Jump to content

MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Herbythyme (talk | contribs) at 10:37, 9 August 2008 (www.shooting.ho.com.ua: done). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives (current)→

    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:

    1. The link that you want whitelisted in the section title, like === example.com/help/index.php === .
    2. The Wikipedia page on which you want to use the link
    3. An explanation why it would be useful to the encyclopedia article proper
    4. 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|230786790#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:
    no Declined {{Declined}}
     Not done {{Notdone}}
    Information:
     Additional information needed {{MoreInfo}}
    information Note: {{TakeNote}}

    Proposed additions to Whitelist (sites to unblock)

    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]
    I'll keep checking back every few days - or is there anything else I need to do?
    Ibjoe (talk) 19:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    It's a review of an arcade game.... I'm not sure I see that as vital to the project. If it is then surely there should be other sources that are reliable elsewhere? Thanks --Herby talk thyme 11:42, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, it is an outside review of the arcade game that the referencing wikipedia article is about, and a pretty good one. While it is not vital, it is useful. There actually aren't that many reviews available. I think it would increase the quality of the article if I could restore the link, which has not changed since I initiated the article. However, if www.digitpress.com is indeed evil, then I can understand even this useful page being blocked. Thank you for the consideration, and I'll continue monitoring until the request is either accepted or rejected. Ibjoe (talk) 05:02, 6 May 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]

    While it is downloadable it is a selling page. Not inclined personally --Herby talk thyme 11:43, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Please consider this fact: since the book is out-of-print, this website is likely to be the only way for readers to get the work cited in the article. Why cite the work if one cannot get the work anyway? See also publication and copyright status of this work from the author's blog.
    The book is also cited in LambdaMOO. Sanxiyn (talk) 14:05, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    If one reads to the end of Julian Dibbell's blog on the subject, one finds the reason that this request must, at this time, be denied on a technicality. Apparently Mr. Dibbell's former publisher, whilst they were empowered to do so, authorized Fourth Estate, an imprint of HarperCollins, to publish My Tiny Life in the UK and Australia. Unfortunately, this means that My Tiny Life is still technically "in print" by Fourth Estate. HarperCollins' failure to even acknowledge Mr. Dibbell's various attempts to contact them might be, and in fact is currently being, interpreted that they do NOT intend to grant him the waiver necessary to meet Wiki requirements in re to copyrights. Entirely within their rights, of course, but it seems a bit dodgy given the commercial magnitude of My Tiny Life. JimScott (talk) 22:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    P.S. to Sanxiyn: It may be out of print in the States but for those adventurous souls who would might wish to obtain a new or used printed copy, there were 23 copies listed as available on amazon.com as of this edit.

    nepalelectionportal.org

    I really don't know why this was black-listed in the first place. nepalelectionportal.org is an interesting site, essential as reference for many articles on Nepalese politics. --Soman (talk) 16:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    It does not appear blacklisted:
    --A. B. (talkcontribs) 19:44, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    well it still gets caught in the spam filter. --Soman (talk) 19:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you give a a link to the page concerned if this is still happening. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:05, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Toadie's Myspace Blog

    Link is blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=1839615&blogID=393290625 . The official announcement of the band releasing a new recording is big news for them and is the first place they officially announced it. This of course would help to update the toadies page on wikipedia, especially the section with information on the new album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eviladam (talkcontribs) 20:48, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    www.allaahuakbar.net/ansaruallah/

    A useful page previously linked on the Dwight York and Nuwaubianism pages that is on a site that has been blacklisted for some reason (spam, I think). In any case, this particular page is useful and wasn't added by a spammer or for spam purposes. -Moorlock (talk) 20:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    GameStooge

    24.215.166.135 (talk) 18:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    2old2play.com has been a source of problems
    gamestooge.com was blacklisted by Nick in connection with an edit war.[1]
    --A. B. (talkcontribs) 04:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    White listing specific links shouldn't be a problem if the person wishing to use the site as a reference can provide justification for doing so. I'm not entirely comfortable with links being used for purposes other than referencing though. Nick (talk) 08:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    It's just referencing. A few articles were created because GameStooge.com broke the news first. (ie. Ticket to Ride (video game), Lost Cities (video game) - the links used: www.gamestooge.com/2008/03/21/ticket-to-ride-coming-to-xbla for Ticket to Ride, www.gamestooge.com/2008/03/04/lost-cities-coming-to-xbox-live-arcade Lost Cities - just samples that GS is NOT a "spam site". (It also does its own reviews, previews, interviews, etc.) Other sites often refer to some of our news stories (this X3F article is just one example) as well (GS reciprocates when it uses other site's news). JAF1970 (talk) 08:26, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Is there a reason GameStooge is still blacklisted? JAF1970 (talk) 16:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Official Flight of the Conchords Blog

