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 11:36, 24 November 2007 (→‎snipurl.com link on my user page: actual link?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Spam whitelist Archives (current)→
 
Related pages:
Blacklist (Talk)
Blacklist Archive
Blacklist Log

Shortcuts:
WP:WHITELIST
The associated page is used in conjunction with the Mediawiki m:SpamBlacklist extension, and lists strings of text that override Meta's blacklist. Any administrator can edit the spam whitelist. Please post comments to the appropriate section below: Proposed additions (sites to unblock), Proposed removals (sites to block), or Troubleshooting and problems; read the messageboxes at the top of each section for an explanation.

Please enter your requests at the bottom of the bottom of the Proposed additions to Whitelist section and sign your requests with four tildes: ~~~~

Also in your request, please include the following

  1. The link that you want whitelisted in section title, like === example.com ===
  2. The page that you want to use the link on.
  3. Explain why it would be useful to the encyclopedia article proper.

Completed requests are archived, additions and removal are logged.

snippet for logging: {{/request|173457552#section_name}}

Proposed additions to Whitelist (sites to unblock)


www.aceshowbiz.com

I need to add www.aceshowbiz.com as a reference but it's blocked. Anthonyd3ca 07:24, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • To which article? And for what content? Guy (Help!) 21:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would like for aceshowbiz.com/celebrity/jonas_brothers/biography.html and aceshowbiz.com/celebrity/jonas_brothers/biography_2.html to be whitelisted for the article Jonas Brothers. My request to remove this domain from the Meta-Wiki blacklist was denied (see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist#aceshowbiz.com http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2007/10#aceshowbiz.com - moved to archive), and they recommended whitelisting the URLs here. Aceshowbiz.com has information I have referenced that I cannot find published elsewhere. It is currently used as a reference eight times in Jonas Brothers, as current reference number 23 ("Jonas Brothers Biography at AceShowBiz.com"). --Scott Alter 04:12, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm. Information not available elsewhere sounds like it might not be that reliable, to me. Guy (Help!) 15:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Looking again at Jonas Brothers and aceshowbiz.com/celebrity/jonas_brothers/biography.html, I see that all of the information at aceshowbiz.com has been published elsewhere, so reliability should not be an issue. The reason I prefer aceshowbiz.com's article is that it presents a large amount of information that is concise and relevant to the Wikipedia article. Even though some portions of aceshowbiz.com contain inappropriate material for referencing, there are also articles with factual information. --Scott Alter 00:56, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

www.mysundial.ca

Request for whitelisting Used on sundial Equation of time Diptych Gnomon I examined the site in May as did User:Walter Siegmund see talk page. Carl himself is an IP Wikipedist. I have posted the following on several user talk pages with no response.

What on earth is the objection to Carl Sabanskis site- apart from pitiful use of HTML! It is by far the most authorative site available on the subject and is an essential link. If the problem lies with someones bot please get that sorted- but remove this destructive blacklisting it does no credit the reputation of Wikipedia.

