Content deleted Content added
Line 87:
:{{u|Tim Pierce}} Nothing odd about it at all. Wikipedia deleted some NINE internal web page links hence they are now red-line links in the article. External links have to be used in places where Wikipedia obtusely deletes its internal links.[[User:LongTermWikiUser|LongTermWikiUser]] ([[User talk:LongTermWikiUser|talk]]) 16:32, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
::{{ping|LongTermWikiUser}} I see you just re-added the links. Considering that consensus is stacked very much against you here, this is just becoming [[WP:DE|Disruptive editing]]. Can I suggest you drop the issue and move on, before you end up blocked? Thanks, [[User:Mdann52|Mdann52]] ([[User talk:Mdann52|talk]]) 16:48, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Mdann52}} and may I suggest you please consider WHY I find the issue important. I have other pressing aspects of my life that do not allow me the privilege of always responding on Wikipedia immediately. If you might kindly read some of my prior posts. Thank you for your continued interest in APL, including your donated editing time on Wikipedia, [[User:LongTermWikiUser|LongTermWikiUser]] ([[User talk:LongTermWikiUser|talk]]) 18:55, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
::{{u|LongTermWikiUser}} but external links are subject to exactly the same kind of [[link rot]] and disappear without warning. The difference is that deleted pages on Wikipedia can always be undeleted if there's a need to restore the material. That's what makes your approach seem so odd to me. [[User:Tim Pierce|—Tim Pierce]] ([[User talk:Tim Pierce|talk]]) 16:54, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
:::{{u|Tim Pierce}} Wikipedia deleted nine links, no external links were deleted. The link rot logic fails miserably. Which is more stable? Nine deleted internal Wikipedia links or zero external links? [[User:LongTermWikiUser|LongTermWikiUser]] ([[User talk:LongTermWikiUser|talk]]) 18:14, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
| |||