Talk:Linkback

Tidying up

There are three types of Linkbacks - Pingbacks, Refbacks, and Trackbacks. Here in Wikipedia, only two were referenced, and there was no article for Linkbacks in General. I created an additional article to represent all three, added some missing material for the two that were in existence, and created the parent article, Linkback.

I propose that we merge Pingback, Refback, and Trackback into a Linkback article, with redirects from each to the Linkback article.

What's your opinion? - Mugs 11:40, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Major cleanup

The three types of Linkback are now compared side-by-side in a table. I have corrected a number of errors, eliminated some repetition, and added more detailed information on each of the three methods the better to exhibit their differences. I have also eliminated some paragraphs that restated more colloquial usages without identifying them as such. I have not propagated any of these changes to the other three articles, as I prefer to wait to see how the changes here are received first.

My opinion is that the separate articles devoted to the three methods would still be useful, as this table setup does not lend itself well to a more encyclopedic treatment of any of the three. Another possibility would be separate sections for each, after the general discussion, within this article, with subsections: overview, nuts-and-bolts, advantages, disadvantages, vulnerabilities, and so on.

Clayton D. Jones 08:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding pingback being less susceptible to spamming, I added a citation needed for that, as I think it's an important point and a major strength of pingback. Davedx (talk) 09:52, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For Dummies...

I have a small page where I give a link to a few articles that I have put on arxiv over the years. Is there a way that I can notify arxiv that my page exists? Alain Michaud 18:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]