    This should be whitelisted because it is the band's official blog. They post news on it. News that should be on the Flight of the Conchords wikipedia article, but one cannot reference to a blog. They announced their second season via this very blog: http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=58557805&blogID=374524428 71.231.175.227 (talk) 23:26, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Unlikely to whitelist on the request of an IP I'm afraid. Established users would be need to make such a request. --Herby talk thyme 16:36, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    infolive.sytes.net

    There is an external link in 2B1 Oka article about a soviet self-propelled mortar. The link points to a blog or alike with a real in-depth historical explanation (if you don't know Russian, just look at the photos) to the otherwise very stub wiki-article. First I thought it was a wiki-markup error when saw a whitespace beetween “infolive” and “sytes.net”, but when tried to correct, I received an error message from spam blocking filter. Please, white list the site, because as for now the link looks broken and is unusable unless extracted manually. 217.172.21.161 (talk) 08:20, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Unlikely to whitelist on the request of an IP I'm afraid. Established users would be need to make such a request. --Herby talk thyme 16:35, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Symphony in Peril's MySpace blog

    I was doing some work to expand the article for the band Symphony in Peril and found that MySpace blog URLs were blacklisted. I would like the following two URLs whitelisted as they pertain to specific announcements directly from the band regarding a member change and the band's breakup:

    http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=2215155&blogID=19583901 http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=2215155&blogID=55272717

    Theonethird (talk) 17:14, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Official I Bet You MySpace blog

    1. I think it should be whitelisted as it is as far as I could find the only, and more important, a quite reliable source for current and future information on the show and behind the scenes developments.
    2. In this case, the article on I Bet You would benefit from it, as I would like to use it as a citation to back up the claim on an upcoming season three. It is currently placed between html comment tags after the relevant sentence.
    3. http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=97068158&blogID=395526769

    I hope that this blog or at least this url can be whitelisted, just as Zach Braff's MySpace Blog. Thanks in advance!
    Ewald (talk) 14:55, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Any thoughts yet? Some MySpace blogs seem to be able to obtain whitelisting. Such as the recently approved MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist#Another_one_of_Jenna_Fischer.27s_MySpace_blog_entries. Thanks in advance. - Ewald (talk) 08:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Official Julian Morris Facebook fan page

    I am editing the wikipedia entry of the actor/celebrity Julian Morris and would like to add a link to his official Facebook fan page which contains photos, videos and news. This is a vital link and addition to those that are interested in learning more about this actor.

    The link I am requesting to be whitelisted is:

    facebook.com/pages/Julian-Morris/6301232551 76.91.179.243 (talk) 05:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I would love to include this link as soon as possible. Please let me know if there is any further information I can give you in order to help the process. Thanks in advance. 92.234.10.193 (talk) 23:13, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Unlikely to whitelist on the request of an IP I'm afraid. Established users would be need to make such a request & even then a facebook link is unlikely. --Herby talk thyme 16:32, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined per Herby and because fansites are deprecated anyway. Guy (Help!) 19:48, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you Herby and Guy for your input however I would urge you to reconsider for the following reasons:

    The fansite in question is official and endorsed by the named celebrity. As such it includes pertinent and relevant information on the person that could not otherwise be placed on his Wikipedia entry eg video interviews and copyrighted photos and literature.

    For those that are trying to learn more about this actor/celebrity this official site provides a plethora of relevant information and therefore having this access to this link is a vital resource for the Wikipedia user.Apekingdom (talk) 00:08, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined fansites are not required on an encyclopaedia generally. --Herby talk thyme 10:34, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Official Pendulum MySpace blog

    Several pages from this blog would be useful if whitelisted. I'll list them all separately to make it easier to read. Whitelisting any of these pages would be helpful, particularly the first page – Ikara talk → 21:54, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=75424283&blogID=379158051
    Contains irrefutable information about a disputed release date for use in the article Propane Nightmares which will help to resolve any further arguments regarding the release date.
    http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=75424283&blogID=407371549
    Contains information about the (faulty) Australian version of In Silico which may be useful in the article at some point.
    http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=75424283&blogID=413030364
    Information confirming the release date and formats of The Other Side which may be useful in supporting the article up until the release.