Further a mirror site has been removed. Can we please have this site whitelisted, and the 'bots' returned to their kennels. ClemRutter 14:51, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had considerable difficulty in understanding exactly where this request for white listing should be made. Attempts to place it at the bottom of the section, as requested, resulted on no posting (perhaps I was unlucky as my internet cafe had a very poor connection). Re-reading the instruction, *here*, was also logically possible and it looks wrong. I am sure that some one will move it to the correct spot.ClemRutter 14:59, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
this continues under http://www.mysundial.2see.de slightly different address for the same site, I know this act itself can lead to a 'spam' reputation but it is a valueable website. --Edmund Patrick ( confer work) 14:57, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
IMHO this site had better remain blacklisted. The site is not that useful, and it is quite clear from the talk page and the massive cross-posting (with mirror pages) that the owner of the site merely wants to attract visitors. /SvNH 03:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Events have moved on- and Carls reaction to the breach of WP:CIVIL is not helpful. However, my solution is different- and for exactly the same reasons- Whitelist the url: for the en: site where it has not caused any trouble for 3 years. This can be considered a limited trial. But it is not true that it is not that useful- for anyone constructing dials and interested in the Mathematics rather than the artistry it is the first port of call. I have deleted many links on this page in the past that were not notable (this page attracts them!). Visit again talk page and read my analysis of the posting history. Pay particular attention to the Users who have been working long term on this page. Finally we need to separate the value of the content of the site from the frustrations of the author whose antics have annoyed many other wikis. WP:AGF with gritted teeth. Thank you all for your attention ClemRutter 23:40, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
An excellent idea maybe even double ring fence it - put it in nonwiki brackets. Then the researcher has to jump through another ring. Why the page is deemed as not important I do not know but hey I only build them on the odd occasion. As I have said many times the actions of the web author here in wikipedia does not best serve the cause of knowledge, but that should not be a reason for stopping it. Edmund Patrick ( confer work) 12:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to take a look at what is going on in Diptych (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Imho Wikipedia should provide content, not links. Omitting one single external link cannot be a major loss, circumventing the external links and spam policies may be worse. But this is, perhaps, a Scandinavian point of view. /SvNH 09:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the pointer, yes I agree the actions do undermine the usefulness of the site. The site gave the mathematical content of the article. agreed circumventing the external links and spam policies may be worse would be worse, but the link did provide information and knowledge. I think now though the website is too intrinsically linked to spam. Ho Hum sad but I suppose we could look at adding the maths into the article. At the moment I cannot see where to go with this. Edmund Patrick ( confer work) 19:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is extremely frustrating that there is still no resolution to this. It is even easier to see Carl's point of view where the random intervention of someone who had no significant role in the developement of the page- blacklists a significant resource- and all the 'official' routes to remedy are broken. ClemRutter 09:39, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've followed this from a distance over many months. From the perspective of a non-admin volunteer who clears a lot of spam in connection with WikiProject Spam, here are my comments:
  • The domain owner has worked very, very hard to get his site blacklisted on meta.
  • The domain owner has been informed many times not to link to his own site. He's been referred numerous times to WP:EL, WP:COI and WP:SPAM. This has seemed only to harden his determination and persistence.
  • The site seems to be run more as a passion than as a commercial operation. That doesn't change the fact that these links have been spammed, but it is worth noting.
  • The domain owner can be considered uncontrollable and not amenable to any Wikipedia consensus
  • Multiple established editors on en.wikipedia have fought for these links, not because they like the owner's behaviour but because they value the site's content.
  • Nobody on any other Wikipedia appears to want these links at all and they are mad to have had them spammed
My suggestion is to whitelist this domain on en.wikipedia on a trial basis and watch it like a hawk. We'd be whitelisting it not becuase we approve of the site owner's behaviour but because as an encyclopedia, this site has content that experienced editors here wanted to link to.--A. B. (talk) 17:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at the site mysundial.ca. Simple inclusion of that link in any of our current articles would be hard to defend in terms of our policies as written, since it is a personal web site, and the author of the site can't be shown to be a recognized expert from reliable sources. I notice that there is some quirky (and possibly correct) information in there that may not be easily accessible elsewhere, for instance that site is the #1 Google hit for 'cycloid polar sundial.' If sundial enthusiasts feel that this information is valuable, they should consider writing appropriate articles in Wikipedia. Since mysundial.ca appears to be weak on sourcing, I'm not sure if this would be easy to do. People would have to dig up their own sources for stuff like 'cycloid polar sundial' which surely isn't easy. Still, this is the work of writing an encyclopedia. EdJohnston 16:48, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments. As this still remains on the backlog- please excuse a reply. The specific difficulty on this article is finding reliable and understandable information that is consistent in style. It is here that the said site is valuable- in that it is the most complete didactic site around. Whenever any maths is written- it is this site that I will check it against for accuracy- the very traits that brought the author to the attention of the 'checkbots' are vert traits needed in composing a bit of good maths. (Like the dogged attempt to add a link to every new language ... becomes the dogged attempt to cover all types of dial). So your points
  • our policies as written I have personally culled over half of the links of this wikipage- so take it seriously though personally the quality of the site would cause me to be generous- if this were the real problem then citations would now be viable - but the blacklist hits citations too.
  • recognised expert from reliable sources- so he is unpublished but as a designer (from memory:- Pinawa memorial Dial Manitoba etc)shows he is a respeced practitioner. Every respected sundial society lists his primer --- but Wikipedia no longer can (this goes for French, Dutch German sites etc). As he has articles on line published by at least three national societies isn't this enough evidence of peer review.
  • it seems quirky that we (bruised and battered) editors link in to the said site- but our readers have to link to five or six other lists, that indirectly point them to this site.
  • the disputed site is week on sourcing (and html!) but so is the Book of Mormon or the Christian Bible- (both personal websites in their day!) but Wiki standards don't extend to external sites.
No, it was for none of these reasons that the site was blacklisted, it was to do with potential interwiki spam. So let's admit the analysis was wrong. Look at the maths, look at the CADialing. The site is needed on English wiki- so whitelist please and soon. ClemRutter 22:52, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

urindar.sytes.net

Hello, this is my personal domain that hosts my blog, placed at urindar.sytes.net/_v22, and I would like to place a link to it in my user page. I currently cannot do so, because the domain *.sytes.net is blacklisted. Thanks a lot.--urindar 15:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

www.mysundial.2see.de

Sundial we have asked many times for clarification as to how to keep this link. This policy is now stopping the development of the article. After a long period of time spent up loading images to be told that it cannot be saved is very frustrating. Please see talk pages for a history. The site to which this link goes does have its problems but is informative, instructional and knowledgeable. What more does one want? --Edmund Patrick ( confer work) 09:42, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would object to that, see above. /SvNH 03:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=3451033&blogID=267108076

