Talk:List of Senegalese writers

Africa: Senegal Top‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Senegal portal This article is supported by WikiProject Senegal (assessed as Top-importance).

This article was nominated for deletion on June 18, 2006. The result of the discussion was Keep.

I'm going to try to do some work on this as I've read a bit of Senegalese fiction in my African classes. However I'm a bit blahh today so it might be next week that I start.--T. Anthony 23:10, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Red links[edit]

Dealing with existing red links

In general, red links should not be removed from articles if they link to something that could plausibly sustain an article. An existing red link can indicate that a new article is needed. At any time, a Wikipedian may independently write an article on the linked-to subject, and when this happens, there's already a link ready and waiting for it. The red link also gives readers the opportunity to click on it to create the needed article on the spot.
In topic/author lists, it is useful to include every topic/author you can possibly find or think of that could plausibly sustain an article. When they are turned into links, the list immediately shows where the gaps in Wikipedia's coverage for that subject are, since all of the topics missing articles will show up in red. Such lists are useful tools in developing subject areas on Wikipedia, as they show where work is needed most.
The red link may identify a need to create a redirect to another author.
Some WikiProjects have bots that determine how many times a certain red link appears in Wikipedia. This is used to determine what articles are the most needed. Editors can also, after clicking on a red link, use the "what links here" function to determine how many times the subject has been red linked.S711 (talk) 13:09, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- We have the same arguement on other talk pages, again I say, I remove red linked names from lists because they are unverifiable, and a Wiki Article thus verifies them. Please remember this is an encyclopaedia that not everyone is just using to edit, but will be used for study, research and knowledge. If there are red link names, they are not useful. What if there is a red link name dkhdhd jhfmhfd or how about Mickey Mooouse in a list, do we leave these names? This makes a mockery of the Wikipedia and makes it a dream for vandals. Who vets red link names in lists? Only a Wiki article, backed by References makes for a solid encyclopaedia. My aim is not to make a mass of pointless edits, but to help, along with others, in making for a sound useful Wikipedia. I do not claim I am right and others are wrong, but I have explained my actions. --BSTemple (talk) 16:54, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of Senegalese writers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:43, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]