Talk:Again and Again (Status Quo song)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Again and Again (Status Quo song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100407015828/http://www.statusquo.co.uk/records/singles3.htm to http://www.statusquo.co.uk/records/singles3.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:52, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Should links to pages that don't list be removed?

I made an edit to link to Jackie Lynton but didn't create a page for Jackie Lynton.

This was then removed. I added it because I'd send other links to pages that didn't exist so thought maybe it was acceptable as someone might then create the page.

If I come across red links, should I be removing them? Infobleep (talk) 22:16, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Please see this. I would suggest creating red-links if you are planning to create the article (sometime soonish) rather than just to link to a non-existent article. Sorry if my edit summary was snarky but so many people create red-links that stay that way for years without ever bothering to create the actual article. Message me on my talk page if you would like to continue this discussion as it is unrelated to the content of this article. Robvanvee 04:29, 4 November 2019 (UTC)