Sorry, I should have been more clear. My thought was that, when linking to a page, it might be worth checking first whether archive.org has a copy and, if so, linking to that version.
Your second comment is interesting. An argument could be made that Wikipedia represents a selection of the more useful pages on the Internet, and I wonder whether the folks at archive.org have considered this at all. It is worth contacting them?
Jake
On Tue, 2007-01-02 at 20:01 +0100, MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
Problem is their lag time. It takes over 6 months for stuff to appear there by which time you are in deep trouble if it wasn't stored to begin with. It would be nice if every site that's referenced in Wikipedia is spidered automatically just like every site that's visited by a surfer with an Alexa toolbar.
Mgm
On 1/2/07, Jake Waskett jake@waskett.org wrote:
There might be some copyright problems involved with that proposal.
There is a partial solution, however. The Wayback Machine [http://www.archive.org/index.php] archives many web pages and their revisions. They have negotiates an exemption to the DMCA [http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=82097], and so will probably be around for some time to come.
Jake
On Tue, 2007-01-02 at 05:33 -0800, zero 0000 wrote:
We allow web pages as sources under some reliability criteria, even though the web page might change or go away. We choose to live with this problem as a lesser evil than banning web sources altogether. But, I was wondering: could Wikipedia not keep its own archive of web pages used as sources? Or some such web pages? This is a minimally thought out proposal as you can tell!
Zero.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l