MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist

The Spam-whitelist page is used in conjunction with the Mediawiki SpamBlacklist extension, and lists strings of text that override Meta's blacklist and the local spam-blacklist. Any administrator can edit the spam whitelist. Please post comments to the appropriate section below: Proposed additions (web pages to unblock), Proposed removals (sites to reblock), or Troubleshooting and problems; read the messageboxes at the top of each section for an explanation. See also MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist.

Please enter your requests at the bottom of the Proposed additions to Whitelist section and not at the very bottom of the page. Sign your requests with four tildes: ~~~~

Also in your request, please include the following:

The link that you want whitelisted in the section title, like === example.com/help/index.php === .
The Wikipedia page on which you want to use the link
An explanation why it would be useful to the encyclopedia article proper
If the site you're requesting is listed at /Common requests, please include confirmation that you have read the reason why requests regarding the site are commonly denied and that you still desire to proceed with your request

Important: You must provide a full link to the specific web page you want to be whitelisted (leave out the http:// from the front; otherwise you will not be able to save your edit to this page). Requests quoting only a domain (i.e. ending in .com or similar with nothing after the / character) are likely to be denied. If you wish to have a site fully unblocked please visit the relevant section of MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist.

Note: Do not request links to be whitelisted where you can reasonably suspect that the material you want to link to is in violation of copyright (see WP:LINKVIO). Such requests will likely be summarily rejected.

There is no automated notification system in place for the results of requests, and you will not be notified when your request has a response. You should therefore add this page to your personal watch list, to your notifications through the subscribe feature, or check back here every few days to see if there is any progress on it; in particular, you should check whether administrators have raised any additional queries or expressed any concerns about the request, as failure to reply to these promptly will generally result in the request being denied.

Completed requests are archived, additions and removal are logged. →snippet for logging: {{/request|209017220#section_name}}

Note that requests from new or unregistered users are not usually considered.

Admins: Use seth's tool to search the spamlists.

Indicators
Request completed:
Done	{{Done}}
Stale	{{StaleIP}}
Request withdrawn	{{withdrawn}}
Request declined:
Declined	{{Declined}}
Not done	{{Notdone}}
Information:
Additional information needed	{{MoreInfo}}
Note:	{{TakeNote}}

Proposed additions to Whitelist (sites to unblock)

This section is for proposing that a website be whitelisted; add new entries at the bottom of this section. Please use the basic URL so that there is no link (google.ca, not http://www.google.ca). Completed requests will be marked with an appropriate Indicator then archived.

Instructions to requesters:

Explain why the site should be whitelisted.
Explain which articles would benefit from the addition of the link.
Provide the specific link to the page you're requesting be added.

If the above information is not provided expect your request to be declined.

technocracynet.eu

Ok, I'm not that familiar with this process, but I think this is where I'm supposed to ask this. The Website technocracynet.eu has been blacklisted for about 2 weeks now, and I'd like to get it unblocked. I'm not sure if you need just the main site or specific subpages, if those are needed I can provide them too.

The site is absolutely not spam or anything like that, it's the website of an organization called the "Network of European Technocrats", part of the Technocracy movement. Links to the site are needed (specifically in the Technocracy movement article) both to give references about the group and to link some vital source information needed for the article (which is currently not available anywhere else, to my knowledge). Namely this PDF document: technocracynet.eu/files/etsc1_3.pdf . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hibernian (talk • contribs) 02:52, 24 April 2008

Here's the blacklisting entry by Guy with his comment on the reason. I don't really understand what's going on with this one -- I've left a note for Guy. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:36, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Above user is involved in the dispute which led to blacklisting. The originators of this content require you to register in order to receive it [1]; primary sources are not necessary references (we'd need secondary sources to avoid original research). See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Network of European Technocrats for more information: user:Hibernian is associated with the linked site. Guy (Help!) 15:55, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I forgot to sign my last post, don't know how that happened, anyway. JzG, that's the second time you've accused me of being "associated" with NET, however I have stated on many occasions that I am not a member of that group, I want this unblocked not because I'm involved with the site (which I am not), but because I do sincerely believe that the article needs to have mention of the European movement and especially because it needs the study course. That link to technocracyinc.org is news to me, but I don't think it’s really an issue, I'm pretty sure they give it out upon request; you certainly don't need to register in any way. I mean I have the document on my computer because I simply asked them for it (and I'm not registered or anything). They seem to have chosen not to have it as a download on their site, but it's widely available, NET got it from a site called http://www.technocracy.ca/ , and they (NET) are the only ones I know of who offer it as a download usable on Wiki, I don't think there's any copyright issues, if that's what you're concerned about. BTW the article does have secondary sources, the Akin book etc, and I'm pretty sure that in this case a primary source such as this is not only acceptable, but highly desirable for the article. Even if the TSC becomes available elsewhere, blacklisting the NET site as "Spam" is simply not justifiable, it my be many things, but it is not spam. --Hibernian (talk) 01:02, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