I was attempting to cite sources for album information on The Live EP, an album by The Black Keys. As this was a digital release via MySpace the only "liner notes" for this album giving information on its production were posted to the band's official blog. This is a primary source posted directly by the band, so it seems like it classifies for the whitelist. The full URL is: /index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=3451033&blogID=267108076 sHARD 04:31, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give us some idea of why this link is necessary (& is it still or are there now other sources)? Is it a reliable source etc, thanks --Herby talk thyme 14:12, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=77284510&blogID=249286825

For page Anywhere But Here (Buffy comic) - the blog in question is the Dark Horse Comics blog, and contains the announcement of the winner, and the winning information, along with info from Joss Whedon on what he intends to do with the character. They haven't posted it anywhere else, so this is the prime source for this information. Thanks. --Thespian 10:49, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give us some idea of why this link is necessary and is it still the only source? Are there alternatives, is it a reliable source etc, thanks --Herby talk thyme 14:13, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

african-american-playwrights.suite101.com

Needed as a source for African American culture and Black Nativity at wikipedia. futurebird 19:37, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like some more info on this. What pages are involved, what is needed to be cited, what makes this a reliable source? Thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:33, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

www.thebestof.co.uk/southwark/news/39700

I need to add www.thebestof.co.uk/southwark/news/39700 as a reference for the article Gilly Flaherty but due to the spam protection blacklist, I can't. It's for the content with the section header "Millwall Lionesses", which provides information on the early part of the career of the Football (Soccer) player. Thanks. --Johngooner 00:18, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is this the only available source for referencing? Thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:56, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

jehan.batcave.net

jehan.batcave.net is the url to my personal website, I attempted to add a link to my user page, and was told that it was blacklisted. this link is a collection of musings on various subjects, and in no way, shape, or form makes me any money. Jehan60188 13:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DecembeRadio MySpace blog

I'd like to be able to reference DecembeRadio's MySpace blog, as it is a primary news source posted directly by the band. It seems that should qualify for the whitelist. The URL is: blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.ListAll&friendID=14481114 —Zeagler 21:08, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give us more idea of why this link is necessary? Are there alternatives, is it a reliable source etc, thanks --Herby talk thyme 14:17, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Everything in the "Recent" section of the page was gleaned from their blog. At this point in the band's career, it's one of the only sources for details of their goings-on, and I believe it meets the criteria for WP:SELFPUB. —Zeagler (talk) 03:21, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shaun of the Dead Director Edgar Wright blog entry on his Myspace page

I'm trying to revert some vandalism and format spamming on the Shaun of the Dead entry, however a reference to director Edgar Wright's myspace blog is stopping me updating.

The reference is blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=144582906&blogID=324420860 and it appears to be important to the Shaun of the Dead article, in that it verifies the Directors motivations when they were reported to have refused to make an American TV series version of their movie. DrJon 09:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a fan:) but can you give us more idea of why this link is necessary? Are there alternatives, is it a reliable source etc, thanks --Herby talk thyme 14:18, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic Church

I feel that there is no need to blacklist any links within wikipedia simply because it relates to the Catholic Church. i personally am not catholic, but i do know catholic beliefs, and try to link to them as well as other religions, but i cant because someone put catholicism on the blacklist. the changes i try to add are all perfectly relevant, and yet i still am unable to make any changes. i tried to correct a nonexistant link on the page about euthanasia, Roman Catholic medical ethics, to Roman Catholicism, but for whatever reason, i found that this was blacklisted. It would be a relatively useful correction for any person looking for beliefs of the Catholic Church regarding euthanasia.

And i apologize if i put this under the wrong heading, im still relatively new and not entirely sure how to organize the discussion page, sorry for any inconvenience...

Hi sniper201092 to have something whitelisted you need to provide the link you want whitelisted (just leave off the http:// bit and it'll be postable). Then we'll be able to look up why it was blacklisted in the first place and meak a decision about whter to whitelist it. Thanks -- SiobhanHansa 03:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

www.suite101.com/article.cfm/canadian_politics/49148

I don't see why suite101 is blacklisted, unless there were problems in the past with a specific spammer. If it's blocked for some kind of policy reason, OK, but if it's just to deal with obnoxious types then please allow me to link this article. Currently I've commented out the reference at Media scrum in order to get through - you can check there for the context. <eleland/talkedits> 20:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was a lot of spam from the site because they encouraged writers to SEO their articles and choose to keep or get rid of writers based on how many hits their articles got. This seemd to encourage a lot of spamming - We also found out that there is no real editorial oversight of the published material and writers are allowed to write on pretty much whatever they like so almost none of the articles were reliable sources (I think there was a link white listed in the last few weeks that actually turned out to be by a bona fide expert). From A.B.'s response further up this page -

