Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Archive.is RFC 4: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Oppose Vote: unfortunately oppose |
|||
Line 235:
#'''Oppose''' We are to allow a site known for malicious activities to spread their links onto this project? The supporters need to take a long hard look in the mirror and decide if they want Wikipedia to be overrun with commercialism. Archive.is needs to be a hell of a lot more forthcoming with the Foundation before we could dream of allowing this. As is, it's nightmare waiting to happen. Allowing archive.is to run amok of this project is no better than welcoming Willy on Wheels back with open arms. --[[User:Hammersoft|Hammersoft]] ([[User talk:Hammersoft|talk]]) 14:26, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
#'''Oppose'''. This is the proverbial drinking poison to quench thirst. And we are not that thirsty anyway. [[User:Timotheus Canens|T. Canens]] ([[User talk:Timotheus Canens|talk]]) 02:34, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
#'''Oppose''' Unfortunately it seems the owner of archive.is is willing to do wrong things and spams Wikipedia using robots. We have no control over the site so we could end up with a large part of Wikipedia in danger from his use of our links to his site. I really wish archive.org could at least do something a bit more about its policy of deleting archived pages just because some ___domain squatter with no interest in the old content takes over a ___domain and sticks in a robots.txt - the retroactive deletions make the site very unreliable. [[User:Dmcq|Dmcq]] ([[User talk:Dmcq|talk]]) 08:58, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
<!-- END OF VOTING SECTIONS
SIGN YOUR VOTE! ~~~~
| |||