[WikiEN-l] Another "BADSITES" controversy

[Blu Aardvark]

Slim Virgin wrote:
> I'm saying three things (1) there is never a good reason to link to
> one of these sites, so don't do it; (2) no matter what page you link
> to, there's likely to be a serious personal attack on it, because the
> particularly egregious sites are full of them; (3) that we shouldn't,
> as an encyclopedia, want to increase the readership of websites that
> seem devoted to encouraging stalking, harassment, "outing," and
> defamation.

(1) Nonsense. There are occasionally, albeit rarely, occasions where 
there is good reason to link to one of those sites. The litmus test 
should be, "Would removing this link stir up more drama than allowing it 
to remain?", because if the answer is yes, removing the link will 
actually draw more attention to the site. I've given quite a few 
examples of occasions where a link might be appropriate - again, it all 
depends on the content and the context of the link given.
(2) Eh, not entirely. There are quite a few threads on Wikipedia Review 
which don't contain serious personal attacks. Admittedly, they are 
increasingly rare these days.
(3) It should be noted that none of the sites mentioned actively support 
stalking, harassment, or defamation. Nonetheless, this concern is valid 
and reasonable, and by no means should Wikipedia be used to increase the 
readership of those sites. However, blind reversion of links /actually 
increases the readership of those sites/. Again, the litmus test should 
be "Would removing the link stir up more drama than allowing it to 
remain?" If the answer is yes, then removing the link is going to have 
the opposite effect than the one you desire.