Talk:Airfix

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Links to Airfix Forums

I would like to have the links to the Airfix forums added back. The links are

The links were deleted by NatureBoyMD on 21:47, 20 September 2007 with the reason External_links#Links_normally_to_be_avoided. I put the links back on 00:43, 24 September 2007 with the reason "They are used by modelers to help build and collect Airfix kits and contain much news and information about Airfix and their kits. Wikipedia says links to forums should normally be avoided, not that they have to be avoided."

The links were deleted by Statsone with the reason (to me) "Wikipedia is not a link farm. The links could easily be found by searching the internet." I strongly disagree with this. There are only four links, which is certainly far from an excessive list. It is true, if someone searches for "Airfix forum" they will find the forums. However, not everyone is aware that the Airfix forums exist. Having the links there provides a place where people looking for information on Airfix can get more detailed information. For example, the Airfix Tribute Forum has a listing and history of every Airfix kit ever issued.

Airfix itself used to have their own forum, with many thousands of members. When this forum was closed, many modellers lost their main source of information and news about Airfix kits, as the Airfix website was not updated very often. It did not occur to many of these modellers that independent Airfix forums started. We often get reports that the only reason they found the forums was due to the links in Wikipedia. Thus, I kindly ask that I can put the links back, without them having to be removed again. I believe having the links there makes the Airfix entry in Wikipedia that much more useful.

Steven Pietrobon 00:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree with NatureBoy. Two of these forums come up right at the top of a simple google search, and the others can probably be easily located from there. So I don't see the need for these links. Gatoclass 05:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. Information is more important than a list of link. --Statsone 13:39, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, somebody agrees with me. CROWDUDE has restored the links.
Gatoclass, many people don't know that the Airfix forums exists, and therefore don't perform a search. This has been shown by people only finding the forums through the links in Wikipedia. Doing a search just for Airfix does not give the forums, although it does give the Airfix website, so by your logic we should also delete the link for the Airfix website!
Statsone, the links provide the reader with a source of information on Airfix (like the complete list and history of Airfix kits) that Wikipedia does not provide. Removing the links removes information. By your logic all links should be deleted!
I can understand your desire to delete unnecessary links, but I believe these links are very useful to people seeking more information about Airfix and their kits. Could you please reconsider and allow the links to stay.
Steven Pietrobon 00:12, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
How many links do you need? Wikipedia ia an enclyclopedia. It is not a link farm nor is it the only one around. I am sure the links left will contain lists of links to other sites. Please add to the article and do not concentrate on the links. It is a very minor parts of the article. --Statsone 04:33, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
I am asking only that four links be added. I believe this is far from making the Airfix page a link farm. User CROWDUDE agrees with me in this, as he is the one who restored the links yesterday. I have checked the four links that are left, only one of them Airfix 1/32 scale figures has a link (in German) to only one of the forums The Airfix Collecting Forum, so your assumption is incorrect. I have also made many additions and corrections to the Airfix article (before I joined Wikipedia). I don't see why you are so against these four links when they are so useful for people looking for information. Could you please reconsider and allow me to restore the links. Steven Pietrobon 02:10, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Is in not a question of me allowing the links. It is links to be avoided and based on Consensus. Nor who is first. For a short article, seems too many. Eliminate the ones that come up in google near the top. On second thought, the msn group should go, and then see what fits. It is not the end of the world as to what goes in. Just trying to balance the article. --Statsone 04:54, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately, consensus has not been reached as I still strongly disagree with you. Note that forums are links _normally_ to be avoided, not that they have to be avoided. The Airfix forums are not just social networking sites, they provide detailed information about Airfix and their kits that is beyond the scope of Wikipedia. The Airfix article is nearly 150 lines long. I hardly think that eight or ten external links is overbalancing the article with links. There are many shorter articles in Wiki that have five or more external links. If we do as you suggest and eliminate links that come near the top in a Google search, then the first to go is the Airfix Official Site (which is in the list of links)! None of the Airfix forums come up in the first 50 hits, so by your logic we should put them in! I think your argument of using Google to decide which links go in and which do not is flawed. As per the Wikipedia guidelines, the links that should go in are the ones editors judge as providing further information about Airfix that are beyond the scope of the article. Steven Pietrobon 01:41, 28 September 2007 (UTC)