Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On Jan 29, 2008 5:33 PM, Bryan Derksen
As long as the page that's on Wikipedia is
compliant with the
requirements to allow that page to stay on Wikipedia - and since this
Bathrobe page has been through MfD and survived, it appears that this is
the case - why should we care _how_ people get there?
Because the use of an external domain pretty much demonstrates that
the page isn't being used for project purposes, but is instead being
used as a replacement for an external web hosting service.
Off-topic wacky userspace pages from established users are not so bad,
but when they are clearly targeted at an outside audience?
I don't get the impression from the page itself that it's targeted at an
outside audience. The entire raison d'être of the page appears to be to
have fun at Wikipedia-related subjects, things that an "outsider"
wouldn't have any awareness of. A random non-Wikipedian would have no
idea what "RfAs" or "1RR" were, or why the goal of "Promot[ing]
adminship" was funny.
If someone were to do something like this with a page about their
internet florist shop or a fan site for some sports team or what have
you, then sure, that's clearly a case of using Wikipedia for
non-Wikipedia-related purposes. This, however, is clearly
Wikipedia-related and I don't see how a redirect hosted by some external
site changes that.
As far as the MFD goes: I can't really comment
there. To me that seems
to be a pretty baffling and embarrassing outcome: Frequently pages
are deleted which are no more off-topic than this appears to be now
some more of those will be protested with "but admins can do it!" ...
we've lost more than a bit of the high-ground we once had there.
I don't pay attention to MfD, but if it routinely deletes stuff no more
off-topic than this then IMO there's a problem with MfD's standards.