21:
231:
86:
293:– Web sites that do not routinely harass have in the past become engaged in an isolated or specific dispute with a Knowledge editor. It is not normally necessary to remove such links. Removing links to the official website of an article subject due to side-effects of a single dispute is rarely necessary and may be unwise. Consider whether removal may draw
544:
Knowledge cannot regulate behavior in media not under its control, however if an external link which contains information violating your privacy or which calls for your malicious harassment is added to
Knowledge, you should bring this to the attention of Knowledge administrators as soon as possible.
527:
This table is not intended as a "point system", its aim is to act as a guide to your decision making in posting, or removing a link. In general, reliable sources should always be linked when needed for use as a source in an article. Websites maintained by notable people or groups should be linked in
111:
any individual should be avoided. Knowledge is a project to build an encyclopedia; and therefore we often provide references (links and otherwise) in talk space to discuss article changes, as supplemental material in the article itself for readers wishing to further educate themselves on a subject,
268:
The best thing to do with harassment found on external websites is to ignore it. These kinds of behaviour are aimed at gathering attention, and when controversy, edit warring and interpersonal conflict erupts on
Knowledge as a result, the harassers often feel triumphant and motivated to continue.
125:
On occasion, sites which are not normally given to attacks and harassment may, through lapse of judgement or an isolated dispute, publish problematic material. It is rarely necessary to remove such links, although deep links direct to the problematic material may well be refactored. Privacy
259:
are liable to be removed and should not be reinstated. If you consider them of genuine encyclopedic value to article space, you are welcome to present the argument yourself, with support from reliable independent sources. It is wise to achieve consensus on the discussion page beforehand.
311:
websites and blogs are generally not considered reliable sources other than for uncontentious facts directly about the subject, or for their own existence. Since sites which routinely engage in harassment typically fall under that category, we would rarely consider them to be
340:, especially if such links do not directly contain malicious harassment or privacy violations. Raising good faith concerns based on information found within an external link is not harassment. Pressing the point in the face of repeated requests to stop may be interpreted as
165:. If a link is removed in good faith, the first step should be a calm and reasoned discussion on the relevant discussion page. The presence or absence of links in articles should be a matter of considered editorial judgement. It is important to
145:
Discuss on the talk page; avoid edit-warring. Note removal of links on the talk page. Others will likely be working with the site to resolve issues. Always check discussion pages before adding or removing a potentially problematic link.
116:
policy, sound editorial judgement should be applied to determine whether links are encyclopedic, and whether they're being included for encyclopedic reasons. Links that are included for unencyclopedic purposes should be removed.
202:
Linking to external harassment, attacks, or to sites which routinely engage in such attacks is usually inappropriate, and should be done only after careful thought has been given to the likely effect on the victim.
112:
and most importantly as sources for the claims in the article to provide the credibility needed to distinguish this as an encyclopedia from something else. Where this goal appears to conflict with our
244:
in offsite forums is almost always unwelcome. If you consider a banned user has reformed, or is making sound points and should be allowed to resume contributing to
Knowledge debate, please contact
350:– If a link could violate this guideline, consider not adding it, or seek the advice of your peers on the talk page of the relevant article. Reflect on the value to an encyclopedia of any link.
206:
Knowledge allows for concerns to be raised in good faith. If you have a concern, see if it can be stated without the need to link to external harassment. Evidence in the form of
210:
is likely to be much more compelling. Be careful not to give the impression of furthering or enabling an external campaign of harassment. If you are unsure, ask
287:– Knowledge strongly discourages any links to web sites that routinely harass, due to potential of the material on the site, taken as a whole, to cause distress.
177:
Knowledge is a social space and works only because people from diverse backgrounds make a conscious effort to shelve their differences and work together. The
363:. The last is particularly important. While discussion about a link or its contents is still active, continuing to add or remove the link may be considered
645:
553:; however, this is a highly public forum and you could inadvertently bring unwanted attention to the link by reporting your concern publicly on Knowledge.
587:
exists both for
Knowledge and for all projects hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation. Blacklisting is normally only considered for sites which are being
550:
94:
Links that contain privacy violations or malicious harassment should be avoided. Links in articles are a matter for sound editorial judgement.