:For some background, here's a partial list of Suite101.com spam discussions on Wikipedia:

I don't know if Rhonda Parkinson is a notable commentator for what you're trying to use her for - if so then this link should be white listed so you can use it. If not you might want to look for a more reliable reference. -- SiobhanHansa 01:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
An answer to this will allow me to close the request? Thanks --Herby talk thyme 14:19, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Forcefeed announcements on blog

I am making an article on a Dutch metal band called Forcefeed. Now they made several announcements about their band, such as one of the members leaving and postponing one of their tours, and I would like to add the references to the article. The links are: Johan leaving: blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=56961133&blogID=326633140 and Tour postponed: blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=56961133&blogID=231990278 and the last one: the recording of their new album: blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=56961133&blogID=293621258

Please whitelist them. As you can see if you check out the links, they're normal announcements. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nake-Blade (talk • contribs) 12:32, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Given this edit appears to be your only contribution I am not sure how valid it is. Are you planning to work on the article soon? Thanks --Herby talk thyme 14:20, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

South Coast Trunk Road

I've created the article South Coast Trunk Road and feel it would be useful to add a link to hometown.aol.co.uk/hamcopublishing/southcoast.html There seems to be nothing objectionable in this particular web page. --rossb 14:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is whether this link adds to teh encyclopedic content of Wikipedia rather than whether there is nothing objectionable on the site. Is it necessary for citation and does it meet reliability standards? Cheers --Herby talk thyme 08:30, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

snipurl.com link on my user page

Please whitelist either snipurl.com or specifically snipurl.com/akrupp. I'd like to link to it on my userpage. Thanks!Anthony Krupp 03:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think snipurl is a link shortener? If so such sites are blacklisted at Meta as a matter of policy to prevent them being used maliciously or to circumvent current blocks. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 08:36, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Equally, call me picky but why not place the actual link there? Closing in a couple of days if no further response - cheers --Herby talk thyme 11:36, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A particular MySpace blog

I understand why most blogs are blacklisted, but certain bands use it to provide information. Gorgoroth have stated something, and it was rightfully sourced here, but with the link up, it is now impossible to edit the page (I'm not sure how they got it up to begin with) without removing a correct source. The link is http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=99208641&blogID=324636534 ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 23:18, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as editing is concerned you can always make it "unclickable" for now. Are there no other option for citing? Thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:11, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Aparrently not. Thanks anyway. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 01:02, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - valid request, established editor - cheers --Herby talk thyme 09:35, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Link works - thanks! ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 10:04, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BombingScience.com on graffiti page

Hi, I recently saw that the BombingScience.com external link was removed from the "graffiti" articles of most languages. This site was in the external links of some of the "graffiti" pages for a few years in some languages, so I have added this external links to the graffiti articles of other languages. BombingScience.com is one of the largest and most important graffiti ressource on the web, with pictures from many countries, news on graffiti culture and events and a large community of graffiti writers contributing to the site.

It is clearly one of the few sites that are true comprehensive ressources on graffiti on the web and this is why I ask this site to be whitelisted in the graffiti articles. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.0.211.8 (talk) 04:10, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is actually blacklisted at Meta in response to this request. Give the spamming history rather more information about why you feel that the site should be whitelisted is necessary, thanks --Herby talk thyme 08:33, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I wrote in the first message, the site was listed in the external link section of the graffiti articles in a few languages already for some time (for years in some languages). I simply took the link and posted the ressource in the graffiti articles of other langagues. This is not called spamming. I have simply posted a ressource that was used already in the graffiti articles to the same articles in other languages. If I was spamming, I would have posted the link in unrelated articles, or I would have posted a new link in all graffiti articles that wasn't "approved" already... but this site was, because it was listed as a ressource since a long time--65.94.188.41 (talk) 14:36, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no suggestion that you were responsible for the quite large number of links that have been placed to that site. However it is the reason that it is blacklisted. It is not the page the links are on that is the issue but the quantity of them across wikis that makes us call them "spam". If some links remained after blacklisting then it is because we did not get around to cleaning them up. I would need to see a request from an established user to consider this request. --Herby talk thyme 14:41, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Hum... I think you don't totally understand my point. The link was there years before I have added the links to the articles of other languages. I simply added a link that was already there to the other languages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.94.188.41 (talk) 21:51, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

www.consumeralertsystem.com

This webpage contains a download link for spyware, however, I have put a disclaimer cautioning the user.

This should be able to be used on Consumer alert system when I create it; right now, the article is in my 2nd sandbox.

