Talk:Alonzo J. Mathison
Appearance
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
External links
[edit]As per WP:ELBURDEN, disputed external links should be exclude unless and until there is a consensus to include them. The only rationale provided for inclusion thus far is that it is a source for the subject's middle name, but External links are not citations, and an alternative source has already been provided. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:58, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
- Given your history of drive-by edits to solely remove FAG templates without actually making improvements to articles, this seems like WP:IDL rather than constructive editing. Adding a source that simply redirects to a login was not useful. I have restored the external link and added a comment following the instructions here. Per WP:ELBURDEN, including this external link is justifiable in the opinion of at least one editor of this article. I suggest that you address the dispute about the link through the normal dispute-resolution process, particularly at the external links noticeboard. Doremo (talk) 03:23, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- ELBURDEN indicates that disputed external links should be excluded by default unless and until there is a consensus to include them. At this point there is not, and as such your restoration is inappropriate. Your instructions indicate that if all material is sourced to reliable sources then a link should not be added, which is the case here - the fact that a particular source requires login does not impact reliability. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:16, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- The linked instructions state that "This allows people to check your facts," which is a good thing and is useful for WP. The link hidden behind a paywall does not allow anyone to check anything; there is no evidence that it even goes to a relevant image. Doremo (talk) 14:58, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- As indicated at WP:PAYWALL, the fact that there is a login requirement does not in itself allow for a source to be rejected. You're welcome to request a copy at WP:RX so you can see for yourself what the image shows. Further, footnote #2 also includes the middle name; you added that source yourself so I assume you can confirm what it says. Either way, this information is well sourced without the disputed external link. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:44, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- The linked instructions state that "This allows people to check your facts," which is a good thing and is useful for WP. The link hidden behind a paywall does not allow anyone to check anything; there is no evidence that it even goes to a relevant image. Doremo (talk) 14:58, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- ELBURDEN indicates that disputed external links should be excluded by default unless and until there is a consensus to include them. At this point there is not, and as such your restoration is inappropriate. Your instructions indicate that if all material is sourced to reliable sources then a link should not be added, which is the case here - the fact that a particular source requires login does not impact reliability. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:16, 16 November 2020 (UTC)