|
|
|
:I think that still defeats the purpose. And some links really are better than others -- for example, the Postel article gives a very good overview of the history of the Hanse cities. It's more informative than harmful, written by a member of the scholarly comunity whose other works we can presumably access. On the other hand, the average person hitting the link won't really ask himself if the article might have been geared towards a specific purpose -- I think I remember it being addressed to a chamber of commerce or something like that. That might have some influence on what facts were included or omitted. Other links that have been posted are to personal web pages or web pages of cities, economic or genealogical organizations, etc. Here, the information must be considered suspect and biased (or maybe just less reliable, since people don't have to verify their sources and can just say what they want) until proved otherwise. This is why I am so leery of adding links anywhere -- except maybe to public domain documents. I just think it's so much better to write an article that doesn't rely on random web sites to prove its point. |
![[Home]](wikipedia.png)