Talk:Gerbil

Untitled section

Link missing - www.egerbil.com Not only does it have the most up-to-date and expansive information on all gerbil and jird species, but it is possibly the only link on the gerbil page that will be free from any inaccuracies. I have attempted to place this link on the gerbil page twice only to have it removed.

Several of the other links displayed are out of date, promote unethical practices or are plainly innacurate. — This unsigned comment was added by 82.18.235.245 (talk • changes).

I am reading the website and checking the links on the article. Response in a few minutes. Griffinofwales (talk) 16:11, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Site approved. I have removed several other sites because we try to keep the number of external links to a minimum. Sorry about the warning. It looked like an ad. Griffinofwales (talk) 16:15, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks. — This unsigned comment was added by 82.18.235.245 (talk • changes).

Rvt by Griffin

• They're not sources. They're external links.
• We need to keep external links to a minimum, unless they're actually references.
• Many of those websites have not been updated for a while.

—MC8 (b · t) 16:41, Thursday August 13 2009 (UTC)

I think we should keep the association websites, and one or two others. You choose. Griffinofwales (talk) 16:44, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

http://www.gerbils.co.uk/ last update 2008

http://www.agsgerbils.org/ looks a bit iffy

http://thegerbils.com/ Identical to your egerbil one in most respects, we only need one version —MC8 (b · t) 16:49, Thursday August 13 2009 (UTC)

The association websites (IMO) should stay. They do have some info, and could be useful for gerbil enthusiasts. I agree with the removal of thegerbils.com. It has less info than the egerbils. com site. Griffinofwales (talk) 16:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC)