Difference between revisions of "Talk:Longest list of atheist URLs ever!"
m (moved Talk:Longest list of atheist URLS ever! to Talk:Longest list of atheist URLs ever!: misspelling of URLs; was URLS) |
(Answer to notability discussion) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | |||
== Notability discussion == | == Notability discussion == | ||
This site seems like a site that has created a lot of content for atheism but cluttered with google page ranking attempts to increase medicine companies. Homeopathic no less... http://iamskeptic.com/ I propose it's not worthy. Anyone agree? Keep in mind if you link to spam it makes your site power go down, and hinders us from increasing the google worth of all atheists. --[[User:Brian|Brian]] 18:51, 30 October 2011 (UTC) | This site seems like a site that has created a lot of content for atheism but cluttered with google page ranking attempts to increase medicine companies. Homeopathic no less... http://iamskeptic.com/ I propose it's not worthy. Anyone agree? Keep in mind if you link to spam it makes your site power go down, and hinders us from increasing the google worth of all atheists. --[[User:Brian|Brian]] 18:51, 30 October 2011 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I think all links on this particular page should be specifically [[atheism-related]], as in they specifically talk about or endorse an [[atheist]]ic [[worldview]]. I've added a more general [[:Category:Resource]] category for [[useful resources]] not specifically [[atheism-related]]. Thanks to [[ex-minister]] for the [[suggestion]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Unless 'iamskeptic' is specifically pro-atheism, I think they should belong on a separate page. Perhaps they can have a page which has [[:Category:Resource]] and [[:Category:Skeptic]]. That should allow them to participate here legitimately without diluting the purpose of this particular [[atheist URL]] list. [[Interrobang|‽]] [[User:Wonderist|Wonderist]] <small>''([[User_talk:Wonderist|talk]])''</small> 19:45, 30 October 2011 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 19:45, 30 October 2011
Notability discussion
This site seems like a site that has created a lot of content for atheism but cluttered with google page ranking attempts to increase medicine companies. Homeopathic no less... http://iamskeptic.com/ I propose it's not worthy. Anyone agree? Keep in mind if you link to spam it makes your site power go down, and hinders us from increasing the google worth of all atheists. --Brian 18:51, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
I think all links on this particular page should be specifically atheism-related, as in they specifically talk about or endorse an atheistic worldview. I've added a more general Category:Resource category for useful resources not specifically atheism-related. Thanks to ex-minister for the suggestion.
Unless 'iamskeptic' is specifically pro-atheism, I think they should belong on a separate page. Perhaps they can have a page which has Category:Resource and Category:Skeptic. That should allow them to participate here legitimately without diluting the purpose of this particular atheist URL list. ‽ Wonderist (talk) 19:45, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
