Talk:Haig's Law

Is this 'law' more a case of confirmation bias? AMassiveGay (talk) 17:37, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Funny, but if this were true wouldn't that mean almost everyone who had a Myspace page was insane? Or does that not count because that is just social media? ^{— Unsigned, by: 97.99.14.9 / talk / contribs}

1. As the others point out, this should be a "Fun:" article. 2. Unfortunately, "remember you are an alien!"'s old URL appears to now be home to a much less geocities-esque religious website. ^{— Unsigned, by: 71.55.186.5 / talk / contribs}

This doesn't make sense!

There are many people that are bad at web development but are also very knowledgeable people, especially people from the older generation. Also, some people just haven't really learned web design. If my website were to be judged according to this rule, then I would be a crazy, insane person, just because I'm bad at web design! Also, many programs do have a dated appearance (such as Audacity), but they are very well-designed. Also, some POV-pushers can have a lot of money and resources to design a good website, such as the people at Answers in Genesis with their misinterpreted literal interpretation of Genesis. Félix An (talk) 23:56, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

There are not many references to this "law" on the Internet. It's outdated at best. It was coined in 2012 by an ex-Conservapedia sysop who also happened to be a Rationalwiki member (now retired). Tools like Wordpress that allow anyone to halfass a decent layout were relatively new, and the number of people trained as web developers was much lower then. Hell even without fancy stuff and Wordpress assistance, these days it's possible to throw something reasonable looking together real quickly just by using a style sheet package like Bootstrap. In the HTML 1.0 days of the Internet, this was not possible. You had to know HTML tags and know how to use them. I kind of feel like this "law", if it is relevant in any way, was mostly relevant when the Internet was new in the late 1990s to early 2000s. The law does not apply very well to present times. I can certainly name a ton of crazy spouting sites with slick presentations these days. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 01:05, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Please move this article to Fun:Haig's Law

As per reasons above. Félix An (talk) 15:38, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Dead links

Many pages listed seem to be at the time of this writing, dead. One example of this is the Richard Hoagland's Mars Tidal Model essay. I would suggest either finding new, more relevant examples, rewrite the article entirely or replace the dead links with the earliest correct archived source, e.g. in the case of the Mars essay, that would be https://web.archive.org/web/20030211010316/http://www.enterprisemission.com:80/tides.htm as it retains the original formatting while showing the images. Also on that note the Mars essay looks like it had it's CSS cleaned up in late 2015 (see here). 49.2.202.72 (talk) 08:00, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

What about Rationalwiki?

Not to disrespect the site (which I enthusiastically support), but it’s one of the few quality websites I’ve found that doesn’t have a mobile reader mode, allowing for text to be reformatted based on screen size. Srkbear (talk) 04:30, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Quackwatch and Nizkor Project

I actually preferred the classical designs for those two sites. Carthage (talk) 15:08, 21 June 2024 (UTC)