Difference between revisions of "Talk:Longest list of atheist URLs ever!"
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| − | 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... | + | 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]]. | 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]]. | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
<after checking the link> Totally unrelated crap. I recommend deleting it and checking out whoever added it (in the [[page history]], i.e. the [[View history]] link on the 'Longest list...' page). I put a [[nowiki]] tag around the link above, so it won't actually render the [[URL]]. Looks like [[spam]] to me. [[Interrobang|‽]] [[User:Wonderist|Wonderist]] <small>''([[User_talk:Wonderist|talk]])''</small> 20:00, 30 October 2011 (UTC) | <after checking the link> Totally unrelated crap. I recommend deleting it and checking out whoever added it (in the [[page history]], i.e. the [[View history]] link on the 'Longest list...' page). I put a [[nowiki]] tag around the link above, so it won't actually render the [[URL]]. Looks like [[spam]] to me. [[Interrobang|‽]] [[User:Wonderist|Wonderist]] <small>''([[User_talk:Wonderist|talk]])''</small> 20:00, 30 October 2011 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Hold on. That first post on the [[I Am Skeptic!]] site is unintentionally deceptive. It's actually a screenshot of a [[homeopathy]] site, but because the screenshot takes up the whole beginning of the post, and looks like a blog post itself, it makes the entire [[I Am Skeptic!]] site look like a homeopathy site pretending to be 'skeptic'. I amend my previous opinion that it is [[spam]]. I read the whole post. The guy's a skeptic. [[Interrobang|‽]] [[User:Wonderist|Wonderist]] <small>''([[User_talk:Wonderist|talk]])''</small> 20:06, 30 October 2011 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 20:06, 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)
<after checking the link> Totally unrelated crap. I recommend deleting it and checking out whoever added it (in the page history, i.e. the View history link on the 'Longest list...' page). I put a nowiki tag around the link above, so it won't actually render the URL. Looks like spam to me. ‽ Wonderist (talk) 20:00, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Hold on. That first post on the I Am Skeptic! site is unintentionally deceptive. It's actually a screenshot of a homeopathy site, but because the screenshot takes up the whole beginning of the post, and looks like a blog post itself, it makes the entire I Am Skeptic! site look like a homeopathy site pretending to be 'skeptic'. I amend my previous opinion that it is spam. I read the whole post. The guy's a skeptic. ‽ Wonderist (talk) 20:06, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