aceshowbiz.com/celebrity/meagan_good

Hi! This link is of great importance. It mentions the ethnicity of actress Meagan good, which is difficult to find just like many other actors/actresses that are multiracial. This will provide more information to the article as well. The source is legit and not fan based therefore it is not biased. Thank You for your timeMcelite (talk) 15:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi has anyone noticed this my request?? To have this put on the whitelist so it can be used for the Meagan Good article?Mcelite (talk) 02:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The question here is about verifiability & reliablility. More information would be good, thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:02, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

www.strumpette.com

The following discussion is an archived report. Please do not modify it. Subsequent reports should be made in a new section.

Is there any intelligent reason why this influential public relations industry web site is blacklisted? It is a completely benign web site that is well-regarded by PR professionals. Can someone please unblock this? Thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 12:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be an Arbcom decision, of which you were informed about previously last June. Additionaly it appears to be a blog/forum which is a Link normally to be avoided. Would seem there are probably other Reliable and Verifiable alternatives available.

Declined--Hu12 (talk) 14:43, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Yes, I recall being told this last year. However, considering that Strumpette is a well-respected business trade web site, its blacklisting seems peculiar. How is it possible to revisit the decision keeping it off Wikipedia? Thank you. Ecoleetage (talk) 18:17, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The internet is full of good material, but Wikipedia is not a directory to that content. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - as such, many links do not belong here. Equally the MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist is not a place to whitelist domains against the wishes of Arbcom decisions. thank you--Hu12 (talk) 18:32, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator note. For the record, Confirmed strumpette.com employed bad faith use of Tor network open proxies and zombie computers To Spam Wikipedia.

Accounts

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

www.digitpress.com/reviews/tmek.htm

Why the site should be whitelisted:
I only request the specific link be whitelisted. This specific link has information valuable to the Wikipedia T-Mek article. It was lost by the last edit.
Explain which articles would benefit from the addition of the link:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-Mek
Ibjoe (talk) 06:19, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

www.squidoo.com

I'm not sure why this site is black listed though I suspect that it's because it's a type of link to be avoided as far as reliable third parties are concerned. That said, I think that at least on the page where the site is described, Squidoo there should be a link to the website. It's weird that an article about the website does not include a link to the site in question. So I am requesting a link to www.squidoo.com on the Squidoo article because an article about a site should include a link to the site. Lot49a (talk) 17:39, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

squidoo.com links

Have no editorial oversight (see WP:RS) and articles are essentially self-published
Fails Wikipedia's core content policies:

Declined I have whitelisted the homepage (www.squidoo.com/homepage/index.php) for the article Squidoo --Hu12 (talk) 18:28, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect! That's all that was needed. Thanks! Lot49a (talk) 04:01, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Tiny Life

Please whitelist www.lulu.com/content/1070691 for linking from Julian Dibbell. It is a link to the online PDF version of the book referenced from the article. Despite being on lulu.com, it is a republication of the published book, not a self-publication. Sanxiyn (talk) 00:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

mehfiltube DOT magnify DOT net

A website containing numerous videos of Mehfils, a rarefied type of classical Indian music performance taking place in intimate, elegant surroundings. It is similar to YouTube in that musicians and music enthusiasts may submit videos, but restricted to videos of mehfils. As such, its inclusion is most appropriate to presenting the most encyclopedic article about this subject. The link was just removed from the Mehfil article, leaving our users without access to actual videos showing this form of performance. Thank you for your consideration. Badagnani (talk) 19:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See WikiProject Spam report. and MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist Item. I would strongly caution against whitelisting the entire channel (mehfiltube.magnify.net), it was one of the the most pevasive violator of our anti-spam guidelines.

