This page is a warning against link madness. An example of the problem is the following hypothetical sentence on a Wikipedia article:
There's no word that on arbitrary grounds could be excluded from Wikipedia. Ha!
It is heartening to see it happening for instance on w:Acronym/Medical List
This demonstrates that NPOV = -NPOV that the word "be" might be considered by some to be more than an informative reference, while others might choose the "to be or not to be" segmentation as a nice spot to jump to the full text..
|"Hypertext makes a virtue out of lack of organization, allowing ideas and thoughts to be juxtaposed at will. [...] The advent of hypertext is apt to make writing much more difficult, not easier. Good writing, that is." |
—Donald Norman, The Design of Everyday Things
Which is correct? and in what context. One would perhaps be disposed to consider the "world as we know it" to be the full context and hence people might be more "in need" of the reference for "be" than the quote "t.b.o.n.t.b"
How should such things ultimately be weighed?
Note: the question of how to segment.