Editing Eurovision Wiki:External links/Noticeboard

[[Category:Wikipedia noticeboards]] 
[[Category:Wikipedia dispute resolution]]
[[Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed|{{PAGENAME}}]]
{{Archives|collapsed=yes|image=none|search=yes}}
{{/Header}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|maxarchivesize = 400K
|counter = 23
|algo = old(30d)
|minthreadsleft=6
|archive = Wikipedia:External links/Noticeboard/Archive %(counter)d
}} __NEWSECTIONLINK__ <!-- Add new questions at the bottom of the page -->

== Links to official pages for Norwegian companies will expire ==

This is an example of a Wikipedia page about a Norwegian company:
https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equinor

In the fact box to the right, there is a direct link to that company's page at The Brønnøysund Register Centre (public state agency) in Norway, where all companies and organisations are registered and are given a 9 digit ID.

The link in this case is: https://w2.brreg.no/enhet/sok/detalj.jsp?orgnr=923609016

From now on that link should be replaced with a link to the new web page:
https://virksomhet.brreg.no/nb/oppslag/enheter/923609016

More generally, links containing this string:
https://w2.brreg.no/enhet/sok/detalj.jsp?orgnr=
...should be globally replaced with this string:
https://virksomhet.brreg.no/nb/oppslag/enheter/
...if possible.

Otherwise all such links will most likely return "404 not found" in the future.

I hope this is possible.
* With apologies for terrible formatting due to mobile; I think a request here would help - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Link_rot/URL_change_requests

== Questionable from a copyright perspective? ==

[https://web.archive.org/web/20240615183657/https://arqunmhistoria.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/ponce-sangines-carlos-tiwanaco-espacio-tiempo-y-cultura.pdf This blog] used to host the content of a source for [[Lake Tauca]] but was removed because it was on the spam blacklist. Now the source is reliable but I am not sure whether it is OK from a copyright perspective - while anonymous and pseudonymous works from 1976 apparently end up PD next year, this work isn't anonymous/pseudonymous. [[User:Jo-Jo Eumerus|Jo-Jo Eumerus]] ([[User talk:Jo-Jo Eumerus|talk]]) 15:45, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
:Just reference the book directly as a publication, but not the blog. The blog was only providing a convenience link and should never have been linked to. The source is not anonymous, it clearly has an author. It's a published book, just reference the book and ignore the blog. Obviously a link to the book copy on the blog/wayback is a [[WP:COPYLINK]] violation.  [[User:Canterbury Tail|<b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b>]] [[User talk:Canterbury Tail|<i style="color: Blue;">talk</i>]] 16:26, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

== Bibliographies ==

[[WP:EL]] states that "With rare exceptions, external links should not be used in the body of an article." Many articles about authors have bibliographies with links to Google Books, Amazon, or Internet Archive. [[Viktor Frankl]] is an example. Should these links be removed, or is this not considered part of the "article body"? I think the Google Books links are useless, but maybe Internet Archive is different. [[User:Prezbo|Prezbo]] ([[User talk:Prezbo|talk]]) 14:05, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

:@[[User:Prezbo|Prezbo]], the usual approach is that bibliographic content is supposed to be formatted the same throughout the article, so if these sorts of [[Wikipedia:Convenience link|convenience links]] are used in the ==References== section, then they can be used in the ==Books== section (or any other [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists of works]] section).
:Also, as a general rule:  when this kind of question comes up, think about what's nicest for the reader of that article, instead of what's most compliant with a written rule.  For example, even if you generally don't think these links are helpful, if a book is particularly hard to find, then you might use your judgement to keep a link for that one.  Of course, if you think these are almost always helpful, then you'd want to keep all or almost all of them.  We really are trusting you to consider all the specific facts and circumstances for that article and make a reasonable choice.  [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 07:05, 23 February 2026 (UTC)
::Thanks. [[User:Prezbo|Prezbo]] ([[User talk:Prezbo|talk]]) 10:55, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

