Consumer Rights Wiki:Tools for writing articles: Difference between revisions

Fixing issue raised on talk page.
 
(12 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 156: Line 156:
#*Double-check that the citation is correctly formatted and supports the intended claim.
#*Double-check that the citation is correctly formatted and supports the intended claim.
#*Save your changes once you're satisfied.
#*Save your changes once you're satisfied.
===Archived citations===
{{Main|Projects:Archive everything}}
To maintain verifiability for our articles, archiving these citations are crucial in case websites go offline temporarily or permanently (also known as {{Wplink|link rot}}). Here are resources for archiving websites yourself or acquiring past archives:
*[https://archive.org WayBack Machine (archive.org)] - The most used and trustworthy resource for website archives.
**Websites retain interactable aspects
**Some websites such as [[X]] cannot be archived by this resource, or are [[List of companies that block Internet Archive|specifically excluded]] (''e.g.'' [[Bambu Lab]])
**Honors [[DMCA]] take-down requests (see [[Internet Archive#Archived website removal]])
*[https://ghostarchive.org/ Ghost Archive (ghostarchive.org)] - An English alternative.
**Can archive nitter.net URLs to archive Twitter/X posts with comments included.
*[https://megalodon.jp/ megalodon.jp] - A Japanese alternative. Some web browsers, such as [[Mozilla Firefox]], have a built-in web page translation function
**May have a better result if experiencing trouble with both the Wayback Machine and Ghost Archive.
*[https://preservetube.com/ PreserveTube (preservetube.com)] – Used for archiving YouTube videos
**While the WayBack Machine might have some older videos archived, that is often not the case for newer and larger sized videos.
*[https://webarchive.nla.gov.au/collection Australian Web Archive] - For Australian websites specifically.
'''IMPORTANT:''' Archive.today is no longer used for archiving due to its owner {{Wplink|Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Archive.is RFC 5|weaponizing the website}} against a blog writer, which involved exploiting unknowing users to initiate {{Wplink|DDoS}} attacks and editing the content of archived pages.


----
----