This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin 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.WisconsinWikipedia:WikiProject WisconsinTemplate:WikiProject WisconsinWisconsin
As per WP:ELBURDEN, disputed external links should be exclude unless and until there is a consensus to include them. The only rationale provided for inclusion thus far is that it is a source for the subject's middle name, but External links are not citations, and an alternative source has already been provided. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:58, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Given your history of drive-by edits to solely remove FAG templates without actually making improvements to articles, this seems like WP:IDL rather than constructive editing. Adding a source that simply redirects to a login was not useful. I have restored the external link and added a comment following the instructions here. Per WP:ELBURDEN, including this external link is justifiable in the opinion of at least one editor of this article. I suggest that you address the dispute about the link through the normal dispute-resolution process, particularly at the external links noticeboard. Doremo (talk) 03:23, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ELBURDEN indicates that disputed external links should be excluded by default unless and until there is a consensus to include them. At this point there is not, and as such your restoration is inappropriate. Your instructions indicate that if all material is sourced to reliable sources then a link should not be added, which is the case here - the fact that a particular source requires login does not impact reliability. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:16, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The linked instructions state that "This allows people to check your facts," which is a good thing and is useful for WP. The link hidden behind a paywall does not allow anyone to check anything; there is no evidence that it even goes to a relevant image. Doremo (talk) 14:58, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As indicated at WP:PAYWALL, the fact that there is a login requirement does not in itself allow for a source to be rejected. You're welcome to request a copy at WP:RX so you can see for yourself what the image shows. Further, footnote #2 also includes the middle name; you added that source yourself so I assume you can confirm what it says. Either way, this information is well sourced without the disputed external link. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:44, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
