Talk:Irwin Dambrot

Question about New York Times Obituary for Irwin Dambrot in References Section
The References Section contains one entry, which is supposed to be a link to Irwin Dambrot's obituary in the New York Times newspaper. Unfortunately, the link does NOT take you to the obituary. The link mistakenly takes you to the New York Times article on Wikipedia, which supplies no information about Dambrot. When you click on a link anywhere in Irwin Dambrot's article, you are supposed to be taken to information on Dambrot and not extraneous information.

I deleted the link, and I also deleted the References Section, because the Section was now empty. My edit was reversed on the grounds that a link should never be deleted. NEVER SAY NEVER. If you insist on keeping the link, the link should be changed so that it takes you directly to Irwin Dambrot's obituary and not somewhere else.

Also, I added a link to Irwin Dambrot's N.Y. Times Obituary in the External links Section. You don't need a second link to the same page in the References Section.

I suggest that the error in the References Section be corrected at your earliest convenience.

Anthony22 (talk) 15:29, 19 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, never say never when removing a References section, even if it is empty. Someone should come along and provide refs since no article should be unreferenced, which would then necessitate the section. Am I going to fill in refs or correct the existing one? No, because I don't feel like it. But it is 100% correct to never delete a ref section, even if it's empty. Jrcla2 (talk) 15:34, 19 November 2013 (UTC)