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 Pppery (talk | contribs) at 18:17, 29 February 2024 (→‎lenta.ru: Added using SWHandler). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives (current)→

    Spam blacklists
    Shortcuts

    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|1211070778#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}}



    Notice to everyone about our Reliable sources and External links noticeboards

    If you have a source that you would like to add to the spam-whitelist, but you are uncertain that it meets Wikipedia's guideline on reliability, please ask for opinions on the Reliable sources noticeboard, to confirm that it does meet that guideline, before submitting your whitelisting request here. In your request, link to the confirming discussion on that noticeboard.

    Likewise, if you have an external link that you are uncertain meets Wikipedia's guideline on external links, please get confirmation on the External links noticeboard before submitting your whitelisting request here.

    If your whitelist request falls under one of these two categories, the admins will be more willing to have the source whitelisted if you can achieve consensus at one of the above noticeboards.

    Proposed additions to Whitelist (web pages to unblock)

    lenta.ru

    Article about corruption of the Soviet Union. Useful for for my new page, Corruption in the Soviet Union. - Altenmann >talk 08:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    What makes this a reliable source given Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Lenta.ru? * Pppery * it has begun... 23:34, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    lenta.ru is accused of Russian conspiracy theories and propaganda, and rightly so. However the article in question is nothing of the sort: it is highly critical of the Soviet Union, i.e., contrary to modern Russian policy of rehabilitation of the Soviet times. The basic events described are known, but the article in question goes in detail which are difficult to find, therefore it is a very good reference. - Altenmann >talk 00:24, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Nu? - Altenmann >talk 17:20, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I was hoping some other admin would handle this request given that this is far from my area of expertise. But this has now been waiting long enough that the rule of necessity kicks in, so I am going to assume good faith. plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. --* Pppery * it has begun... 18:17, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Indiegogo Pocket Bravery

    Link requested to be whitelisted: indiegogo.com/projects/pocket-bravery#/

    I'd like to whitelist the following link indiegogo.com/projects/pocket-bravery#/: 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 . This link is going to be used as a reference in the Pocket Bravery article I'm creating. Pocket Bravery is a video game that earned some praises and attention in the gaming community being nominated for D.I.C.E. Award for Fighting Game of the Year and The Game Awards 2023. The link has important info that is going to corroborate with the info I'm going to use. Mizunoryu (talk) 23:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Care to elaborate on that important info? All I see at that link is a one-sentence description of the game. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:37, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure. This is the only available page I found that talks about the confirmed upcoming DLC of characters and other cosmetic content.Mizunoryu (talk) 23:52, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, I see, I have to click "continue reading" to see it. But is that content really appropriate to add given WP:VGSCOPE#6/WP:VGSCOPE#7? I would think not. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:58, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I just briefly mentioned them. I just would like to use the link as reference source so the readers know the info wasn't taken from nowhere. Mizunoryu (talk) 06:02, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And my point is that they shouldn't be mentioned. * Pppery * it has begun... 06:08, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Actually it would reference this line in the characters session: "The game will also have 2 season passes that will be included via DLC.". But I got it now. Mizunoryu (talk) 04:18, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    onlyfans.com

    For the claim in piri's article that OnlyFans creators are paid in US dollars only.

    theSufi.com

    As a source on the phrase "This Too Shall Pass" I read the biography of Faridudin Attar of Nishapur, to whom it is often attributed. I found nothing alarming, or helpful, in the article. I also searched the site for the phrase and that I think too since none of the pages seemed to have been indexed with the common aphorism.

    DrKC MD (talk) 08:15, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    bnnbreaking.com

    For use on BNN Breaking after blacklisting.

    This was plus Added by Ohnoitsjamie, and I then fixed the entry. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:58, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    filmreference.com

    For use on Patrick O'Neal (actor), as a source on the claim of years of military service.

    Fabrickator (talk) 23:31, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    This is a data scraper and generally should not be linked to per WP:RSP#Advameg. Please try to find the original source. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:40, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Fabrickator: I found the original source, it's https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/K1609007078/BIC?u=wikipedia&sid=bookmark-BIC&xid=892210b7, which you can access through The Wikipedia Library. no Declined * Pppery * it has begun... 23:57, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Pppery: Thanks for providing this link! I note that the link is working for me without having to login through the Wikipedia library. Is there any reason not to include the link on the page? Fabrickator (talk) 03:08, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, go ahead and add it. Apparently Gale makes some things publically available which wasn't clear to me. The decline above was in reference to whitelisting the data scraper only. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:10, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Pppery: Thank you for your assistance with resolving this issue. That said, there are apparently about 2800 articles with references to "filmreference.com", and it appears that people can contribute content (or at least, request an update) on any of these pages. There does not seem to be any significant effort to address these references, but I'd suggest we'd be better off if were we were able to add archive links (along with some value of "url-status" so that you get the archive link by default). This prevents the article from being affected made by changes to filmreference.com (and as a small bonus, the archived pages mostly don't have ads displayed on them, or you can at least select one of the archive versions that doesn't have an ad). The proposal being to change the way the protection works so that we can mitigate this problem rather than leave us vulnerable to whatever changes anybody wants to make o filmreference.com. Fabrickator (talk) 08:13, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What someone really should do is go through all of those articles and replace filmreference.com with the original source. What you are proposing, while technically possible, is a half-measure which I see no good reason to implement. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:44, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    heavymetal.about.com

    Links to be whitelisted:

    • Link requested to be whitelisted: heavymetal.about.com/od/interviews/a/kittieinterviewmercedes.htm (archived: Link requested to be whitelisted: web.archive.org/web/20091001004416/http://heavymetal.about.com/od/interviews/a/kittieinterviewmercedes.htm) (page 1)
    • Link requested to be whitelisted: heavymetal.about.com/od/interviews/a/kittieinterviewmercedes_2.htm (archived: Link requested to be whitelisted: web.archive.org/web/20091001004416/http://heavymetal.about.com/od/interviews/a/kittieinterviewmercedes_2.htm) (page 2)

    Interview (both pages provided) with Kittie drummer mercedes lander. offers recording date for In the Black which i could not find on other sources among just general info

    • Link requested to be whitelisted: heavymetal.about.com/od/interviews/a/Kittie-Interview.htm (archived: Link requested to be whitelisted: web.archive.org/web/20120314085802/http://heavymetal.about.com/od/interviews/a/Kittie-Interview.htm)

    another interview for I've Failed You article, breadth and depth.

    p.s. i had a url from heavymetal.about.com whitelisted before??

    Chchcheckit (talk) 14:42, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @Chchcheckit: The archived versions are not blacklisted:
    Unless there's some particular reason you need to link to the non-archived versions as well them I see no reason to add them (you can pass |url-status=usurped to prevent a cite template from trying to link the the original source, which seems applicable given the blacklist reason is This site has now been taken over ...)* Pppery * it has begun... 18:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals from Whitelist (web pages or link patterns to re-block)

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist&oldid=1211070778"