On Jan 29, 2008 5:33 PM, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen(a)shaw.ca> wrote:
I'm not so sure. Would it be different if, instead
of an instantaneous
redirect, their URL led to a page with the text "click here for the main
page on Wikipedia?" They're simply automating the process of clicking, IMO.
And how about tinyurl.com? I'm sure there are thousands of links to
Wikipedia that come in via tinyurl redirects.
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?
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.
It certainly isn't the end of the world but I find the apparent double
standard mightily confusing.