This will provide a link for the users to see the website, which is why this may be useful to Wikipedia. Thank you. Jonathan talk 03:23, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Am I getting this right - you want to have a site that has spyware on it whitelisted? For me that would be pretty close to "no" but am I misunderstanding something? Thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:53, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes...but I have put an uninstallation link and have also cautioned the user in bold text next to the link, so they do know about it. Thanks! —Jonathan 21:45, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok - personally I am not going to whitelist anything that may cause someone using Wikipedia in good faith to access a site that might be undesirable. Interestingly I find that my HOSTS file blocks the site because of "[PcTools.CasinoClient]". --Herby talk thyme 15:35, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I'll just put the actual address...if they want it that bad, they can type it themselves. —Jonathan 22:24, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So closed and  Not done --Herby talk thyme 09:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Approved Requests

ezinearticles.com/?What-is-Ergativity?&id=249623

Blacklisting ezinearticles.com has prevented me from editing the article Ergative case, I am sure that many others tried to edit the mentioned article unsuccessfully, as that article is still in very poor stage compared to its notability as an prominant Grammatical case.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hakeem.gadi (talk • contribs) 18:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For now I have disabled the link to allow editing the article.
This is the first of hundreds of ezinearticles.com articles that has actually been written by an authority (in this case a linguist) and meets our reliable sources standards. I recommend an admin whitelist this link (only). --A. B. (talk) 20:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done and should be ok now, thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:03, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

salvador-dali.net/_eng/_articulos/articulo_ver.asp?id=167

I wish to add a reference to Être Dieu about a performance of the play in 2005 and I can't find a citation elsewhere.-Halo 19:43, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some history:
I suggest whitelisting only the page Halo has requested. --A. B. (talk) 15:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, should work now, thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:02, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=108825250&blogID=166356894

This site contains the only full set of rules to Guyball, formed by the King's College London Guyball Society. This would therefore help the page on "Guyball". ISD 12:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can verify that this would be highly beneficial. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 09:18, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done should work now, thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:01, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's working. Thanks very much! ISD (talk) 10:36, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hometown.aol.co.uk/_ht_a/ianian47/mary.htm

This is the website of St Mary's Church, Sandbach, a new article I have just written. I should like the link to be whitelisted because:

  1. It is a reference to material for which I have not found sources elsewhere
  2. To include the link in the infobox

Thank you. Peter I. Vardy 17:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do have a slight query with this. Would this website be a reliable source? thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:30, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As the "official" website of the church, that is, it is produced for and on behalf of the church and its members, I would regard it as reliable as any source can be. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:55, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am inclined to list this however is there not a sense in which this is self referencing? You use the website created for the Church to reference the Wikipedia article for the church. I guess I would be happier with something that seemed like an independent source. If no one gets "excited" about it I'll list it fairly soon I think. While I'm at it, apologies for the delay in dealing with this & thanks for your prompt response, regards --Herby talk thyme 15:05, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments. Links to "official" websites are common throughout Wikipedia and can lead the reader to more information about the article. This link does not lead to a particularly good website. However there is provision for the church's website in the religious building infobox. Better examples are maybe St Chad's Church, Farndon [1] or St Laurence's Church, Frodsham [2] which I think are valid links in an encyclopaedia. The inclusion of the link for St Mary's Church, Sandbach would provide consistency. Best wishes. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:21, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok you convinced me :)  Done and it should work, regards --Herby talk thyme 16:25, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It works fine. Many thanks. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 18:11, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Requests

blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=34726270&blogID=305215395

I am writing an article about Ulver's upcoming album and would like to add information about a release party in accordance to the promotion of the album (Shadows of the Sun), but are not allowed to use this link: blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=34726270&blogID=305215395

I need to have this as a reference in the article. Sincerely cun 21:32, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Not done. Wikipedia is not for social networking, including telling the other fans about the release party. Guy (Help!) 21:49, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • It is to be used as a reference in the facts about the promotion of the album. It is useful for an article about the album telling how it was promoted. How can I write about facts if I am not allowed to use verified sources? The blog is from Ulver's official MySpace. -cun 21:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Now that the other link about the promotional event is dysfunctional, this is in fact the only official documentation that exists. -cun 19:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • How about reconsidering? No arguments have come forth -cun 13:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is not very professional of you not joining the debate any further. cun 11:15, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Supporting Guy -  Not done and closed --Herby talk thyme 20:09, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Really constructive of you. There are several reasons to include this official statement as a source in the article:
  1. It is one of the few sources on one of the few promotional events in accordance to the release of the album.
  2. It is something that actually occurred and thusly deserve to be mentioned as of reason no. 1.
  3. It is way too late to "inform" other "fans" about the event, to inform about it now is strictly encyclopedic.
  4. How can an encyclopedia be treated seriously if its contributors are not allowed to use official statements or the like as sources?
-cun 19:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beatbox.Be

Sincerely,

My name is Lawrence and I go by the artistname Beathead. I'm a professional beatboxer and together with Roxorloops we're also administrating a website/forum (BeatBox.Be) dedicated to beatbox. On the international forum, we have an active beatbox-database with tons of movies and information. You can also learn how to beatbox in three different languages, or just hang out with internationally known beatboxers. Some time ago I created an editor account to add info about beatbox here on wikipedia, especially about our Belgian scene. Roxorloops became vice-world champion of beatbox, and is the most refreshing beatboxer of the last years, so there is definitely relevance. The problem about this was that I did not put up any referral links (I did not know a lot about editing here yet, sorry).

