5

Reviewing the suggested edit queue, I bumped into a question where a user replaced one of the links because the former one was broken. However, as it already was broken (and out of Google's cache), I couldn't verify if the new link is a valid replacement for the first one, so I rejected the edit.

I was looking here on meta for a policy towards broken links, and also on StackExchange meta, where I found this. However, this only talks about StackOverflow.

Is the same procedure valid on SuperUser as well? I mean:

  • Is it ok trying to find a link replacement and edit the question if possible?
  • Should we provide the link as a comment?
  • 2
    It's fine to fix broken links. Just make sure you complete the edit summary to say "Fixed broken link" ;) – DavidPostill Dec 31 '15 at 13:43
  • And what about suggested edits where we cannot confirm that the new links are analogous to the broken ones? Should we skip, reject them? – nKn Dec 31 '15 at 13:47
  • 1
    If the replacement is also broken then reject the edit. I would select "causes harm - replacement link also broken" – DavidPostill Dec 31 '15 at 13:49
12

If you can find what's definitely the (or a) correct link, it's fine to go ahead and fix it. If you can't find it on the Internet Archive or Google, and it seems correct enough and posted with good intentions, better that than a broken link IMO. The person who posted the posted the post can always fix it in the future.

If it's a link only answer, flag it, and we'll make it go away.

  • 13
    Conversely, if the user is editing in a spam link then flag it and we'll make them go away. – Mokubai Dec 31 '15 at 15:14

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .