I think that external links to the subject's self-published sites don't add anything beyond a link to the subject's self-published site, which is usually the easiest thing to find about them. Omitting them in some circumstances does not harm the articles greatly, and if it would have a major impact in reducing harassment then the trade off would be worthwhile. WE can argue over how much of a positive improvement there'd be, but it's hard to argue that our articles are defaced by removing a link that isn't a source.
Wait, I'm confused. You said that "Omitting them in some circumstances does not harm the articles greatly" and said that "it's hard to argue that our articles are defaced by removing a link that isn't a source." I'm a bit confused. If it is harming our articles, isn't it defacing them?