Arch Linux

tank

Member

Registered: 2020-07-31

Posts: 4

[SOLVED] How to fix dead links on wiki

Hello there,

Newbie here.

I have identified a dead link in rsync#See Also which is referenced as so. I followed the "dead link" link in the entry with the motivation of finding a fix.

After following the "dead link" link, I arrived at Wikipedia:Link Rot. Since I couldn't find any information in the ArchWiki:Contributing or Help:Editing pages specific to dead links, nor in the Arch Wiki or Arch Forums in general, I decided to try and employ Wikipedia:Link Rot#Internet archives' suggestions on internet archives. Specifically, I wanted to preserve the original URL, dates, status, and the other relevant parameters that this section mentions while providing an alternative or archive URL.

However, I notice that the original citation does not use the common templates referenced in Wikipedia:Link Rot#Internet archives therefore I cannot add the mentioned parameters such as |url= or |archive-url=. From Wikipedia:Citation templates, I understand that consistent citation template usage should not be altered without a consensus.

That said, my question is simple: how should I proceed with the edition in order to provide an archive URL while at the same time respecting ArchWiki's rules and etiquette?

Thanks in advance.

Best,

Last edited by tank (2020-08-01 11:48:20)

lahwaacz

Wiki Admin

From: Czech Republic

Registered: 2012-05-29

Posts: 762

Re: [SOLVED] How to fix dead links on wiki

We don't use citation templates, so the editing instructions from Wikipedia don't apply. Since the link in question does not support any claim, you can just replace the link with an archived version if it's still useful, or (preferably) with a link to a different/better/newer text.

ondoho

Member

Registered: 2013-04-30

Posts: 692

Website

Re: [SOLVED] How to fix dead links on wiki

Wikipedia has nothing to do with the Arch wiki.
The way to fix dead links in the arch wiki is the same as any contribution to the arch wiki: create an account there, make the proposed changes.
IMO, sometimes a dead link is useful to just leave as it is.
One can try to find the article on web.archive.org/.