This is what I added: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Beatboxing&diff=153141722&oldid=153141432

So the content was removed, after I learned I had to put up referrals, I linked to Beatbox.Be and asked someone else to put links to our site on other wikipedia's languages as well (since we are running an international beatbox forum with users from Nicaragua, Malaysia to the United States I thought this would not be a problem, but this can only be done if content is added I found out later).

But I wanted to try to add another article and put up a link to BeatBox.Be and it said our site was blacklisted. I went to see and I saw on the report ( http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2007/10#Spam_from_beatbox.be) that we only received one warning and it was in French (and I can't speak that language). If I would of known that I was actually spamming, this could have been prevented.

So, to cut a long story short, I tried to get our domain whitelisted on the general wiki-blacklist, but apparantly there is a rule that says they cannot do this for site-owners, and that I had to try to get it locally whitelisted or get an established editor to present my case on the general whitelisting page. How is this possible ? Could this mail be forwarded to the right instances, so this can be done ? I allready tried to contact an editor who deleted the history in the past, but this probably went unnoticed. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Can%27t_sleep%2C_clown_will_eat_me#BeatBox.Be)

This is the page I 'd like to help and edit, but the information for that is on Beatbox.Be. And if I can't refer to this domain, I'm afraid this content is going to be deleted again and again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beatbox

As a reference, this is a link to previous work I've done on WikiHow, an article on how to beatbox, http://www.wikihow.com/index.php?title=Beatbox&action=history


Thanks in advance for looking into this, sorry for the long post and the bad English. Beathead BeatBox.Be Team —Preceding unsigned comment added by BeatboxBe (talk • contribs) 18:11, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at this when considering this request and maybe this edit too. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 18:30, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a permalink to the meta discussion in case it gets archived before the issue is resolved here. Given the sometimes uncivil discussion we've already had on meta, I lack confidence this domain won't be spammed here. --18:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by A. B. (talk • contribs)

Yes, well I wanted to delete that awful post 5 seconds later and my IP was allready banned. And like I said, the spamming will be stopped. What is your guys problem, Herby and AB ? You are telling me to go whitelist my domain locally and now you are causing troubles in here as well ? Go find somebody else to stalk if you want. How much do I need to tell that warning was in French !!!! We haven't had a second chance since.BeatboxBe 19:05, 23 October 2007 (UTC)


So this is declined locally as well ? What do I have to do to write articles in here if I cannot reference anything ? BeatboxBe 22:08, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

If you are unable to write the article supported by multiple acceptable sources (WP:RS#Self-published_sources), the article itself would fail WP:NN#General_notability_guideline and would be deleted anyway. I'm sure you understand that Wikipedia *must* have strong rules against conflict of interest, that there are many people who come here solely to promote themselves and their own sites and their own pet interests. Are you here for Wikipedia? Or are you here for Beatbox.be? If you are here for Wikipedia then there's an entire universe of conflict-free areas where you'll have no difficulties. Alsee 09:14, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanx for the reply. Actually I'm here for beatbox. I thought since we maintain a website on beatboxing, that info could be added to wikipedia as well. Since I needed to add a source, I've put a link to my site. Later on, because of great success, we added an international section and then I 've put links on other wiki-languages as well. I'm sorry, I shouldn't have done that.

The 'beatbox' page on wikipedia did not even mention that there was a world championship of beatbox in Leipzig (2005). Every time I tried to edit such info it got deleted. Isn't wikipedia meant to be like some kind of active and fast encyclopedia ? I would gladly write more in wikipedia, but I don't understand why I may not write about the things I know best. How can I add multiple sources if there's only one source ? Except maybe small articles online. But who's to say those are so credible..

