Category talk:All articles with bare URLs for citations

Backlog articles
The backlog articles List of Internet exchange points and List of pipeline accidents in the United States in the 21st century are very difficult if not impossible to correct, because the two tools seem to be incapable of performing on these articles. Perhaps some linkrot URLs might be done by hand. What do other editors suggest?--DThomsen8 (talk) 20:31, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Tags for this category
The tag is applied by the gadget Twinkle.

The category page says This category includes all pages marked as needing link rot cleanup by.

Apparently, both tags have the desired effect of placing articles in the category, but perhaps the category page should include the Twinkle tag. What do other editors advise?--Dthomsen8 (talk) 03:22, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

BARE URLs, HATnotes as HATEnotes: IMO vs. IMHO
Having incrementally handled --still a bit more left as of this writing -- an article with more than just a dozen or so BARE URLs (it just seems to be the style of whoever made it to use BARE URLs ..  see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Visa_policy_of_Russia&action=history [Nov.'22]), I'd say that it's a YELLOW version of what I sometimes think about ORANGE hatnotes, and have been tempted to think of as HATEnotes, as if to say "some admin-type person hates this article as it appears, and wants to frighten some readers to not trust what it says). As a step forward, perhaps HIDE all of these notes, since to a casual reader, it's saying, IMO (I could have said IMHO, but obviously these words are not written with a sense of being THAT humble) "don't trust this article's content. If someone often sees these hatnotes, it may just be that Wiki will be viewed, despite the automated watch tools, as not worth reading, and that would be a loss. 'Nuf said (at least for now). Nuts240 (talk) 07:09, 20 November 2022 (UTC)