Links to MyWikBiz, Summa Logicae Options

[Peter Damian]

I raised the issue on the RS noticeboard here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Rel...WikiBiz_deleted

There is a concerted effort to remove a link on the Summa Logicae article to a version of book III (the only version on the internet) I placed there.

The logic is that it is a 'personal website'. As I have pointed out, that logic would remove 90% of links from medieval articles, and nearly all the links on that particular article.

It was many weeks work to check the scanned in Latin version - there are currently no Latin spell-checkers on the market, and it all has to be done by eye. This seems more a vendetta against Kohs than anything else.

[Abd]

Well, there is no question that the external link to Wikipedia Review is appropriate, unless that material is truly duplicated at Wikisource. I tried to figure out what was what, it wasn't easy to compare these. I restored the link to Wikisource.

The discussion on Talk there shows how not to approach a content dispute, Peter, you rather quickly resorted to "childish," etc. That really never belongs on an article talk page, if anywhere. If this was common, it's easy to see why you were banned. Yes. I know, it is very tempting to call stupidity "stupid" and childishness "childish." Sometimes I have to sit on my hands, sometimes I fail, but ... I do redact at the drop of a complaint, I'd have struck that immediately....

Old stuff, though.

But the Wikisource link wasn't discussed, just the Wikipedia Review link, with the usual bogus arguments.

RSN was the wrong place to address this issue, the issue for external links isn't reliable source, and external links are not required to be reliable sources, merely to be of likely interest to readers without being grossly biased, or ''known'' copyright violation, or maybe just likely violation, and an allegation of gross bias here is probably preposterous, likewise copyvio, unless the Wikisource is copyvio.

If one of the links duplicates information in the other, with no independent value, then probably preference would be given to Wikisource. Otherwise, removing the Wikipedia Review link is damaging the usefulness of the encyclopedia.

Yes, this was a coatrack on which to hang complaints about Wikipedia Review or perhaps Peter Damian.