In any case, I did not know about these policies until the domain got banned. The only warning was in French. I just wanted more promotion for beatbox, and for our site, sure, but we do not earn anything of our site, so there is no interest whatsoever to spam the net. I hope you still can review this. BeatboxBe 05:39, 22 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BeatboxBe (talk • contribs) 05:39, 22 Nov 2007

Languedoc

I followed the link and it seems perfectly legitimate and germane to the article:

[The Cathars of the Langudoc] James McDonald, 2005.

from Wiki article on Catharism Critic9328 03:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is the link? ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 19:12, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
languedoc-france.info/articles/t_voltairecathars.htm Octane [improve me] 01.11.07 1053 (UTC)
The domain was blacklisted in July because of spamming by an IP (see [3]). But there was an understanding there were also many legitimate links. This one should probably be white listed so Critic9328 can improve the article he's working on. -- SiobhanHansa 23:14, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
User:Wetman, the creator of the Circulade article about circular villages in France, was unhappy at the blacklisting of languedoc-france.info, since that ruled out the best links to illustrate his article. The evidence of cross-wiki spamming above is serious, so the best course might be to whitelist the link just for en.wp and then see what happens. EdJohnston 23:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's some background:

Notwithstanding the abusive spamming and attacks on some editors, I recommend whitelisting specific site pages on a case-by-case basis here as trusted, established editors request them for specific articles. However, I should also note that these sites are self-published original research and do not meet WP:RS. --A. B. (talk) 01:50, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for specific pages will be considered but for the whole site  Not done per A. B. --Herby talk thyme 20:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Lindberg Bellamy salute post blocked

This is interesting. I tried to add the following text to a discussion of the Charles Lindberg Talk Page. It was blocked because the PREVIOUS post had the blocked link. Could someone fix that?

If you google images, you can find quickly find a photo of Lindberg giving the salute, along with a bunch of text, both superimposed on the photo, and accompanying it. Whoever wrote that text all of a sudden uses the term "military salute", although nothing else on that site states that the American military used it a its salute. This appears to be just plain carelessness. Even if American troops gave the pledge and used the salute when reciting the Pledge of Allegance (did they do that? and something that the article does not contend), it is NOT the equvalent of "the miltary salute", which is how soldiers formally acknowledge each other (as far as I can make out). Thus the recent edit after waiting for comment. Steve Pastor 21:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done looks like it is out of time now, thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.ListAll&friendID=66393725

I need the above link whitelisted so I can reference the announcement, made only on the band's MySpace blog, that Gibson Guitars is producing a signature model for the band. I'm attempting to include the reference on List of Gibson players. Bullzeye (Ring for Service) 08:30, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'd say that's not actually a reliable source for the claim, and it's trivia anyway. Perhaps when Gibson announce it on their site? Guy (Help!) 17:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Closed as  Not done per Guy's comment --Herby talk thyme 20:17, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

tutorialspoint.com

I have been at tutorialspoint many times and found that their tutorials specially Ruby on is really very useful, I could not find such helpful material on RoR on any other site. I came across a discussion which is going on to whitelist this site, Here is the link

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist#tutorialspoint.com

Not sure if it will go through. Same time someone already has suggested to add at least their RoR link at wekipedia. But according to A.B. this request has to be put on other wiki page and that’s why I’m doing so for the benefit of wikis. I know I’m not an established editor at wiki but I’m a frequent user of wiki and always have been a great fan of wiki. I’m in middle east and its difficult to find good books around so I’m totally dependent on internet specially wikipedia

Here is the link from tutorialspoint.com/ruby_on_rails/index.htm and I would recommend to add this link at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_on_Rails. I don’t think current tutorial links are useful.

Thanks Scott —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.244.160.221 (talk) 09:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid this does not carry the weight of an established editor making a request so I'm closing this as  Not done as no one else has come forward request it, thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

z4.invisionfree.com/Adrian_Edmondson/index.php?

I attempted to add this as an external link on the page about the actor Adrian Edmondson, but was told that invision.com was blacklisted. However, this forum is a good source of news and chat about Ade, and other related articles and people —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artimeia (talk • contribs) 14:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to request that invisionfree hosts be unblocked, as they are simply message-board hosting pages, and blocking all invisionfree forums seems a bit odd, especially when many are good resources for information about a topic. --LordHuffNPuff 17:01, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In the general case forums are inappropriate external links and non-reliable sources. The invisionfree forums have been spammed on several occasions. If there are exceptions to the general case individual links can be whitelisted but ought to be accomapnied by some reasoning as to how they're encyclopedic. So far (from what I've noticed) all cases brought up have been like this one - links that apparently fit squarely in the non-reliable sources or links to be avoided categories and for which no compelling special case has been made. -- SiobhanHansa 19:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Closed as  Not done per SiobhanHansa --Herby talk thyme 20:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

economywatch.com

I don't understand why this site is blacklisted; at any rate I was attempting to take this page out of the category International relations (userpages should not be contained within mainspace categories), but I don't want to remove the user's work. Octane [improve me] 01.11.07 1050 (UTC)

This page might be of interest for further review. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 11:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seems it was blacklisted for conflict of interest, not spamming? In that case we should let the ban on the user stand, and leave the site unlisted. Octane [improve me] 08.11.07 2005 (UTC)