This seems to be a personal website with over 3000 videos, is this copyrighted material that would raise the concerns of possibly Linking to copyrighted works?
What specific link do you wish considered?
Are there reasonable alternatives availables?

If there are no reasonable alternatives available and no violations of copyright, Could provide a specific example to consider for whitelisting? thanks--Hu12 (talk) 20:59, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the site and the content appears to be hosted on a YouTube type model; the uploader is responsible for the ownership issues. See mehfiltube.magnify.net/help/faq. We link to lots of YouTube videos without vetting the copyright status of each video. Unless we have a good reason to suspect copyright violation, I don't think we have a burden to track the status down if we're just linking to it.

Assuming copyright is not an issue, I'm willing to whitelist a specific deep link for Badagnani but I need to know which one.

I wonder what's the best way to resolve the extent of our obligations on the copyright question? I am not a copyright expert.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BouzoukiDVD.com

1. I would like to request that you whitelist the BouzoukiDVD.com website. The website is dedicated to the niche Greek instrument called the Bouzouki. The website provides a comprehensive tutorial on the playability of this instrument. There is a section on respected bouzouki players worldwide along with a forum for discussions about related bouzouki topics.

2. Articles that would benefit from the addition of the link are: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouzouki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_music http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_culture

3. Specific link to be added: www.BouzoukiDVD.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.9.177.34 (talk) 13:58, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Appears 66.9.177.34 is the account responsible for the initial link additions, including moving own links "up" (not a sign of good faith). Here is an additional IP used to spam this link 67.176.161.20 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot).--Hu12 (talk) 14:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

www.amazon.com/gp/search?ie=UTF8&field-isbn=MAGICNUMBER&tag=wikipedia08-20

1. This Amazon URL includes an affiliate link that belongs to the Wikimedia Foundation. Some folks want to use this link as the URL that ISBN links refer to, through the externISBN userscript, in order to, as individuals, support the Wikimedia Foundation.

2. The pages that would be edited are Users' personal monobook.js pages.

Lunchboxhero (talk) 15:18, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That discussion seems quite old. Probably shouldent solicit vote stacking "Please add your support to having it whitelisted". I don't see an issue with this specific link.

Done--Hu12 (talk) 15:49, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Approved Requests

Declined Requests

xmail.net/evanlong/tcc/Columbine_Attack_Government_Document_Library.html

A listing of links to public domain government documents concerning the 1999 bombing/shooting at Columbine high School. Xmail.net has been blacklisted but is an e-mail service providing free web space like geocities.com Evan long account (talk) 16:32, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For an event like that I would imagine there were plenty of satisfactory alternatives? Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 13:02, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page is simply on a blacklisted hosting service (Xmail.net); that's why it won't post. Considering that the host has nothing to do with the content, that is an illogical approach to blacklisting. What would be more "satisfactory" about the same page on a different server? Please evaluate the request based on the content of the page. Evan long account (talk) 15:36, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hum - I have just noticed given the name of the page you require whitelisting & your user name that there might be a conflict of interest here. Wikipedia requires reliable sources too. The issue is not the content but whether than content can be gleaned from a better source (I realise you may not see it that way if you have an interest in the page). I'll step back & let others deal with this I think --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whomever is moderating these requests, Xmail.net has been blacklisted for reasons unknown. It is a free web hosting provider on which the users do not necessarily have anything to do with each other. This approach makes about as much sense as blacklisting all web sites registered by a particular pay site. I have requested a whitelisting for this page and received nothing but assumptions and insults from "Herby" for my efforts. Evan long account (talk) 20:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Declined. Personal pages are not a reliable source, citing yourself is bad practice, no attempt has been made to justify the link by reference to its content, relevance, authority or encyclopaedic merit. Guy (Help!) 20:53, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ARA Santísima Trinidad (1948)

I would request that the following link be unblocked for use in the article ARA Santísima Trinidad (1948). The link is to a photo of this ship taken in 1965, when she had the name Comodoro Augusto Lasserre (Q-9). In the photo, it is clear that she had been disarmed by this date. www.suite101.com/view_image.cfm/198319 --Toddy1 (talk) 18:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please also unblock the following articles, because they are useful as references:

naval-history.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_tacoma_class_frigates_pf03 The Tacoma Class Frigates PF-03, The Forgotten Expendables of The Navy, by Christopher Eger, 8 July 2007
naval-history.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_post_war_life_of_the_tacomas The Post War Life of the Tacomas, The Frigates of the PF-03 Class Served 14 Different Navies, by Christopher Eger, 9 July 2007

