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 Beetstra (talk | contribs) at 14:24, 18 March 2009 (→‎economywatch.com: re, done). 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|278108829#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)


    holocaustresearchproject.org/trials/konradmorgen.html

    I would like to requeat that the above link be white-listed, because it contains information relating to Georg Konrad Morgen. I was not aware of Wikipedia's "blacklisting" policy until I attempted to add the aforementioned link as a source for Morgen's attendance at the Hague Academy of International Law, specifically on the List of Hague Academy of International Law people page. I have tried to find another website with the needed information, but I could only find Wikipedia sites and others which "mirror" its content. --TommyBoy (talk) 02:45, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    • The issue here is that there are two competing claims to ownership of te content of that site, much of which is editorialised anyway, and they brought their fight here. I am sure you can find a better source, perhaps the source they themselves cite. A link is not necessary, just a citation to a reliable source (which that site is not, according to the comments we have form the competing webmasters). Guy (Help!) 22:37, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    The H.E.A.R.T Website is well respected, it is quoted frequently by the BBC, CBS news, was a source of information and research for the film Defiance, it is listed on the USHMM top Holocaust related websites etc etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.243.68.248 (talk) 04:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    • Which entirely fails to answer the issues we have experienced with this site. And of course there is the point that something which exists only on this site is probably not significant anyway. 80.176.82.42 (talk) 00:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I think the shortcoming you are referring to is systemic to the nature of Wiki and the acts of hate bloggers and spammers who attempt to blacklist sites they do not like by pretending to spam from the actual site domain itself. I've spoken with members of the HEART team on this matter and they've stated they really have no desire or interest to be embroiled in the controversies created by others. By the way, the issues stated above were not the holocaustresearchproject, they were deathcamps.org vs. a counterfeit version with a hyphened URL. You may want to get the stories straight. Keep up the great work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.243.68.248 (talk) 04:28, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    www. missoulian. com/articles/2007/10/08/news/mtregional/znews06.txt/ and www. missoula. com/news/node/939/

    These are two simple articles with no spam involved that are the 2 only sources in SpectrUM Discovery Area. Debresser (talk) 17:51, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Somebody has added a third source from another site, but still these links are essential for the article. Debresser (talk) 14:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    • Missoulian.com is not on the blacklist. Missoula.com is blacklisted at meta. I have restored the link to missoulian.com, is that enough? Guy (Help!) 23:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I suppose so. What should be done with the remaining link? In general what should be done with a blacklisted reference that will not be whitelisted? Should it be left as a remark in the source code, or deleted? Debresser (talk) 10:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    • I normally remove blacklisted sites. Sometimes the content can be referenced from a print source, which is better. Guy (Help!) 23:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Ok. Thanks. Debresser (talk) 01:21, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    tinyurl.com, bit.ly and is.gd

    When I attempted to use a shortened URL by either of the three above domains bit.ly, tinyurl.com or is.gd, Wikipedia displayed the message "The spam filter blocked your page save because it detected a blacklisted hyperlink." The MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist was referenced, however none of these urls or domains are listed. These domains provide a valuable service shortening urls that can be VERY unwieldy and I have not been able to find them on either the global or local known blacklists. I am all for blacklisting even suspected spammers, but let's not blacklist ones that provide a valuable service used by many popular services. I highly recommend all three be whitelisted. Navywings (talk) 00:45, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    These links can be, and many of this type have been, used to circumvent the blacklist. That is why they are blacklisted, and any others, even while they have not been used yet, should immediately be meta-blacklisted. Just click the link, and copy the resulting, proper, url from the browser and use that as a link. As such, no Declined. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:43, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    economywatch.com

    I would like to propose that economywatch.com be whitelisted. The site has been producing regular news stories about the economy and they are good references.