    After reading through the blog I have found other references that would be useful in several Pendulum articles, however I cannot list all the ones that will definitely get used right now. Ideally it would help to have all pages on the blog whitelisted, as well as the top level page for general reference, using an expression similar to:

    \b(http://)?blog\.myspace\.com/index\.cfm\?fuseaction=blog\.view&friendID=75424283&blogID=[0-9]*\b
    \b(http://)?blog\.myspace\.com/index\.cfm\?fuseaction=blog\.ListAll&friendID=75424283\b
    

    I haven't seen this method used in the whitelist yet so it may not be approved of, but it should be noted that the expression will only match pages in the Pendulum blog, and assuming one of them is allowed, there should be no problem with the others. In any case the above entries would still be very useful, and there should be no problem with them. I could really use the above three, so a speedy reply would be very helpful. Thanks – Ikara talk → 23:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    www.shooting.ho.com.ua

    The Ukrainian Shooting Federation (main page at www.shooting-ua.com) uses this domain to store some documents, including the ones linked from [2], e.g. the Ukrainian records. I tried to add these as references for List of national shooting records surpassing the world records, but apparently it's considered spam. I have no idea what kind of site ho.com.ua is, but at least an exception for the shooting subdomain sounds reasonable, no? -- Jao (talk) 19:39, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Seems odd but I guess the higher level domain hosting may well have had some spamming. Either way this looks valid so  Done. Cheers --Herby talk thyme 10:37, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    gargoyles.dracandros.com

    Not sure why a TV wiki is blocked. Nothing offensive I could see. --T smitts (talk) 15:29, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Some aggressive adding of the link: Special:Contributions/GDarau, it may have been blacklisted for that reason, maybe specific whitelisting of specific pages on the server is the way to go? --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:33, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    www.womadforum.freeforums.org

    This appears to be on the spam list for Wikipedia. The original link was incorrect, it had a .com ending - no forum exists with this url. On amending the page to the correct .org suffix I got the message that it was on the blacklist. Whereas the root domain may or may not be the originator of spam, the forum itself is not. Thank you--83.67.68.190 (talk) 17:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Forum links are very rarely suitable for inclusion on articles. What article do you intend to place the link on? OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:44, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined per Ohnoitsjamie. --Herby talk thyme 10:28, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    www.squidoo.com/software_ip_management

    This page at www.squidoo.com/software_ip_management documents problems and solutions related to software intellectual property management. It documents the general problem for which Black Duck software provides the leading solution. It provides links to the general issues around the problem as well as links to tool and solution providers. It also provides original content in the form of analysis and opinion. I would like it removed from the black list and put on the white list. I would like the Black Duck Software page at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Duck_Software to have a link to this page hosted at www.squidoo.com/software_ip_management. This page at Squidoo has multiple links pointing back to Black Duck Software and its competitors, which you would expect of a site that lists general problems, general solutions, and the providers of specific solutions. 99.224.63.36 (talk) 19:05, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia is not a vehicle to promote your Squidoo page. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:31, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined per Ohnoitsjamie. --Herby talk thyme 10:28, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    www.squidoo.com/sqlitehammer

    This page at www.squidoo.com/sqlitehammer documents problems and solutions related to embedding the SQLite Database. It documents ways to use SQLite, its legal issues, and competing products and solutions. It provides links to the general issues around SQLite as well as links to tool providers. It also provides original content in the form of analysis and opinion. I would like it removed from the black list and put on the white list. I would like the SQLite page at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQLite to have a link to this page hosted at www.squidoo.com/sqlitehammer. This page at Squidoo has multiple links pointing back to www.sqlite.org and its competitors, which you would expect of a site that lists general problems, general solutions, and the providers of specific solutions. 99.224.63.36 (talk) 19:05, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia is not a vehicle to promote your Squidoo page. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:31, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined per Ohnoitsjamie. --Herby talk thyme 10:29, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    randorguy.galatta.com

