Also can be abbreviated as wp:minupg and that's now the primary page on that active subject

Immediately below is my initial statement of what I guess I'll still call a 'proto-policy' on the subject and two subsequent refinements:

I have taken to upgrading naked urls minimally by linking to the web site that's embedded in the url, for instance here where <ref>http://www.bop.gov/locations[.. ].jsp</ref> became <ref>[http://www.bop.gov/locations[...].jsp ''bop.gov'']</ref> --> bop.gov. It's not as much as I'd like but it looks better on the finished page and maybe will (a) prompt naked-url editors to rethink or (b) encourage other editors to go the next steps to full citations. For what it's worth, I learned a bit on the overall subject and got endorsement for my current "minimal upgrade" program here. (May switch to "bare" terminology and link to this article in future to further the education goal of my effort.) I'm of course still open to opinion on whether my effort is counter-productive in any way. Swliv (talk) 15:06, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I've used this a fair amount in 'first round' cleanups. I am considering Wikipedia:Bare URLs Minimal upgrades and WP:minupg to simplify citation of this proto- (at least) policy in the Edit summary. Of course I'm still always open to comment and/or suggestion. Swliv (talk) 12:52, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Minupg or WP:minupg, either/or, are up and running, working nicely as for example here. There's probably use for more of a 'presentation' but it's not likely for now. The main functional links remain here and as outlined above. Swliv (talk) 16:12, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

The proto-policy was originally posted here.

Today, besides establishing this as a freestanding page, I'm augmenting the proto-policy as follows:

A) Sometimes naked URLs are enclosed in single brackets -- [http://www....]. That translates in the footnote to a single numeral '1' in brackets -- [1] -- for the first such on the page, second to '2' et c. For purposes of this proto-policy, such a citation will be considered 'naked' and when possible minimally upgraded accordingly.

B) If there's a date embedded in the URL a minimal upgrade can include that date in the footnote.

A recent example of these two augmentations are here.

Any thoughts on the proto-policy please post on Talk. Thanks. Swliv (talk) 16:42, 8 April 2015 (UTC)