I noticed that post #21508 has this as its source:
https://d.furaffinity.net/art/ivybeth/1208462194.ivybeth_ovycharactersheet2008.png

However, clicking on that link does nothing. Only through searching for the original image manually on FA can you find this link:
https://d.facdn.net/art/ivybeth/1208462194/1208462194.ivybeth_ovycharactersheet2008.png

I take it that FA has changed their URL format over the years, so the previous one is outdated to the point that it doesn't just redirect to the new one. However, these two links are quite similar, and I can imagine a bot that goes through posts with the old format and updates it to the new one. But this does beget the question, is there a reason to add the image host link as the source rather than just the FA post itself?
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/1230509/

So, which does this site prefer, the image host or the post itself?

Both, ideally you would want (1) source post link, (2) gallery link, and (3) direct image link.

Including the source post link would allow for people to fav/bookmark the original post.
Including the gallery link would allow for people to find the artist, should the original post be deleted (from the source).
Including the direct image link would indicate where this image was taken from, and also as a preview for what the post was before it was deleted (from e6).

notuncommon said:But this does beg the question, is there a reason to add the image host link as the source rather than just the FA post itself?
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/1230509/

So, which does this site prefer, the image host or the post itself?

When you provide a direct image URL as the image when posting, rather than uploading a file from your system, the direct image link is automatically added as a source (and depending on the site, it can try to derive other relevant source URLs from the given image URL). It's generally good to provide the FA post as a source as well, as it helps users discover more of that artist's work that may not be here.

thegreatwolfgang said:

watsit said:

Thanks to you both!
I like that you've made arguments for why each link should be added, thegreatwolfgang. Though, given the artist is tagged, would you consider it acceptable to not include the gallery link? Especially if the artist has their gallery already on their wiki page?
I'll try to source images accordingly from now on.

notuncommon said:
Thanks to you both!
I like that you've made arguments for why each link should be added, thegreatwolfgang. Though, given the artist is tagged, would you consider it acceptable to not include the gallery link? Especially if the artist has their gallery already on their wiki page?
I'll try to source images accordingly from now on.

Sometimes, not all of the galleries are listed on the artist's wiki page, they could have different galleries for different content (i.e. SFW gallery, NSFW gallery, Kink gallery, etc).
It wouldn't hurt to include the gallery link since there are more slots for sources now (it was once limited to 5 links only).
It is also worth noting that the gallery link is automatically added when you direct-link upload the image (at least for FA).

notuncommon said:
But this does beg the question...

But this does beget the question...[/pedant jerk] ;p

notuncommon said:
Though, given the artist is tagged, would you consider it acceptable to not include the gallery link? Especially if the artist has their gallery already on their wiki page?

Actually, it's better to include the gallery link in an image's sources. Many users don't think to check the wiki, even if they know it's there, and having the gallery link right there on a picture's sources mean that an interested user doesn't have to search through all those images for those ones that do include the gallery link (assuming any do). The fewer clicks needed to get to the gallery, the better.