665:
44:
660:
635:
28:
600:
307:, try first of all to find a better source for the content, or to cite it directly from an original print publication. Note that
640:
107:
apply to any kind of attack or harassment in any context, so linking to external attacks, privacy violations and other content
576:
563:
562:
you trust, via the link on their user page. This ensures greater discretion. A list of administrators can be found
222:
150:
539:
620:
100:
133:
in an article on someone whose notability includes harassing others), putting the link in plain text, e.g.
199:, and fundamental to that guideline is that it applies to you more than to supposed behaviours by others.
263:
154:
36:
630:
610:
584:
153:, so must be approached with care as a temporary measure. However, temporary absence of a link is
559:
367:. Allow sufficient time for consensus to become evident, remembering differences in time zones.
354:
61:
68:
615:
487:
193:
component of the functioning of the project. The fundamental rule in any social space is:
104:
375:
The following table may help in determining the suitability of external links in general:
8:
572:
605:
323:
162:
53:
40:
269:
This can be understandably difficult if they try to troll people on the site with it.
625:
532:, though linking to them from other articles may not be appropriate. If a website is
308:
370:
514:
505:
326:. If someone is repeatedly removing or adding a link, follow the steps provided in
256:
245:
186:
272:
509:
588:
536:
notable enough to have its own article, it should be linked from that article.
304:
252:
207:
654:
518:
500:
496:
482:
360:
337:
241:
182:
178:
166:
113:
529:
491:
478:
364:
341:
327:
313:
158:
591:, but in some cases the blacklist has been used to prevent serial abuse.
579:
who can remove the links so they will not still appear in a page history.
303:– Sourcing is important. If you feel the need to unlink a web page
138:, (rather than as a live link), or even just the domain name, e.g.
195:
237:) rather than risk unproductive drama on the admin noticeboards.
120:
129:
Where an especially problematic link is encyclopedic content (
549:
The quickest way to do so is by explaining your situation at
281:– Do not add external links of no value to the encyclopedia.
172:
594:
214:
about the likely reception of the link you have in mind.
39:
may apply. Substantive edits to this page should reflect
646:
Knowledge:On privacy, confidentiality and discretion
336:– Try not to fight over links added or removed in
652:
551:Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
142:, is sometimes used as a workable compromise.
136:http://www.unpleasant.example/</nowiki: -->
149:This can arguably be seen as problematic for
558:A better option may be to directly email an
221:of suspected administrator abuse, email the
359:The usual model for addition of content is
35:Editors should generally follow it, though
571:A further option is to directly email the
255:or through anonymous open proxies such as
27:This page documents an English Knowledge
248:for details on how to appeal the ban.
636:Knowledge:Protecting children's privacy
601:Knowledge:Biographies of living persons
653:
641:Knowledge:Knowledge is an encyclopedia
666:Knowledge project content guidelines
251:Links added by ban or block evading
80:
15:
330:Further options are detailed below.
126:violations are especially harmful.
13:
540:If you feel you are being harassed
43:. When in doubt, discuss first on
14:
677:
423:Completely respectful of privacy
229:
84:
19:
661:Knowledge behavioral guidelines
320:Knowledge is not a battleground
297:attention than calm discussion.
264:Harassment on external websites
155:rarely of paramount importance
1:
621:Knowledge:No personal attacks
291:Sites not routinely harassing
101:Knowledge:No Personal Attacks
7:
355:Management of problem links
285:Sites that routinely harass
10:
682:
464:Extreme privacy violation
348:Err on the side of caution
51:
45:this guideline's talk page
404:
399:
394:
389:
384:
381:
246:the Arbitration Committee
230:
631:Wikimedia:Privacy policy
611:Knowledge:External links
179:assumption of good faith
92:This page in a nutshell:
577:requests for oversight
470:Deliberate harassment
475:Relevant authorities
371:Link assessment table
361:bold, revert, discuss
279:No encyclopedic value
223:Arbitration Committee
151:Neutral point of view
616:Knowledge:Harassment
467:Systematic campaign
429:Good-faith critique
396:Violation of privacy
273:Key guideline points
105:Knowledge:Harassment
29:behavioral guideline
528:their article, per
328:Dispute Resolution.
