> 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.
Good faith requires an attempt. > 2. try to get a policy for adding a subpage for links to articles That is what they did on Citizendium. Fred > 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