Wikipedia talk:Digital Object Identifier

Wiki doi is a covert advertising instrument
For a discussion of what is in my view a gross violation of our core principle NOTADVERTISING, please see HERE. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 11:47, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Interesting read now archived at Template talk:Citation/Archive 4. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:01, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Good comments by User:Anthonyhcole, who confirmed the issue, and User:Gun Powder Ma, who raised the issue.  It's a pity we still don't have the bot User:Rjwilmsi proposed that adds free-access URLs to for any DOI citation where such content available for free.  Annoyingly,   produces a doi.org link that redirects here - a commercial site that does a really shitty job of indicating that the full article is available for free: Even if, after going there, I click on "Rights and Permissions" and fill out a form, the fact that the content is free is still hidden from me!  How misleading! By contrast, following  I see "FREE", in red, alerts me to the status, and even better, at   we find the whole article and the license.  We shouldn't be directing people the way we do as if this drawback doesn't exist. I added a citation somewhere to the above-cited article, and when I went back to look at the article again, using the citation I'd added, was angered when I found the citation I'd added was directing me at a sleazy, misleading paywall. I edited accordingly. -- Elvey (t•c) 01:31, 13 October 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't think we should use DOI when it links to a paywalled version of an open access page. I added this to this project page. Mikael Häggström (talk) 05:14, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

wikilinking "doi" in the citation is annoying
We end up with blue next to blue. A wiklink next to an external one. And "doi" getting wikilinked a bazillion times. TCO (talk) 09:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)