    This is the only source on the web where Randor Guy's date of birth is mentioned (See: randorguy.galatta.com/myprofile.asp). Randor Guy is a famous film historian and his blogs could be used as reference in numerous articles related to Indian or international cinema -RavichandarMy coffee shop 15:11, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    If that's the only place it's mentioned then we should not be including it. Obscure information should be left out of WP:BLPs even if the only source is a good one, which in this case it is not. Guy (Help!) 16:52, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    The DOB argument is now obsolete anyway. There is now one online and one offline reference in addition to the one originally requested, both added by the same editor. -- Jao (talk) 18:24, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined seems unnecessary now. --Herby talk thyme 10:29, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    www.lulu.com

    This website contains books avaiable no where else. With this site being blocked, users do not have access to books related to the topic they are searching on wikipedia. One such book is a NEW BOOK on Mario Cuomo. It is only avaiable on lulu.com, but wikipedia users won't ever hear of it if it remains blocked —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.185.52.91 (talk) 12:29, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done. This site would not appear to be on the blacklist at this point in time, but it is on User:XLinkBot's revertlist. You may try requesting its removal there, or create an account and the bot will stop reverting your edits after you become an established user. There are a few pages from the site that appear to have been added pre-emptively, but they currently serve (as best I can tell) no functional purpose. All the best – Ikara talk → 02:33, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, these "new books" on lulu.com are of course new self-published books, and thus extremely unlikely to be valid sources. Guy (Help!) 16:20, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    -After going to the revertlist I was told it is blacklisted. The book I want to have a link to is a self-published MA Thesis written under the guidance of a Pulitzer Prize winning author. Egolembiewski (talk) 12:35, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    lulu.com is here on the blacklist (\blulu\.com\b), as it contains mainly self-published sources, and was often 'spammed' (i.e. multiple placement of links with intent to get traffic to lulu.com), &c. &c. If you have written a book/thesis, then please get an ISBN, and when you have that, use the ISBN to link to the book. Otherwise, specifically define which link, and established editors will see if the link would make an appropriate reference or external link. Hope this helps.
    hence:  Not done --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:47, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    After a quick search I did find the local blacklist which has lulu.com blacklisted. However the page is not mentioned anywhere significant here (there is one link at the bottom of the page). Shouldn't that be at the top somewhere? – Ikara talk → 15:00, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    freelancer.com.ar

    Dear wikipedia editors: may you please remove / unblock freelancer.com.ar ?(domain, not specific url) The website contains mainly photos about southamerica destinations and destination information such as history or geographical data, even when might be useful to wikipedia I ask for no inclusion at all on any pages if you don't consider it proper, only do not appear as blocked. I'd appreciate your consideration about it. Thank you very much. --Juanchetts (talk) 16:27, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    This exact domain is blocked on the Wikimedia spam blacklist, if you want it unblocked you may have better luck asking to have it removed there. You will also have a better chance of getting it white-listed if you can give specific pages on the site, and some relevant articles for which they are needed. The domain was blocked as a result of IP-based spamming, not because of content, so if a page is crucial to an article I should think it will be allowed. Good luck – Ikara talk → 01:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined no further contributions by user. --Herby talk thyme 10:30, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    z10.invisionfree.com/Margo_Fans_Lazarus/index.php?act=idx

    Dear Wikipedia Editors: The above site is a fan forum for the actress Margo Harshman. I can understand if you do not want forums to be added to external links sections of Wikipedia pages, but I thought there would be no harm in asking. Therefore I am making this request, so that I may add it to the external links section of the Margo Harshman's Wikipedia page. She is an actress who has limited online fan activity and my forum is a more centralized location for her fans to be talk. I wish to add it to her Wikipedia so that other fans of hers may find out about the forum. Again, I understand if you do not wish forums to be added as links. Thank you for your time and future response and candor. --Iceblade, forum Administrator of Margo Fans Lazarus Forum 05:46, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

    nefac.net

    NEFAC is one of the most prominent anarcho-communist organisations on the planet, and there should be a link in their article to their official website. On behalf of the Anarchism task force, Skomorokh 02:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    www.sunglasses-direct.co.uk

