I think it's bad business to get in the habit of setting up official
policies that exclude factual, referenced, neutral information from
inclusion in Wikipedia.
The natural extension of this tendency will lead to the typical elitist
exclusionism that all institutional media typically fall victim to.
Wikipedia is not paper.
On 11/27/06, charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com <
charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com> wrote:
Steve Block wrote
Steve Bennett wrote:
In general, we should be more selective with what
external links we
provide, and how we present them.
We already do.
We should distinguish between:
- Sources of the information in the article
These should be placed in the References section, not the External links
one.
I looked at [[Wikipedia:Citing sources]] on this, and I don't think that
guideline is optimal. It is much better, if you need a weblink as reference
for something specific, to make an inline link or make a note. In fact a
note is much superior, because you can attach a comment or point up some
specific phrase used.
If you just put raw weblinks in a References section, and don't specify
the relevance, how can anyone tell that the link is playing a reference
role?
Charles
-----------------------------------------
Email sent from
www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software
Visit
www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l