== PreserveTube ==

Is PreserveTube (https://preservetube.com/) permitted as an archival service for YouTube videos? While it is effective at archiving YouTube videos, it is not listed at [[Wikipedia:List of web archives on Wikipedia]]. It appears to be relatively transparent, being open source. Are there any potential issues regarding this website which could in any way prevent its use on Wikipedia? ―<span style="border: 1px solid black; padding: 1px; border-radius: 5px;">[[User:Howardcorn33|<b>Howard</b>]] • [[User talk:Howardcorn33|🌽<sup>33</sup>]]</span> 16:39, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
:Looks like a copyright violating site to me. No evidence they have permission for the videos, and the fact they've had DCMA takedowns supports that. As a result [[WP:COPYLINK]]. [[User:Canterbury Tail|<b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b>]] [[User talk:Canterbury Tail|<i style="color: Blue;">talk</i>]] 17:31, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
::I don't think this matters when we're talking about web archiving.  [[user:sapphaline|<span class="skin-nightmode-reset-color" style="color:#c20;text-decoration:underline">sapphaline</span>]] ([[user talk:sapphaline|<span class="skin-nightmode-reset-color" style="color:#236;text-decoration:underline">talk</span>]]) 17:47, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
:::By the way, this might be owned by the same person who owns archive.today.  [[user:sapphaline|<span class="skin-nightmode-reset-color" style="color:#c20;text-decoration:underline">sapphaline</span>]] ([[user talk:sapphaline|<span class="skin-nightmode-reset-color" style="color:#236;text-decoration:underline">talk</span>]]) 17:53, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
::::If this is true, it should also be blacklisted, but please provide your evidence for this assertion. ―<span style="border: 1px solid black; padding: 1px; border-radius: 5px;">[[User:Howardcorn33|<b>Howard</b>]] • [[User talk:Howardcorn33|🌽<sup>33</sup>]]</span> 17:54, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
:::::Same domain registrar (this is literally the second site I know of with a domain registered on Tucows, first being archive.today) and the description on the main page is a word-by-word copy from archive.today's main page.  Not much, I know.  [[user:sapphaline|<span class="skin-nightmode-reset-color" style="color:#c20;text-decoration:underline">sapphaline</span>]] ([[user talk:sapphaline|<span class="skin-nightmode-reset-color" style="color:#236;text-decoration:underline">talk</span>]]) 18:03, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
::::::In that case, I am going to open a discussion at [[Wikipedia talk:Archive.today guidance]] so that it may be considered whether links to preservetube.com should also be blacklisted. ―<span style="border: 1px solid black; padding: 1px; border-radius: 5px;">[[User:Howardcorn33|<b>Howard</b>]] • [[User talk:Howardcorn33|🌽<sup>33</sup>]]</span> 18:08, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
::::::I will say that using Tucows is not at all evidence that these sites are owned by the same person. It is just a good domain registrar for this kind of thing, I've used it myself. [[User:PARAKANYAA|PARAKANYAA]] ([[User talk:PARAKANYAA|talk]]) 03:58, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
:::::::Yup, Tucows is one of the original internet registrars and one of the biggest names from the early days of the internet. Those of us who were in university in the 90s know the name well. Being registered with Tucows indicates nothing. It's like saying they're bad because they use Shopify or Squarespace. [[User:Canterbury Tail|<b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b>]] [[User talk:Canterbury Tail|<i style="color: Blue;">talk</i>]] 13:59, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
::@[[User:Canterbury Tail|Canterbury Tail]]: we've permitted Ghost Archive which does the same thing and said so openly about its capacity to archive videos at [[Wikipedia:List_of_web_archives_on_Wikipedia#Ghost_Archive]]. ―<span style="border: 1px solid black; padding: 1px; border-radius: 5px;">[[User:Howardcorn33|<b>Howard</b>]] • [[User talk:Howardcorn33|🌽<sup>33</sup>]]</span> 17:54, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
:::Yes and I think that is a gross mistake, but I'm not a lawyer. [[User:Canterbury Tail|<b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b>]] [[User talk:Canterbury Tail|<i style="color: Blue;">talk</i>]] 20:48, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
::::What is the difference between archiving a copyrighted webpage and archiving a copyrighted video? ―<span style="border: 1px solid black; padding: 1px; border-radius: 5px;">[[User:Howardcorn33|<b>Howard</b>]] • [[User talk:Howardcorn33|🌽<sup>33</sup>]]</span> 20:57, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
:::::Nothing. I don't think we should be linking to archived copies of copyrighted webpages either without the copyright holders permission. [[User:Canterbury Tail|<b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b>]] [[User talk:Canterbury Tail|<i style="color: Blue;">talk</i>]] 21:16, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
::::::We would have to do away with like 99% of all archives on our citations then. ―<span style="border: 1px solid black; padding: 1px; border-radius: 5px;">[[User:Howardcorn33|<b>Howard</b>]] • [[User talk:Howardcorn33|🌽<sup>33</sup>]]</span> 03:19, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
:::::::Yup. [[User:Canterbury Tail|<b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b>]] [[User talk:Canterbury Tail|<i style="color: Blue;">talk</i>]] 13:36, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

