relatively few occasions where a link to a site such as Wikipedia Review
is beneficial to the project, but it should be acknowledged that these
Actually, I can't think of any occasion where such a link would be
beneficial to the project. What exactly did you have in mind?
I can think of four classes of occasion:
1. When the site is the topic of an article or the source for an article,
2. As part of a policy discussion around WP:BADSITES or any related
3. As part of a collection of evidence as to why a particular site is
4. When a Wikipedia participant's behavior on or participation in one
of those sites is raised as an issue in any on-WP proceeding, like
an RFA or anything in dispute resolution.
If the first hasn't happened yet, it will eventually. As people never
tire of pointing out, we're a top-10 website, so like it or not, our
critics will eventually become notable just for opposing us. For
The second and third are pretty normal things we do when discussing and
implementing policy. Indeed, on current trends I expect BADSITES will
never become a solid policy because the suppression of relevant
information is antithetical to the way we get anywhere together.
As to the last, the nature and extent of one's participation in a
BADSITE seems like a relevant factor to me, especially in questions of
discipline or community trust.