RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/RationalWiki:Webshites

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

RationalWiki:Webshites | Result: Keep (but needs pruning and cleanup)[edit]

RationalWiki:Webshites (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View log)


  1. A giant link farm of uncurated websites does not further RationalWiki's mission.
    RationalWiki shouldn't host pages that have dozens and dozens of unexplained links to obscure YouTube sites.
    If BONs and random RationalWikians want to add a link, they should be encouraged to use the to do list so they can tell us why a site deserves consideration and why they consider it missional.
    The pages could be cleaned up. First, remove all uncurated links with no description. Next, remove all links to sites with minimal or unhelpful descriptions. What's left is a page that has a list of websites that we have an article on, or websites we should consider for making an article on. Remove the latter and put them in the to do list.
    Now all that's left is a portal for articles on the wiki grouped by major category, which duplicates portals we already have. Cosmikdebris (talk) 01:04, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  2. What C said. Nerd (talk) 01:28, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  3. Don't need a RW's Index Librorum Prohibitorum -Lankaster (talk) 23:42, 10 November 2018 (UTC)


  1. Keep but prune. An index of shitty sources is a good thing, especially if we don't have articles on them, but there must be some level of quality control. Obscure cranks are generally obscure for a reason. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 01:26, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  2. Per. It's counterproductive to delete a page filled with tons of sites that fit our missionality, and it can potentially be starting points for people who just feel like debunking. Some of these can grow popular in the future. Some of these serve to poison the reputation of good sites (such as Popular Technology or Left Exposed). I do believe there should be some curation of what sites go here. Wix sites, unless they get really, really popular for some reason, generally don't go here. Wikias probably shouldn't go here. Some sites do deserve less than an article but still a mention, and that's what this list should serve, and I don't see any harm for it. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 01:36, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  3. Per, on condition that we prune the list immediately after. RoninMacbeth (talk) 01:41, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
    Yes. As with the Youtuber purge, how do we proceed to purge the links? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 01:43, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
    @LeftyGreenMario We can start with the YouTube links. We can apply the same criteria to them that we used during the YouTube purge. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 01:47, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  4. Keep, could be a good resource. But jeez, clean-up needed. Badly. Looking through the Sexuality one... It needs work... Dendlai (talk) 02:08, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
    @Dendlai Homophobe #568... TERF #937... Yawn... ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 02:13, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  5. It's already been said. Keep but heavily prune. Any YouTube nobodies with fewer than a thousand subscribers should, of course, be the first to go. Spud (talk) 03:00, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  6. As above. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 05:33, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  7. These kind of pages just need a gardener to keep on top of the weeds. Avida Dollarsher again 13:01, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  8. James Earl Cash (talk) 00:59, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  9. I think that we should keep this page, but just drastically improve it. Remove pointless YT video links and links to insignificant webshites, and replace them with better webshites. Stalk meCircularREmail2.gifasoningSee what I've been messing around with 21:22, 11 November 2018 (UTC)