3 ms·
WebCite [1] was built for this in the past, but using archive.org is a better idea nowadays. Save a copy of the webpage to the archive if it doesn't already exi
by notRobot 5y ago
WebCite [1] was built for this in the past, but using archive.org is a better idea nowadays. Save a copy of the webpage to the archive if it doesn't already exist and link to it.
Has the added advantage that anyone who goes to the link sees exactly what you saw when you linked to it, with no modifications.
[1]: https://www.webcitation.org/ https://www.webcitation.org/
- cxr 5y ago"Perma.cc helps scholars and courts create permalinks of the web sites they cite" <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10948033 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10948033>
- bryanrasmussen 5y agoI think a service like webcitation is better because 1. Archive.org follows robots.txt rules - also used to remove content on request from owners (not sure if still do but I suppose they do) making it less sure than webcitation. 2. webcitation could also provide other services like - export citations for book or collections of books into one book of citations. 3. Similar citations tracking stuff that you can get on google scholare, how many other publications were citing this text or part of this website. on edit: obviously this is if webcitation or a similar service was still a going concern, pragmatically yes archive.org is better because functioning and taking new content to archive.
- notRobot 5y agoThe only reason I recommneded archive.org is that webcite is no longer taking submissions, and their HTTPS cert has expired. Other than that, I agree with you.