--Toddy1 (talk) 19:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Accepting that this probably isn't widely available information Wikipedia does requires reliable sources. Is this one & are there any alternatives? I know it has been a while - sorry - --Herby ^{talk thyme} 07:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other information in the article referenced above that I checked was accurate. The photo is particularly valuable, since you can tell a lot from a dated photo.--Toddy1 (talk) 03:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, here are links to numerous discussions of suite101.com and its spam and reliability problems. The earlier discussions contain the most useful comments; the later discussions are largely just repetitions of the early stuff:

Suite101.com is self-published material and not a reliable source.

Declined : links to text articles. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done -- link to image.

Thanks for your work on these naval topics. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:26, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I've assumed that even though this is suite101.com, an image is an image is an image. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:01, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for allowing the link to the image - however, when I tried to put the link in to the image, I hit the white list block. Help.--Toddy1 (talk) 17:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it was a typo on my part. Try again:

http://suite101.com/view_image.cfm/198319

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - it worked.--Toddy1 (talk) 20:14, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

petitiononline.com/RRH53888/petition.html

(Thread copied from Mediawiki talk:Spam Blacklist It's silly to block this site, it's needed for a reference in Uwe Boll#Online Petition. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 11:35, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In 99.9% (and maybe more) of the additions of these links are not appropriate (per WP:SOAPBOX). Specific cases should be whitelisted. Hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 11:37, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.petiti STUPID SPAM FILTER ononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?RRH53888 is needed for a citation, please whitelist it. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 12:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Defer to Whitelist --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 10:03, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 10:03, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a special case. A petition was explicitly referred to in this Guardian news article. Please read the section in the Uwe Boll article in question and whitelist the site. -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 01:58, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

seems http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,2271690,00.html solves the issue of having to whitelist.

Not done--Hu12 (talk) 02:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not link the petition referred to, and the article's information is already quickly becoming outdated (48,000 signatures referred to as opposed to the 214,211 signatures as of this edit). Seeing as it has been referred to by a notable source, why would it be taboo to provide a citation in the reference section to the updated petition itself? -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 03:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Never mind. It seems Dirk Beetstra already did whitelist the site. I saw the approval, but I ran into problems because I was trying to cite it as written in the section title and not as Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote exactly. I've added the citation in the reference section. Hope this is ok. Thanks a lot, Dirk. -- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 03:44, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Invisionfree

Please do not block a specific site in Invisionfree. It's a good site,it'a a forum about Monster Allergy that I only know. Please reply as soon as you read this. - Retsnom Adedekutsu (talk) 04:25, 14 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Retsnom Adedekutsu (talk • contribs) 04:22, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have to give us a little more information. What specific page do you want to use? --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be an SPA for Monster Allergy‎ related forums/chat links, which are all Links normally to be avoided

Not done--Hu12 (talk) 14:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-vetscor/1427139/posts

This page should be whitelisted because it contains valuable information about Soviet T-44 medium tank including memories of Soviet tank crew member who talks about vehicle's drawbacks, advantages and repair methods. - SuperTank17 (talk) 12:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are two issues with this: first, Free Republic is not a reliable source; second, it is pretty clear that not all that material originated on Free Republic, but there is no attribution and no acknowledgement of sourcing or permission. Freep has a historical problem with rampant copyright violation (see L. A. Times v. Free Republic), so we'd need to be sure we were not party to copyright infringement. Guy (Help!) 20:45, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Declined due to copyright concerns. Try Googling portions of the interview to see if you can find the original. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

bossanovamusic.net/en/5-bossa/index.html

The following discussion is an archived report. Please do not modify it. Subsequent reports should be made in a new section.

