On Wed, 30 May 2007, David Gerard wrote:
It is limited
to three sites; the trouble is that a zero tolerance policy still
has the problems of a zero tolerance policy. There are some reasons why we
might want to link to even those three sites. They may be rare reasons, but
they are not nonexistent reasons. Removing the link from Wikipedia Signpost
and removing the links from the attack sites discussion are bad ideas, and a
zero tolerance policy leaves no room for such unusual cases.
Perhaps if we mandate
{{spoiler}} tags around each mention ... ;-p
By the anti-spoiler crowd's reasoning, we could just refuse to ban links to
attack sites on the grounds that deciding whether something is an attack site
constitutes original research.