    This site offers designer sunglasses manufactured by luxottica and offers people a chance to view and buy their products —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lily2008 (talkcontribs) 13:02, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined spam and not encyclopaedic. --Herby talk thyme 13:07, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    The same editor went on to subsequently spam:
    It should be blacklisted also. --A. B. (talkcontribs) 04:56, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    already done. --Versageek 05:10, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    www.associatedcontent.com

    The link added to the Montauk Monster wiki article, taken from AssociatedContent, should not be blacklisted. The link in question is to an Associated Content article that contains a firsthand interview with a USDA official and makes reference to a statement by the Director of Plum Island that was emailed to the author of the Associated Content article by the Department of Homeland Security officials. This is verifiable information and it contributes to an understanding of the wiki article. Without this information, wiki readers do not know the DHS or USDA position on the Montauk Monster and may be left with a mis-impression concerning a link between the facility and the Montauk Monster. This is the link (excluding the root because it would be blacklisted again): /article/920725/dhs_debunks_monster_of_montauk_mystery.html?page=2&cat=8 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Catloverbonifant (talkcontribs) 21:43, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    da Vinci Surgery Systems

    Hey Guys,

    I think there's some mistake, because da Vinci Systems is a surgical utility Web site for the surgical equipment. I am desigining a Wikipedia page for a robotic surgeon and the site is a major External Link, so I'd appreciate it if you could check it out and see what the deal is. Thanks. --Nmishra9 (talk) 19:18, 5 August 2008 (UTC)nmishra9[reply]

    For background, it appears that the site was originally blacklisted due to multiple parties posting the link to multiple articles on Wikipedia, and appeared to have been done for the purpose of promotion/advertising. For reference, the spam report can be viewed here (note, link is to an archive, please do not add new comments): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2008_Archive_Jun_1#davincisurgery.com
    The whitelisting (or removal from the blacklist) will need to be evaluated by admins with access to make the change ... I'm just providing the link for reference purposes. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 19:36, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    MySpace blog =

    Mike Skinner, more commonly known as The Streets, has announced on his MySpace blog (blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=2536242&blogID=421632554) today the title of his next album (excluding Everything Is Borrowed, to be released next month). I've made note of this in the article, but would like to source it properly. Cheers, faithless (speak) 12:43, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    A specific signed and dated review published as www.suite101.com/article.cfm/poetry_magazine_review/76867

    I only need this one link, to add to the References section in Agnieszka's Dowry. Exact form given below. Actually, it's already in the article, minus the "http://" part. I am responding to another editor demanding more sources. This is an independent third-party review of a fairly in-depth kind. It's only fault is that it contains outdated links to the magazine, since moved to asgp.org from enteract.com --Mareklug talk 13:58, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    • Heather O'Neil. [www.suite101.com/article.cfm/poetry_magazine_review/76867 "Agnieszka's Dowry (AgD)"], Suite101.com, 7 August 2001. (Accessed 7 August 2008).

    First-hand account of horse race

    www.storz-bickel.com/

    This site deserves to be unblocked because its commonly accepted to link to the website of the company that manufactures a product that is notable, as the Volcano Vaporizer is. While I understand not wanting to unleash the floodgates of every head shop on the internet wanting to spam the Bong or Cannabis article, an exception should be made for the actual manufacturer of the product. SiberioS (talk) 10:14, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Recently declined here. --Herby talk thyme 10:17, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Is it technically feasible to unblock for one specific page?SiberioS (talk) 10:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    And may I also point out its a bit absurd to block a site on the presumption of its abuse by anonymous IP addresses in spamming, or its potential for abuse, even though it DOES have a legitimate purpose on a specific page. It would be like presuming that linking to Apple or Microsoft's websites are dangerous because they may be used to bolster or spam vast numbers of articles in order to drum sales or support. We should err on the side of allowing it. SiberioS (talk) 10:28, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Approved Requests

    Declined Requests

    Withdrawn or Otherwise Past Relevance

    Proposed removals from Whitelist (sites to block)


    gazeteler.com is somehow on the spam list for wikipedia. I don't know why it is there and I don't know or care if there is an article which could link to gazeteler.com. All I know is that gazeteler.com is not a spam website and does not deserve to be listed in a spam list. Either name that section "sites we do not like" or take gazeteler.com out of that spam list.

    Troubleshooting and problems

    Discussion

    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]