Jump to content

Talk:Link rot

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why a target?

[edit]

This article clearly gets way more than the usual dose of vandalism, and the application of pending changes protection by Ymblanter has proven to be a prudent measure. I'm left wondering, though, why this article? I'd kinda understand the attraction if the vandals were breaking links within the article to be ironic, but most of the vandalism is not that. The subject matter is pretty dry so this isn't vandalism as a response to controversy; it isn't about a K-Pop band, a kids TV show, or Brazilian footballer, so this isn't vandalism as a natural side effect of high page views. What am I missing? Cheers —jameslucas ▄▄▄ ▄ ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄ ▄ 17:06, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

There are recurring issues in Wikipedia where link rot leads to removed references, which leads to challenged content as uncited (which isn't really true), which has even led to AFDs. There doesn't seem to be any guideline or consensus discusson on this.

SOFIXIT would suggest that the solution should be to automatically find archives of rotten links, rather than the normal modus operandi of simply deleting things. But the practice of link rot -> article rot continues unabated. - Keith D. Tyler 05:35, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keith, if you haven't yet, I recommend that you seek information on that issue at WP:LINKROT and/or its talk page. This is the talk page for the article on link rot. Sorry for the slow response! jameslucas ▄▄▄ ▄ ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄ ▄ 13:47, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between Archived Search Destinations and Deleted ones

[edit]

Can Wikipedia figure out which 'type' of rot link we're running into for each search. For example, can you program the 'linked to page' to determine what info is gone for good vs. what info still exists somewhere on the internet. I know that if this idea works, we still won't have access to the data we were after in the first place*. The benefit will be the time we'll save in not searching for information that doesn't exist.

  • One step at a time

Thank you for reading, Mary Hughes 2600:4040:5D9A:1B00:28F7:F24:F572:4B66 (talk) 06:51, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]