Talk:SGU Episode 3

It's my opinion that think link in the page to the Discovery Institute should be to Wikipedia and not to the institute's web site itself. Perhaps that link should be at the bottom of the page or section? I am going to change it.

from http://www.discovery.org/ to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_Institute

Any opinions? Bshirley (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing the proof-reading for this episode, and welcome, Bshirley! We don't really have an authoritative guide for what should be linked, what site to link to, etc. Someone had once suggested using "nofollow" for links to pseudoscience sites, but I think the MediaWiki software doesn't support that. The Wiki link for Discovery should be just as good. -- Av8rmike (talk) 05:14, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I tend to favour wikipedia links myself. However, by default, rel="nofollow" is added to all external links, so linking to pseudo-science websites won't give them a leg-up in the search rankings.  It is possible to explicitly whitelist certain sites, which means that rel="nofollow" is not applied to these.  The list of sites we currently have set up this way is: wikipedia.org, theskepticsguide.org, sguforums.com, theness.com and skepchick.org.  Let me know if you think any other sites should be added to this list. --Rwh86 (talk) 15:41, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Heh, I guess I could have looked into the page source before speaking up. Thanks for clarifying! -- Av8rmike (talk) 03:33, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

I subdivided the interview into the salient discussions they had. Seems like a good idea. Of course, after listening to it, I didn't have the time references easily accessible to me. Bshirley (talk) 03:03, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I really like this idea, and have gone through and added the timestamps. I think I'm going to do some subdivisions on future transcripts that I do too. :) --Rwh86 (talk) 15:55, 28 November 2012 (UTC)