when the content is repurposed, that sentence will make no sense at all.
Sure, but "So-and-so says such-and-such [http://www.whatever.com/]." will make perfect sense once it's been repurposed. Citation-type links are parenthetical and can simply be removed; the content just loses a little credibility. If any information about the context of the referenced material is useful to the reader of the article (who wrote it, where it was published, etc.), this information ought to be in the article anyway. Readers should not be expected to follow the link to understand the reference, only for the full story.
When such content is repurposed it may be appropriate to move this link to an equivalent of an "External links" section, but this can be done without garbling the text. Putting it there on the wiki version just makes the context of the reference unclear and confuses the reader.
Peter
--- Funding for this program comes from Borders without Doctors: The Bookstore Chain That Sounds Like a Charity. --Harry Shearer, Le Show