Talk:Longest list of atheist URLs ever!
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)
On even further review, the guy states on his about page that he's an atheist, and his discussion of agnosticism is legit. He calls himself and agnostic atheist, and defends it cogently.
- LOL, it's so funny that you thought my blog was a homeopathy sham site. I'll have to be more careful to not give the quacks or religious nuts such a big screenshot next time! (--Iamskeptic)
I would vote that it is fair, under the concept of Atheism United, to include his blog in the list, since at least two of the posts were about atheism, his about page mentions his atheism, he's got a blog category of Religion, he has links to the Out Campaign, etc. I think he's legitimately part of our vision. I'll post a comment on his blog about this confusion. He might be amused. :-) ‽ Wonderist (talk) 20:20, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Americo Centric
The list as it stands is essentially American. Each State appears twice (except DC for some reason), but not a single country has a list. Is that intentional? Os this list for US Atheists only? Please remember that there is a (Atheist) world outside your borders. (--Slugsie)
International will be expanded out when we have more international links. Post your links and we'll build out a place for international links. --Brian 13:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
To include or not to include
Hey gang, what are your thoughts about sites that are tagged as 'atheist' but when opened the information is a wide variety of subjects (Including Atheism) A few examples:
[http://www.edwardjayne.com/index.html Edward Jayne [[File:**Mr. Jayne has categories on his site titled Atheism, Secular history, and Skepticism ~ My first thought is placing it in "Atheism Awareness" category, what do you all think?
Edward Jayne writes about atheism on his site, he has a few articles. He's taken the time to put himself out there, he should be honored on our list. The freethought and rationalism site should make it on the grounds of freethought and rationalism. Anyone who is using a term that avoids the word atheist but we know are still atheists should be included. They should all be honored even if they choose to function outside of the confines of the word "atheist." --Brian 16:46, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
