Talk: External links policy

Revision as of 18:43, 24 April 2007

Proposal proposal vote

Votes

Yes

Yes User:Kirkburn/Sig3 04:30, 21 April 2007 (EDT) - (Proposed)
Yes User:Adys/Sig 22:55, 21 April 2007 (EDT) - ()
Yes User:Tekkub/Sig 00:07, 22 April 2007 (EDT) - (Voting is for chumps, just decree this bitch.)
Yes GRYPHON^tc 03:14, 22 April 2007 (EDT) - (no comment)}
Yes Karrion 03:16, 22 April 2007 (EDT) - ()

No

No User:Reskar/Sig 14:37, 24 April 2007 (EDT) - (see comment below)

Comments

I'm a little confused if this is a vote to keep / remove this policy or what.... Kirkburn voted Yes, yet his vote says delete. --User:Psyker7/Sig 10:54, 21 April 2007 (EDT)

Fixed :) User:Kirkburn/Sig3 22:54, 21 April 2007 (EDT)

Shouldn't it be WoWWiki:Writing/Externallinks? :D --User:Sky2042/Sig 03:41, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

Or more simply WoWWiki:External links --User:Adys/Sig 09:01, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

I think we are going in the wrong direction here, While it is nice to have info on the wiki and internal links where ever possible it think that trying to nuke external links if WE think there isn't anything new is bad. If any of you remeber/are old enough to remeber the macy's/gimbal's (sp?) war you'd know that one of the big reasons that macy's is here today is that they would show you all of there merchandise and if they did not have anything help you find a competitor that did. Because of this everyone went to macy's FIRST and there buissness soared. If we did the same (links throught article i still think is bad they should be at the end) then people will get used to comming here first which can only help us. User:Reskar/Sig 14:43, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 ::Shouldn't it be [[WoWWiki:Writing/Externallinks]]? :D --{{User:Sky2042/Sig}} 03:41, 22 April 2007 (EDT)
 :::Or more simply [[WoWWiki:External links]] --{{User:Adys/Sig}} 09:01, 22 April 2007 (EDT)
+I think we are going in the wrong direction here, While it is nice to have info on the wiki and internal links where ever possible it think that trying to nuke external links if WE think there isn't anything new is bad. If any of you remeber/are old enough to remeber the macy's/gimbal's (sp?) war you'd know that one of the big reasons that macy's is here today is that they would show you all of there merchandise and if they did not have anything help you find a competitor that did. Because of this everyone went to macy's FIRST and there buissness soared. If we did the same (links throught article i still think is bad they should be at the end) then people will get used to comming here first which can only help us. {{User:Reskar/Sig}} 14:43, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
 </div>
 <hr style="color: #555;" />
-I think we are going in the wrong direction here, While it is nice to have info on the wiki and internal links where ever possible it think that trying to nuke external links if WE think there isn't anything new is bad. If any of you remeber/are old enough to remeber the macy's/gimbal's (sp?) war you'd know that one of the big reasons that macy's is here today is that they would show you all of there merchandise and if they did not have anything help you find a competitor that did. Because of this everyone went to macy's FIRST and there buissness soared. If we did the same (links throught article i still think is bad they should be at the end) then people will get used to comming here first which can only help us.