I think that external links to the subject's
self-published sites don't
add anything beyond a link to the subject's self-published site, which
is usually the easiest thing to find about them. Omitting them in some
circumstances does not harm the articles greatly, and if it would have a
major impact in reducing harassment then the trade off would be
worthwhile. WE can argue over how much of a positive improvement there'd
be, but it's hard to argue that our articles are defaced by removing a
link that isn't a source.
Wait, I'm confused. You said that "Omitting them in some circumstances
does not
harm the articles greatly" and said that "it's hard to argue that our
articles
are defaced by removing a link that isn't a source." I'm a bit confused. If
it
is harming our articles, isn't it defacing them?