== CVE template usage ==

The [[Template:CVE]], which creates an external link to the [[National Vulnerability Database]] is commonly used in the body of articles which seems to me as a violation of NOELBODY. The article I personally first came across this use is [[XZ Utils backdoor]] and it seems this use is done on most pages that this template is transcluded. Is this one of the exceptions to the guideline? -- <span style="background-color: #000000; padding: 1px;">[[User:ChaosAmber|<span style="color: #00F927">Chaos</span>]] [[User talk:ChaosAmber|<span style="color: #ffbf00">Amber</span>]]</span> 19:34, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

:@[[User:ChaosAmber|ChaosAmber]], thanks for the clear example.  I haven't seen that template before.  
:I think that content would be better suited for inclusion in {{tl|Infobox bug}}, don't you?  If it's worth mentioning in the text of the article, then the template could perhaps be used inside ref tags, but I'm not sure that the number itself is worth mentioning in the text.  
:I'm not sure I'm explaining this clearly, so here's an example:
:* Current:  "The issue has been given the [[Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures]] number [[CVE (identifier)|CVE]]-[https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-3094 2024-3094] and has been assigned a [[Common Vulnerability Scoring System|CVSS]] score of 10.0, the highest possible score."
:* My suggestion:  "[[Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures]] assigned a [[Common Vulnerability Scoring System|CVSS]] score of 10.0, the highest possible score." (and the id# is in the infobox)
:[[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 20:15, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
::The suggested version does seem better, but my question was more focused on the use of the template in article bodies in general, not in that article in particular. I am not an editor of the article I linked. -- <span style="background-color: #000000; padding: 1px;">[[User:ChaosAmber|<span style="color: #00F927">Chaos</span>]] [[User talk:ChaosAmber|<span style="color: #ffbf00">Amber</span>]]</span> 20:29, 26 February 2026 (UTC)
:::So... I've not heard of this one before, so it's probably not one of the most common/traditional exceptions (e.g., IETF RFCs or Bible verses).  
:::IMO it's not entirely unreasonable (if you're going to have the id number in the text of the article in the first place, it might as well do something useful for the reader, and there is an argument to be made that it is useful to verify that nobody's changed the ID number), but I would recommend following [[WP:NOELBODY]] instead.  Following NOELBODY probably means one of these three approaches:
:::* Remove the number and template from the text and put it in the infobox (if the article is about a bug)
:::* Remove the number and template from the text and put it inside ref tags (if there is other content, e.g., the CVSS score)
:::* Move it to the ==External links== section (if the bug is particularly relevant to the topic, e.g., ''not'' in [[Microsoft Windows]])
:::[[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 20:44, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