322:– Do not engage in
183:no personal attacks
114:No Personal Attacks
606:Knowledge:Civility
525:
217:In serious cases,
163:considered harmful
140:unpleasant.example
626:Knowledge:Privacy
524:
523:
377:
305:cited as a source
167:assume good faith
98:
97:
79:
78:
673:
454:Links to exclude
417:Highly reliable
413:Links to include
379:
378:
236:
234:
233:
232:
88:
87:
81:
71:
64:
23:
22:
16:
681:
680:
676:
675:
674:
672:
671:
670:
651:
650:
597:
542:
426:Isolated event
420:Highly notable
373:
357:
301:Sourcing policy
275:
266:
228:
226:
196:don't be a jerk
175:
135:<nowiki: -->
123:
85:
75:
74:
67:
62:WP:PROBLEMLINKS
60:
56:
48:
20:
12:
11:
5:
679:
669:
668:
663:
649:
648:
643:
638:
633:
628:
623:
618:
613:
608:
603:
596:
593:
585:spam blacklist
581:
580:
568:
567:
555:
554:
541:
538:
522:
521:
512:
503:
494:
485:
476:
472:
471:
468:
465:
462:
459:
456:
450:
449:
446:
443:
440:
437:
434:
431:
430:
427:
424:
421:
418:
415:
409:
408:
403:
398:
393:
388:
383:
372:
369:
356:
353:
352:
351:
345:
331:
317:
309:self-published
298:
288:
282:
274:
271:
265:
262:
174:
171:
169:on all sides.
141:
137:
122:
119:
96:
95:
89:
77:
76:
73:
72:
65:
57:
52:
49:
34:
33:
24:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
678:
667:
664:
662:
659:
658:
656:
647:
644:
642:
639:
637:
634:
632:
629:
627:
624:
622:
619:
617:
614:
612:
609:
607:
604:
602:
599:
598:
592:
590:
586:
578:
574:
570:
569:
565:
561:
560:administrator
557:
556:
552:
548:
547:
546:
537:
535:
531:
520:
516:
513:
511:
507:
504:
502:
498:
495:
493:
489:
488:WP:NOTABILITY
486:
484:
480:
477:
474:
473:
469:
466:
463:
460:
457:
455:
452:
451:
447:
444:
441:
438:
435:
433:
432:
428:
425:
422:
419:
416:
414:
411:
410:
407:
402:
397:
392:
387:
380:
376:
368:
366:
362:
349:
346:
343:
339:
335:
332:
329:
325:
321:
318:
315:
310:
306:
302:
299:
296:
292:
289:
286:
283:
280:
277:
276:
270:
261:
258:
254:
249:
247:
243:
238:
235:wikimedia.org
224:
220:
215:
213:
209:
204:
200:
198:
197:
192:
188:
187:no harassment
184:
180:
170:
168:
164:
160:
156:
152:
147:
143:
139:
134:
132:
127:
118:
115:
110:
109:that harasses
106:
102:
93:
90:
83:
82:
70:
66:
63:
59:
58:
55:
50:
46:
42:
38:
32:
30:
25:
18:
17:
582:
543:
533:
526:
461:Non-notable
453:
412:
405:
400:
395:
390:
385:
374:
358:
347:
333:
319:
300:
294:
290:
284:
278:
267:
250:
242:banned users
240:Advocacy by
239:
218:
216:
211:
205:
201:
194:
190:
176:
159:edit warring
148:
144:
130:
128:
124:
108:
99:
91:
26:
575:members at
458:Unreliable
386:Reliability
253:sockpuppets
121:In articles
69:WP:LINKLOVE
655:Categories
391:Notability
365:disruptive
342:disruption
338:good faith
334:Good faith
225:directly (
37:exceptions
573:oversight
534:in itself
515:WP:HARASS
506:WP:HARASS
406:Intention
401:Frequency
382:Criteria
324:edit wars
227:arbcom-en
191:essential
173:In debate
54:Shortcuts
41:consensus
595:See also
510:WP:CIVIL
314:reliable
589:spammed
316:anyway.
189:are an
519:WP:NPA
501:WP:NPA
497:WP:BLP
483:WP:SPS
530:WP:EL
492:WP:EL
479:WP:RS
212:first
208:diffs
564:here
517:and
508:and
499:and
490:and
481:and
295:more
219:e.g.
185:and
157:and
131:e.g.
103:and
257:Tor
161:is
657::
583:A
448:↕
445:↕
442:↕
439:↕
436:↕
181:,
566:.
344:.
47:.
31:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.