On Wed, 30 May 2007, jayjg wrote:
WR doesn't qualify for citation under [[WP:V]] or
Links to attack sites have been removed from talk pages. [[WP:V]] and
[[WP:RS]] do not apply to talk pages.
Since nothing in WR could be added to an article (as it doesn't
qualify under [[WP:V]] and [[WP:RS]]), and since Talk: pages is to
describe article content, then there's no benefit to Wikipedia in
linking to it on Talk: pages.
That is utterly ridiculous. Things may be quoted and said on talk pages
that are not acceptable for inclusion in an article themselves. Linking to
non-verifiable material, even though an article shouldn't contain
non-verifiable material, is no different from mentioning the results of a
Google search even though no article may contain the results of your
I can see the benefit of a discussing the results of a Google search.
I haven't yet seen the value of linking to WR on an article Talk:
page, given that none of the information posted there is trustworthy.