== networkdvd.net ==

This is something I’ll work on tomorrow when I’m on a computer rather than my phone, but since there are ~40 links to it that I can see with an insource: search, I thought I’d draw further attention to [https://www.cordbusters.co.uk/network-back-with-a-sad-twist/ this news story] about the hijacking of this domain. • [[User talk:A Frantic Turtle|'''a&nbsp;frantic&nbsp;turtle''']]&nbsp;🐢 21:54, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

:@[[User:A Frantic Turtle|A Frantic Turtle]], please copy this message to [[Wikipedia:Link rot/URL change requests]].  @[[User:GreenC|GreenC]] may be able to have a bot deal with all of these for you. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 22:01, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
::Done, with thanks. • [[User talk:A Frantic Turtle|'''a&nbsp;frantic&nbsp;turtle''']]&nbsp;🐢 22:09, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
:::I've been through and manually changed most of them to url-status=usurped, adding an archive link. The rest were either links to the front page or to searches on the old website, so I've just removed those entirely. (A couple were naked adverts, so they're gone too now). A ''lot'' of the references were in rubbish formats that I don't think a bot could get to grips with, which is fairly typical for our articles on TV shows, alas.
:::The hijacked site has taken a copy of the last working version of the real site, so people may not realise it's actually now a scam and add new links to it in future. I don't think there's a way of preventing this? I'd assume that vigilance will have to suffice. (I'll cc this to Link rot too). • [[User talk:A Frantic Turtle|'''a&nbsp;frantic&nbsp;turtle''']]&nbsp;🐢 11:48, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
::::Spammy pages are often eligible for inclusion in the [[Wikipedia:Spam blacklist]]. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 19:21, 5 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::Yeah, but the existing links (including the archive links because of how the regex works) would have to be removed entirely before the url string could be added to [[WP:BED]]. If they aren't, any time someone edits the page, they'd have to remove the url anyway before they could save it – and the real but now sadly dead site has a lot of accurate and unique information on it... something that our TV show articles desperately need. Damned if we do, damned if we don't! • [[User talk:A Frantic Turtle|'''a&nbsp;frantic&nbsp;turtle''']]&nbsp;🐢 20:04, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

== [[:Talk:Hot Fuzz]] ==

On my watchlist this edit by {{u|Laeredis}} [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hot_Fuzz&diff=prev&oldid=1343639488] where he removed bot posts from 2017, I saw this weird meta on the page, something about blacklist content links. Was there some links to be removed? Because it was confusing me. [[User:Govvy|Govvy]] ([[User talk:Govvy|talk]]) 16:15, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

:The sections I deleted on the talk page were to do with a bot automatically adding Internet Archive links for two sites that no longer exist, after checking the citations were still in the article and supported the text, so I'm a bit confused by this as well.
:To remove both sections at once I edited the whole talk page, is it possible the blacklist warning pertains to something further up that I wasn't actually altering? Otherwise, is it possible the blacklist stuff was a result of the removed links being usurped for a while by a spam domain or similar in the past? I confess I didn't see any warnings myself, but if I've overlooked something it'd be great to have it pointed out. [[User:Laeredis|Laeredis]] ([[User talk:Laeredis|talk]]) 16:49, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
::I use twinkle, and have meta reader for hidden tags, which most editors don't see. [[User:Govvy|Govvy]] ([[User talk:Govvy|talk]]) 18:40, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
::{{reply|Laeredis}} If you're interested, if you try an undo on your edit on the talk page. You might see you can't add the bot posts back. [[User:Govvy|Govvy]] ([[User talk:Govvy|talk]]) 18:43, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
:I think the answer to your question is at [[Wikipedia:Archive.today guidance]].  Note that archive.<u>org</u> is not the same as archive.<u>today</u>.
:Also, removing those messages after checking to see whether the bot's edit was correct is a good thing to do.  Thanks for doing that, Laeredis.  [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 23:03, 15 March 2026 (UTC)