I'd like to ask you to whitelist the link bossanovamusic.net/en/5-bossa/index.html since it's very vital for Bossa Nova ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bossa_nova ) since this site contains informations and nice visual and audio illustrations not contained in other sites about this subject. Thank you! 78.142.160.178 (talk) 11:12, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the original blacklist request:

meta:Talk:Spam blacklist/2007-08#bossanovamusic.net

Typically, we do not remove domains from the spam blacklist in response to site-owners' requests. Instead, we de-blacklist sites when trusted, high-volume editors request the use of blacklisted links because of their encyclopaedic value in support of our encyclopaedia pages. If such an editor asks to use your links, I'm sure the request will be carefully considered and your links may well be removed.

The global blacklist is used by more than just our 700+ Wikimedia Foundation wikis (Wikipedias, Wiktionaries, etc.). All 3000+ Wikia wikis plus a substantial percentage of the 25,000+ unrelated wikis that run on our MediaWiki software have chosen to incorporate this blacklist in their own spam filtering. Each wiki has a local "whitelist" which overrides the global blacklist for that project only. Some of the non-Wikimedia sites may be interested in your links; by all means feel free to request local whitelisting on those.

Unlike Wikipedia, DMOZ is a web directory specifically designed to categorize and list all Internet sites; if you've not already gotten your sites listed there, I encourage you to do so -- it's a more appropriate venue for your links than our wikis. Their web address: http://www.dmoz.org/.

Declined --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:40, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't give one (!) reason why the website is unworthy to be used as ADDITIONAL link reference to the subject Bossa Nova, what you don't like on that website, etc. But actually I didn't expect you to do it anyway. PS: I'm not the owner of that website, but this won't interest you anyway since you didn't make the effort to analize the CONTENT of the information provided by that website. 78.142.160.178 (talk) 09:49, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly cross wiki spamming as evidenced above. Wikipedia's fundamental purpose is to create an encyclopedia of " content", the internet may be full of good material, but Wikipedia is not a directory to that content. Wikipedia is NOT a "repository of links". Please see the welcome page and Wikipedia:Civility.--Hu12 (talk) 10:06, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

becomingapua.com

Hi, it is currently blacklisted as I think a recall a person a while back trying to agreesively add a link to this on every single page that was vaguely related. As this is no longer going on at this is a site that could actually be used to build up additional info for articles on seduction it would greatly help if this was unblocked (you can see my history that I've been an editor for years and years without ever doing any spamming, so I'm obviously was not the cause of the original blacklisting)

I found just now again about the blacklisting as I was trying to add on an extra source to a page I'm just starting up again in my userspace about Savoy (to build it up first before I put it in mainspace, as currently it is a very very rough sub sub stub status) yet I would save the changes due to there already existing the becomingapua.com link in the page as a references from when I started off that page way back. Thanks. Mathmo ^Talk 06:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The owner of this site was serially spamming external links across two dozen articles, which had to be reverted hundreds of times. The domain was added to the AntiSpamBot, but the spammer started circumventing the bot by reverting and not adding the domain. Then it was blacklisted: original discussion here. When this domain and a redirect domain (bapua.com) were blocked, he started spamming with another redirected domain (becomingapickupartist.com). Discussion here. If the block is lifted, he'll probably be back as there have been additional spamming incidents involving this webmaster. Details here. The site is a blog, is not considered a reliable source, and should never be used for a biography of a living person. dissolve ^talk 06:53, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Declined --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:08, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

theatrehistory.suite101.com

Needed for a source for H.M. Tennent. Few other sources available. No clear reason for blacklisting. Neddyseagoon - talk 10:04, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

suite101.com links

Have no editorial oversight (see WP:RS) and articles are self-published
Offers its authors financial incentives to increase page views
Fails Wikipedia's core content policies:

Declined--Hu12 (talk) 07:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, here are links to numerous discussions of suite101.com and its spam and reliability problems. The earlier discussions contain the most useful comments; the later discussions are largely just repetitions of the early stuff:

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:18, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

petitiononline.com/sos02082/petition-sign.html

it s just a petition, like others! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.165.47.146 (talk) 20:52, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Declined. Wikipedia is not the place to drum up signatures on your petition. Guy (Help!) 20:46, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

kmle.com

1. Explain why the site should be whitelisted: I wish to fix the link to the site on the wikipedia article mentioning it.

