A link is still valuable because it shows where the writer of the publication accessed the information. Yes, it might be deleted, but it might be possible to retrieve a copy of what was at that URL, or it might be discovered someone keeps a record of an alternate location of the content that was at that URL, or at least the revieer can verify that a valid-looking URL as cited if no other evidence can be found. A citation is supposed to supply a lot of information to make research easier.
For this reason (and others) I vastly prefer the APA's standard which would certainly require the URL, and would put the tweet text in as the title unambiguously as Twitter's site is structured that way. Thankfully the APA is still the gold standard so hopefully not many will be citing tweets in the MLA's useless way.
For this reason (and others) I vastly prefer the APA's standard which would certainly require the URL, and would put the tweet text in as the title unambiguously as Twitter's site is structured that way. Thankfully the APA is still the gold standard so hopefully not many will be citing tweets in the MLA's useless way.