Deeplinks are based on editorial judgment. For this particular deeplink (having checked its edit history) there are, I think, good reasons for trusting the editor's judgment. Can you pick two or three deeplinks that you think are more questionable than this?
As to the more general question: the Consumer Information categories were originally built with the help of one particular site (we basically took their category structure and deeplinked it everywhere.) We've since gone back and trimmed some of THOSE deeplinks, as experience enabled us to get a better feel for what else was and would be on the net.
The "consumer information" categories form in their own way a unique challenge. On the one hand, there are large, reputable (or semi-reputable) sites with a breadth of content. On the other, there are small personal sites that provide genuine (enthusiastic but idiosyncratic) perspective.
And, lastly, underfoot there are the new generation of affiliate/doorway slimers -- zillions of impersonal, pseudonymous or anonymous sites consisting of Adsense ads or the like, filigred with dimly-understood regurgitated press releases and promotional material that would make Willy Loman blush. And the Consumer Information categories are their targets.
It is better to deeplink reputable or even semi-reputable sites, than to let the faux-informational spam sites in.
