Jon:
Jayjg questions why I oppose linking to the
religioustolerance.org website,
citing an Alexa ranking of 10,000 to 11,000. Let me explain why.
I find your reasons not to be backed up by Wikipedia policy or practice.
External links in Wikipedia articles do not have to be "academic" or
even NPOV, they have to be on-topic and add value to an article. It's
perfectly fine to link to a blog if that blog posts articles exclusively
or primarily devoted to the topic of a Wikipedia article, and we have
frequently done so. Check out, as one example of thousands, the link
collection on [[Michael Moore]].
For an example of the kind of material
religioustolerance.org hosts, see
their useful and well-referenced collection of information on satanic
ritual abuse:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/sra_intro.htm (this is just one of
many pages devoted to the topic)
My main criticism would be that the site has become more
advertising-dependent than it used to be; this somewhat reduces its
value as a resource.
Where exactly did you remove links to religioustolerance.org?
Especially as this is the sort of thing we need
content arbitration for.
And that's exactly the reason I oppose content arbitration.
Best,
Erik