[Wikipedia-l] Re: [associates at amazon.com: Amazon.com Associatesprogram - your application approved]

[Delirium]

Jimmy Wales wrote:

>b schewek wrote:
>  
>
>>There has not been one reason given so far why WP should link to
>>booksellers in the first place.
>>    
>>
>
>Well, that's a conversation that we've had more than once, see.
>
>It's clearly useful to many readers.  It's not evil to buy books.
>It's not even evil to sell books.
>
>Let's say we have an article about Stephen King (we do).  And an
>article about one of his books (we do).  Why should we not link to a
>page that lets people know how they can do more research by actually
>obtaining the book?  The user might want to buy it, or borrow it from
>a library, or read reviews of it, etc.
>  
>
While I don't oppose linking to booksellers, I'd have to say I'm 
unconvinced it's really all that useful to our readers.  Surely people 
are aware of the fact that one might want to read books for various 
reasons, and they likely are even aware of the fact that there are 
several venues from which books may be acquired: there are libraries, 
project gutenberg, online bookstores, local bookstores, and so on.  I 
can see the usefulness in linking directly to a free online edition of 
the book (project gutenberg, etc.), since that allows them to read it 
with a simple click, but I don't really see the usefulness in linking to 
online booksellers.  There are plenty of things besides books people can 
purchase online as well, and we don't generally link them.

-Mark