Comment by nobody9999
16 hours ago
>> an analysis of existing links has shown that most of its uses can be replaced.
>Oh? Do tell!
They do. In the very next paragraph in fact:
The guidance says editors can remove Archive.today links when the original
source is still online and has identical content; replace the archive link so
it points to a different archive site, like the Internet Archive,
Ghostarchive, or Megalodon; or “change the original source to something that
doesn’t need an archive (e.g., a source that was printed on paper)
[flagged]
> archive.today
Hopeless. Caught tampering the archive.
The whole situation is not great.
I'd rather deal with this weird feud than not have access to any archived content that people want censored. Defeats the entire purpose of an archive
I just quoted the very next paragraph after the sentence you quoted and asked for clarification.
I did so. You're welcome.
As for the rest, take it up with Jimmy Wiles, not me.
aka Jimbo Wales
1 reply →