 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
External links modified (February 2018)
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mofos. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160509080047/http://www.mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/manwin-isnt-buying-redtube-7916/ to http://www.mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/manwin-isnt-buying-redtube-7916/
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: 5 June 2024).
- 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) 11:48, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
Poor citations
editGreetings Wikipedians! I'm concerned about the statement "Regardless of any explicit themes, Mofos and its subsites are carefully run under the supervision of MindGeek so as to avoid all illegal activities.[1]" Two issues: 1) it's supported only by a citation to the company's own website; 2) apparently Mindgeek owns and operates Mofos, so they have a vested interest here. Therefore, they're not a reliable third party. When illegality is the topic, we have to be careful. Therefore, I have edited that sentence. The same concern applies to the earlier statement: "there are over twenty websites operating under the Mofos network." Cordially, BuzzWeiser196 (talk) BuzzWeiser196 (talk) 17:01, 3 January 2023 (UTC)