Timeline for Are answers that just contain links elsewhere really "good answers"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 14, 2023 at 19:54 | comment | added | Michael Freidgeim | A link alone is a bad answer , that deserved to be improved or downvote, but usually do not delete | |
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:31 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 23, 2014 at 13:35 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Fixup of bad MSO links to MSE links migration
|
|
| Apr 23, 2014 at 9:11 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Migration of MSO links to MSE links
|
|
| Jul 5, 2013 at 20:24 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by Shog9 | ||
| Jul 16, 2012 at 18:54 | comment | added | Chris Stratton | This depends on the link itself; sometimes they encode information in the url itself that will remain useful even if the target disappears. As a related issue, fancy formatting to hide the actual URLs can degrade answers, by removing such information - as well as attribution - sometimes present in the URL. | |
| Mar 30, 2012 at 16:42 | comment | added | Katie Kilian | Late to this party, but I wanted to add that if you're going to provide just a link because you want to be quicker about your answer, fine, but you should go ahead and edit the answer and provide more follow up. Best of both worlds. | |
| Feb 17, 2010 at 23:31 | comment | added | cregox | I think this is the biggest argument in favor of always including a summary with links. But that's not to say a link only answer should be overlooked. Sometimes a summary isn't doable or applicable. And even if it is, sometimes you just don't have the time to do it. Other times it's just not all that relevant to summarize every link - this depends on the whole context. | |
| Jul 22, 2009 at 20:12 | history | answered | tvanfosson | CC BY-SA 2.5 |