 Not done per Octane, thanks --Herby talk thyme 08:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

www.bestmusic.ro

I`ve posted some informations about different bands(concerts in different cities). See Deep Purple, Pink Martini. Anyway, those dates (people attended at the concert, date, lcoation) were taken from this site: bestmusic.ro. I`ve use (as I was supposed to do) notes to indicate my source by posting the link in the note section. Also there are some interviews (video or audio) usefull for those who are looking new informations about their favourite artists. here are some links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_M._Lauderdale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_Martini

I`ve noticed that this site: bestmusic.ro was blacklisted after I`ve tried to post some information about the band Outlandish and its concert in Bucharest. Check out this link, pls: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlandish —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.88.148.1 (talk) 16:36, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You (and some editors with a clear conflict of interest) were spamming this particular link (and, seen your edit history, another link as well), and I strongly suspect that you have a conflict of interest as well (your IP is close to the IP of the site). See the COIBot reports in these two link-templates:
The site may be of interest, but it was only spammed to this wikipedia, and we are writing an encyclopedia here, not a linkfarm (see also our external link guideline). You are still free to add content, though!
Hence:  Not done
Hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:53, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Blacklisted locally.[4]
Background information
Domains
Accounts
--A. B. (talk) 17:58, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Related domains missed earlier (Renalo Investments)


Possibly related domains
  • Active Soft:
  • IP: 194.88.148.1
  • IP: 194.88.148.11
  • IP: 194.88.148.12
  • IP: 194.88.148.11
  • Netbridge:
  • IP: 194.88.148.13
  • IP: 217.156.103.22
  • IP: 194.88.148.14
  • IP: 194.88.148.14
  • IP: 194.88.148.13
I recommend we have bots monitor the addition of links to these related domains. It's not clear they are all spam, so I am reluctant to recommend blacklisting.
--A. B. (talk) 19:56, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your answer. I only did what i`ve seen before on wikipedia (and that`s the idea of a field called external links - to have the possibility to direct the readers to more complex informations about a subject of interest.) If I say `x sung in Tokio on december 2008 and felt of the stage` - i`m supposed to cite my source. Here are some examples: Akon interview - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akon (reference no 2) Any new information added on this page was linked to an external source... and that`s the right thing to do. This way I have the possibility to verify the information found, to see the context etc... It is in both interest to have solid information and most important - easy to verify. It is true that behind those footnotes are some webpages - but that`s not spaming... It is called REFERENCE.

Closed -  Not done per a number of the comment above by established users --Herby talk thyme 20:20, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Remark: From the COIBot reports it can be seen that there are quite some single purpose accounts whose only purpose is to add these links to external links sections on several wikipedia (different languages). There are hardly any other accounts who have added any of these links in a way where it was actually used as a source (there have been some reversions by established where the link was reinserted after unrelated vandalism), nor was there any content added by these accounts. It may therefore be recommended that these links are blacklisted at the meta-level. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I take it you are suggesting that this be listed on the Meta blacklist rather than locally? If so, both sites listed or just this one? Thanks --Herby talk thyme 10:44, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Both, I would say. I see both are used here and on ro (sometimes similar accounts). I don't know how the romanian wiki thinks about the links, if there are complaints there, or the link gets added to more wikis than only these two, meta may be appropriate. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:11, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - now listed on Meta and removed from local list - thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:25, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(http)://z7.invisionfree.com/Kya_Dark_Lineage/

this link has been blacklisted becuase it is a 7 invisionfree server, i like to put this link on my user page but it has recently dissapeared because the 7 invisionfree forums have been blacklisted, could someone please whitelist this forum? this forum has a special task to get the creators of the game its about to make another and it would help if fans of the game saw it on my profile and joined to help get a sequel for that game.-hotspot

Have I got this right: You want the link whitelisting to help you use your user page as a platform to campaign for a sequel game to be made? -- SiobhanHansa 15:15, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, but its a bit similar to what you said, it is also a good resource for people who need help in the game-hotspot

How is it different? Or more to the real point - in what way would white listing help Wikipedia be a better encyclopedia? -- SiobhanHansa 12:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well it is the only kya dark lineage forum ever made! (excluding a dead one i found that only had 1 member) it will only be on my profile page so it won't do any harm to wikipedia, also maybe a kya fan will go to my profile and find the link and will be helped by the forum, by asking a question there.-hotspot

Personally I do not see this as encyclopedic as such, with no further comments closed as  Not done --Herby talk thyme 14:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Withdrawn or Otherwise Past Relevance

Proposed removals from Whitelist (sites to block)


Troubleshooting and problems



END

Discussion

Spam filter or editorial filter?

As I said in #Without_warning.21, this is a spam filter, and should not be used to block links that are prohibited merely for editorial reasons, like blog.myspace.com or links that violate WP:C. There will always be a few instances in which such links are appropriate. Please remove all such domains.

If they're a persistent problem, create a bot to flag such links for review by editors; don't just block them mechanically. This is causing people to lose their work unnecessarily. — Omegatron 13:05, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist&oldid=173457552"