2. Explain which articles would benefit from the addition of the link: KMLE Medical Dictionary

3. Provide the specific link to the page you're requesting be added:

www.kmle.com -> for the main site

www.kmle.com/dview.php?view=news1 -> for the reference section

Note: this site has been discussed at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#Proposed_removals— 123.108.165.108 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 06:23, 20 April 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Search aggregators are Links normally to be avoided. I'm not convinced how this could be used as as a citation, (in an appropriate context). Would seem there are other reasonable Reliable and Verifiable alternatives available. Along with kmle's extensive negative history, this is

Declined--Hu12 (talk) 06:42, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

repossession-stoppers.com

The following discussion is an archived report. Please do not modify it. Subsequent reports should be made in a new section.

I have tried to add a link to www.repossession-stoppers.com/repossession-law.htm but it says my site is blacklisted and I have had a message saying it isn't a relevant link. I am not sure why you say this, as this page contains all the legal terms explaining repossession law. It is the only page on the web which contains such an extensive list of these terms and their explanations. Why don't you want this on your page? At least if you don't want this page then aren't you limiting user help? as you don't provide this information yourself? I offered this link in good faith so if you don't want the link on page then at least please remove it from your blacklist. 86.148.230.154 (talk) 09:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Accounts used in repeated spamming

86.164.32.151 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)
86.153.61.63 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)
86.148.230.154 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)

Typically, we do not remove domains from the spam blacklist in response to site-owners' requests. Instead, we de-blacklist sites when trusted, high-volume editors request the use of blacklisted links because of their encyclopedic value in support of our encyclopedia pages.

Unlike Wikipedia, DMOZ is a web directory specifically designed to categorize and list all Internet sites; if you've not already gotten your sites listed there, I encourage you to do so -- it's a more appropriate venue for your links than our wikis. Their web address: http://www.dmoz.org/.

Declined--Hu12 (talk) 11:05, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did the site get blacklisted? Because the page has useful information on - I thought that was what you wanted? The page isnt spam! It is the only page on the web which listed all the definitions!! Anyway, if you do not want the link I would still appreciate it being removed from your blacklist as I do not want the site to be associated with spam. Thank you.— 86.148.230.154 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 12:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Here are the applicable rules:

SPAM
External links policy
- Links normally to be avoided
- Advertising and conflicts of interest
Conflict of interest
- Editors who have a conflict of interest
- Accounts used for promotion
What Wikipedia is not
Wikipedia:BLOCK#Disruption
- Persistent spamming
- Accounts that appear, based on their edit history, to exist for the sole or primary purpose of promoting a person, company, product, service, or organization in apparent violation of Conflict of interest or anti-spam guidelines.--Hu12 (talk) 13:23, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Domain:

repossession-stoppers.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

Please look at the warnings you were left on the talk pages of the three anonymous accounts you used (list above). The hyperlinks you were provided lead to the relevant content and editorial rules.

I'm surprised and concerned that you were still trying to add your links in spite of the earlier warnings.

I note we did not blacklist the other two domains spammed:

land-deals.co.uk: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
ologybusiness.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:45, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

komendant.cal.pl

As a speaker of Polish language I don't see anything violating our policies there at a quick glance, rather it is a portal dedicated to en:Józef Piłsudski and as such its addition to articles related to him is relatively relevant. It has been added by an anon to various language wikis that have entry on Piłsudski, which led to blacklisting it on meta.wikimedia.org. I was told that we have to whitelist it here as there are no sufficient grounds for removing it from meta, and my request for further explanation was simply archived - seems to me like some petty bureacratization, but here I am. Do note that the link was quickly whitelisted at pl wikipedia, within hours of being blacklisted on meta.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:24, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(be_wikipedia) 2008-04-05 10:51:56 -- http://komendant.cal.pl/ added to: [Юзэф Пілсудскі] by 212.182.107.222 -- diff
(simple_wikipedia) 2008-04-05 11:01:41 -- http://komendant.cal.pl/ added to: [Jozef Pilsudski] by 212.182.107.222 -- diff
(es_wikipedia) 2008-04-05 14:33:13 -- http://komendant.cal.pl/ added to: [Józef Piłsudski] by 212.182.107.222 -- diff
(fr_wikipedia) 2008-04-05 14:35:42 -- http://komendant.cal.pl/ added to: [Józef Piłsudski] by 212.182.107.222 -- diff
(it_wikipedia) 2008-04-05 14:36:36 -- http://komendant.cal.pl/ added to: [Józef Piłsudski] by 212.182.107.222 -- diff
(ru_wikipedia) 2008-04-05 14:40:07 -- http://komendant.cal.pl/ added to: [Пилсудский, Юзеф] by 212.182.107.222 -- diff
(uk_wikipedia) 2008-04-05 14:41:16 -- http://komendant.cal.pl/ added to: [Пілсудський Юзеф] by 212.182.107.222 -- diff
(en_wikipedia) 2008-03-02 01:24 -- http://komendant.cal.pl/ added to: [Józef Piłsudski] by 212.182.107.222 -- diff

