Talk:Ernest "Doc" Paulin

Untitled

Wow, this is an article that certainly highlights how Wikipedia editors who remove "red links" in articles are destructive to the project. I wonder how many other other articles used to link here. Annoyed, -- Infrogmation (talk) 17:17, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Could you explain a bit more please? I sometimes remove redlinks if I truly feel there's a strong likelihood of the person being non-notable, but don't always do so.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 19:17, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

If you are removing "red links" for subjects you think improperly given links, subjects you think Wikipedia ought not have articles on, or subjects that if an article already existed on you would nominate it for deletion, no problem. The problem is some editors who make a practice of removing all "red links", presumably in the belief that any possible subject which Wikipedia does not have an article on today is inherently a subject that Wikipedia must never be allowed to have an article on. Of course that approach is harmful to those editors who believe that Wikipedia has not yet achieved perfect coverage of all encyclopedic subjects, or who try to fill in useful gaps via such tools as Wikipedia:Most wanted articles. Regarding this particular article, I have posted a request on the talk page of a user who removed a link to Doc Paulin from the article on another musician to restore the link-- I didn't wish to get in an edit war with the user. From looking at "what links here", I know that was not the only article I (and perhaps other editors) linked to Doc Paulin from only to have the links removed before the article was created. Sheesh, -- Infrogmation (talk) 18:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)