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|209649941#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.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]

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]

I think if a specific editor is willing to take responsibility for ensuring that a specific video is copyright-clean, as appears to be the case here, then there should be no real problem with whitelisting individual videos. The spam report was more of a generic too-much-crap report, but actually I think that in cases like this (and indeed YouTube) a precautionary approach is justified, with general blacklisting and specific whitelisting. If admins on any one project want to whitelist the whole site, and take responsibility for policing copyvios, they can, but we don't have the resources on this multi-million page wiki. Guy (Help!) 17:40, 30 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]

Declined given that the IP was involved with the linkage. Wikipedia is not somewhere to be used to try and gain web traffic. Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:16, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RA MySpace blogs

The article on the U.S. band RA refers to blogs made by the band on its MySpace. The article that would benefit is Ra (U.S. band). The pages to be whitelisted are: blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=11309695&blogID=369954952 blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=11309695&blogID=270821753 Ideally, any blog.myspace.com link with friendID=11309695 would be permitted. Anyway, these sources should be included because they are about the band and written by the band itself. The blog format is how the band has chosen to release information to its audience. -ZendarPC (talk) 01:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zach Braff Myspace Blog

link is blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=97669648&blogID=387269933. Basically, Zach Braff has confirmed that 18 new episodes of Scrubs are being filmed, that has been added to the Scrubs article linked above, but as blog.myspace is blacklisted, i am unable to cite it. He also gives information about a soon to air episode, My Princess, which could be useful for the article. Thank you--Jac16888 (talk) 02:07, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done Agreed this is valid - I just hope no one gets the truly ridiculous idea that I might be a fan of Scrubs from this :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 07:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Approved Requests

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]

Very good. Thanks. Lunchboxhero (talk) 15:54, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Requests

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.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]

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