There are other things to do short of that. 1. try to change the interpretation of NOT DIRECTORY and the EL policy to permit a section of links with more generous standards. 2. try to get a policy for adding a subpage for links to articles 3. run a mirror of the project, with links added, which is easier & better than a true fork where the articles diverge.
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 9:17 AM, Fred Bauder <fredb...@fairpoint.net> wrote: > I think the point is to use editorial judgment with respect to what > external links and further reading are worthwhile. > > My experience is that very good links regularly get axed. And there is > little you can do other than to fork the project if you don't like it. > > Fred Bauder > >> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 4:39 AM, Charles Matthews >> <charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote: >>> Of your three points, I don't really find anything to agree with. >>> Taking >>> the attitide that "External links" is the name of a "Further reading" >>> section for reading that happens to be online, what exactly _are_ you >>> arguing? That trawling through the first hundred hits on well-known >>> search engines will always produce those links? That is easy to refute. >>> For many sites of high academic value, precisely no (zero) SEO is done. >>> I can easily think of examples. Very good links can be very hard to >>> find, unless you have a good reason to suspect they are there. >> >> High value links should always be provided. Can you provide an >> reference to a Wikimedian arguing that links to the most useful >> additional resources shouldn't be provided? I'll gladly go and >> disagree with them. >> >> >> But I do believe that a list of, say, 50 links tagged onto the end of >> an article typically has negative value for the following reasons: >> * Readers will be inundated, no one is likely to follow more than a >> couple so the very high value links will be lost in the less valuable >> ones. >> * Wikipedia editors are unlikely periodically review links in a large >> collection (supported by the high density of dead links, and the >> malicious sites I've found in prior scans of our internals links). >> * Long lists provide plausible denyability for someone attempting to >> profit by placement, as additions to link soup doesn't look suspect. >> * Someone looking for a large collection of assorted links on a >> subject can find a larger and more current list from any of the search >> providers. >> >>> Given your style of argument, which is that we should be relying on the >>> utility of commercial entities over which we have no control at all, to >>> help our readers find the further information that we know (because WP >>> does not aim to give complete coverage) they will need, I would say >>> that >>> Fred's worries are amply justified. >> >> I bothered making the argument here because I believed that Fred was >> likely mischaracterizing the nuanced position people have taking in >> trying to balance the value of additional links vs their cost as a >> simple "war on external links", when no one was likely carrying on any >> such war: Just because someone has decided on a different benefit >> trade-off than you doesn't make their activities a "war on all X". >> >> I wish there were a usable non-commercial search engine. But Wikipedia >> clearly isn't that. Wikipedia's value is in human editorial review. >> A search engine's value is in enormous scale automation, "machine >> neutrality" (not the google results are neutral, but it is resistant >> to many kinds of bias which wikipedia is not), and automated updates. >> Everyone on the internet already has access to high quality search >> engines. I just don't think that making Wikipedia into a poor search >> engine at the expensive of diluting the selectivity is a net positive >> for the reader. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> WikiEN-l mailing list >> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l