Fails Wikipedia:El#Non-English_language_content. I don't see any reason or use for this link here. There seems to be no need to open the english wikipedia up to a comfirmed spamlink. sorry.

Not done--Hu12 (talk) 22:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

myresistor.com

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

My website (myresistor.com) has been blacklisted as I tried to add an external link to it in the [Resistor] page. For an unknown reason, the contributer User A1 thought it was a spam link and undone my update. I have talked to the contributer [User Talk] and he agreed to put the link back but he also was not able to do so because the website has already been blacklisted. The website offers a resistor color code calculator better than the one which is currently linked to in the external links section. This calculator has been designed based on the information in the wiki page, unlike others. It also supports 4-band and 5-band resistor color codes which is not supported in other online calculators. I would really apreciate it if you can remove the website from the blacklist so I can link to again.

Thanks --Imarzouka (talk) 11:53, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also spamming

Adsense pub-2941481051944299

myresistor.com

Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

Cross wiki spamming myresistor.com

86.108.40.209 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)
86.108.122.69 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)
http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciel:Bidrag/86.108.122.69
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Beitr%C3%A4ge/86.108.122.69
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/86.108.122.69
http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/86.108.122.69
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciale:Contributi/86.108.122.69
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciaal:Bijdragen/86.108.122.69
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specjalna:Wk%C5%82ad/86.108.122.69

ledcalculator.net

Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

Cross wiki spamming ledcalculator.net

May want to review;

We do not remove domains from the spam blacklist in response to site-owners' requests. Instead, we whitelist sites when trusted, high-volume editors request the use of blacklisted links because of their encyclopedic value in support of our encyclopedia pages. If such an editor asks to use your blacklisted links, I'm sure the request will be carefully considered and your links may well be removed.

Declined--Hu12 (talk) 13:45, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have read these links you have provided about spamming and I have not violated any of the rules. I am not a spammer and these websites (ledcalculator.net and myresistor.com) do not advertise any product and are not affilates of any kind. I have developed them to help people with electronic circuit design and this is their only intention. Having links to them in related wikipedia articles, about resistors and LEDs, are useful to the readers of the articles. I have also added them to other wikipedia languages because I know they will be useful. No intention of spamming. If you think otherwise, please explain. And please explain the specific reason why they got blacklisted. I do not see any violations here.

Thanks --Imarzouka (talk) 14:46, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but we don't need "additions" like that. Period. MaxSem^{(Han shot first!)} 15:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Withdrawn or Otherwise Past Relevance

Proposed removals from Whitelist (sites to block)

This section is for proposing that a website be unlisted; please add new entries at the bottom of the section. Remember to provide the specific URL whitelisted, links to the articles they are used in or useful to, and arguments in favor of unlisting. Completed requests will be marked with an appropriate Indicator then archived.

Troubleshooting and problems

This section is for comments related to problems with the whitelist (such as incorrect syntax or entries not being allowed). This is not the section to request that an entry be listed or unlisted (see above). Completed requests will be archived

Discussion

Criteria for Whitelisting

Can we share any thoughts on these please. I don't see anything specific in the way of pointers so I guess we can make our own.

So far my view have been that is should be

An established editor
Going into a "worthwhile" article
That the editor can be interested enough to present some sort of case
That the whitelisting should be aimed as far as possible at solely what is required

It would be good to have the views of others too. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 13:34, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My two cents:

Whitelisting should not open the door to a bunch of spam. This would be most likely if the requested whitelisting was a home page as opposed to a deep link
Proposed link must meet the Reliable Sources Guideline and be "encyclopedic".
Requester sends money to the whitelisting admin.

--A. B. ^(talk) 06:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! If they send enough, maybe we'll even call off the Pornographic Fire Parrot ;-) --Versa geek 07:08, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strangely, given recent publicity.... I wondered about putting something on my user page in the form of a "deposit box" :)--Herby ^{talk thyme} 07:57, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bearer bonds fit nicely in deposit boxes, and strangely have a calming effect on Fire Parrots--Hu12 (talk) 09:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I put the header in a template to reduce size of this page and included MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist/Indicators which is loosly based off of RCU's indicators.--Hu12 (talk) 20:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spam protection

I do not know if he is the right place, but when I try to post on one talk page I get this message "The following link has triggered our spam protection filter:" I tried to use another computer and I got the same message. Can you tell me what is wrong please? I am not adding any link. 89.181.19.14 (talk) 21:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell us what page you were editing when you got the message and then we can look at it. Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page is this one: Talk:Disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Thank you.81.193.32.83 (talk) 15:59, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Disappearance of Madeleine McCann Should be fine now. Thanks--Hu12 (talk) 20:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The same problem here. I tried to edit a sentence in the article vegan. I did not try to add a link but I was still spam blocked. Since the spam block bot doesn't give the link which I was supposedly trying to spam, there is nothing I can do. It is very frustrating. Vapour (talk) 14:27, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per-page whitelisting

Is it possible to do per-page whitelisting, similar to the bad image list? Thanks in advance, Iamunknown 08:17, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed bot (SquelchBot) to automatically revert the addition of certain external links

Please see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SquelchBot if you have comments. Thank you, Iamunknown 01:04, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Freerepublic

This has been blacklisted after discussion on the reliable sources noticeboard. But because the link was used as an illustration in the discussion, editing of that page is now blocked. I tried to get rid of the problem by nowiki-ing the link, but it hasn't worked. Could you help me unlock that page. Many thanks.Itsmejudith (talk) 14:16, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other projects with active whitelists

I was unable to format this so as to fit in the left column where x-wiki links normally go. This, as well as a similar list for other local blacklists (on our blacklist's talk page) may be useful information. --A. B. ^(talk) 14:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

v t e Noticeboards
Wikipedia's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General	Administrators Main Incidents Bots Bureaucrats Centralized discussion Closure requests Education Interface admins Main Page errors Open proxies VRT Oversight User permissions
Articles and content	Biographies of living persons Copyrights Questions on media Problems Dispute resolution External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view Original research Pending changes Reliable sources Resource requests Scalable vector graphics Spam Blacklist Whitelist Style Titleblacklist Translation
Page handling	History merges Mergers Splits Moves Protection Importation XfD Articles Redirects Categories Templates Files Miscellany Undeletion
User conduct	Conflict of interest Contributor copyright Edit warring and 3RR Sanctions Personal restrictions General sanctions Contentious topics Sockpuppets Usernames (Requests for comment) Vandalism
Other	Arbitration Committee noticeboard Requests Enforcement Edit filters Requested False positives Questions Help desk Teahouse Reference desk New articles Requests for comment Village pump Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous WikiProject proposals Discussions for discussion
Category:Wikipedia noticeboards

Proposed additions to Whitelist (sites to unblock)

technocracynet.eu

aceshowbiz.com/celebrity/meagan_good

www.strumpette.com

www.digitpress.com/reviews/tmek.htm

www.squidoo.com

My Tiny Life

mehfiltube DOT magnify DOT net

BouzoukiDVD.com

www.amazon.com/gp/search?ie=UTF8&field-isbn=MAGICNUMBER&tag=wikipedia08-20

Approved Requests

Declined Requests

xmail.net/evanlong/tcc/Columbine_Attack_Government_Document_Library.html

ARA Santísima Trinidad (1948)

petitiononline.com/RRH53888/petition.html

Invisionfree

www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-vetscor/1427139/posts

bossanovamusic.net/en/5-bossa/index.html

becomingapua.com

theatrehistory.suite101.com

petitiononline.com/sos02082/petition-sign.html

kmle.com

repossession-stoppers.com

komendant.cal.pl

myresistor.com

Withdrawn or Otherwise Past Relevance

Proposed removals from Whitelist (sites to block)

Troubleshooting and problems

Discussion

Criteria for Whitelisting

Header

Spam protection

Per-page whitelisting

A proposed bot (SquelchBot) to automatically revert the addition of certain external links

Freerepublic

Other projects with active whitelists