    I was trying to add a reference to a story on the site which would have supported the fact that not only Japanese media criticized the Japanese finance minister who appeared drunk at the recent G7 meeting in Rome, but the international media criticized him too, as was done on economywatch.com here: economywatch.com/world_economy/japan/Japan_Economy_Japans_GDP_Shrinks_3.3_Finance_Minister_Drunk_at_G7_Meeting.html

    The page I would like to add the page to is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G7

    Patro (talk) 13:27, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    The site is blacklisted locally, but I can't find any reason why it should be (and there was no log at that stage). I am inclined to remove it entirely, and will do so in a few days unless I hear a reason not to. Stifle (talk) 16:17, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I think I found the issue that resulted in the blacklisting at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Oct 2#Assorted spamming, which references users 61.247.238.182 (talk · contribs) and Moneywatch (talk · contribs). I have no opnion on this myself - just supplying a reference. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:32, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I see. It appears User:COIBot has been asked to watch this. I'll poke Beetstra for his opinion. Stifle (talk) 13:23, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm, don't see too much wrong with the site. Lets whitelist this link ( Done), and I would suggest to request de-blacklisting for the whole domain. If abuse resumes .. it can always be put back. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:24, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    DwarfURL.com on TinyURL page

    The TinyURL page mentions DwarfURL.com as a related site without a link to it. I tried to add an explicit link, and I got the blacklist page. It seems silly to block DwarfURL.com when it is not followed by a path. —TedPavlic (talk) 14:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added \bwww\.dwarfurl\.com(?![/:]) --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:45, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Please do the same for
    • linkbee.com
    • snipurl.com
    Also, it might be nice if these matches were case insensitive. Thanks. —TedPavlic (talk) 12:59, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    attask.com/ on AtTask page

    It's the company's page for crying out loud. I'm not sure the previous debate about this site. I don't work for them but I'm trying to find some good project management software (I'm looking up numerous project management software via List_of_project_management_software). I just find it weird trying to look up software and I have to go to another site (google) to get to their website. I'm not sure how many pages will benefit from it but I think the site should be able to be listed on it's own company bio. (Also, I hope I made a valid proposal. If not. I'll check back. :D) --Monkey225 (talk) 09:07, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    This was blacklisted back in 2007 ([archive]) when it was spammed over several articles about the company with various versions of its name. It wasn't notable then, but if it's notable now, I see no reason to maintain the blacklisting and would  Defer to Local blacklist for full removal. Stifle (talk) 16:39, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    aboutmyarea.co.uk

    AboutMyArea is a UK franchise operating in postcode regions to provide local information. Typical URLs are of the form www.aboutmyarea.co.uk/np26, givng information about the NP26 area. This network of websites would be of use as links on the Wikipedia pages of the towns and villages the websites serve, giving a wider view of the community. However the root URL is blocked locally as part of the MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. I can find the blocking reference, but no reason for the block in the first place.

    As a specific example I would like to add www.aboutmyarea.co.uk/np26 to the Redwick page, which I have just updated with two photographs - both of which were originally taken for the AboutMyArea website!

    Expatscot —Preceding undated comment added 23:37, 16 March 2009 (UTC).[reply]

    Viva64.com

    Explain why the site should be whitelisted.
    The site www.Viva64.com entered the blacklist by mistake. www.Viva64.com is a commercial site of OOO “Program Verification Systems” and contains an abundant base of informational resources devoted to the issues of resource intensive applications development. A large number of programmers in C/C++ may get interested by the articles presented at this site. A number of articles form www.Viva64.com are published at such sites as CodeProject, DDJ, Intel. E.g.:

    Thus, the articles at www.Viva64.com are good and interesting ones. It would be preferable to afford an opportunity to Wikipedia visitors of finding links to such articles is the corresponding topic sections devoted to programming.

    Explain which articles would benefit from the addition of the link.
    The articles that will benefit from adding such link are those that are connected with resource intensive software development, those connected with parallel programming and 64-bit technologies, to be more precise.

    Provide the specific link to the page you're requesting be added.
    E.g., it would be reasonable to add links to the articles on the following pages:

    94.28.248.41 (talk) 13:11, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Approved Requests

    Declined Requests

    hallmarkchannelpress.com

    • Should be whitelisted because it has cast lists, synopsis, and ratings to help expand articles about the network's television movies.
    • Which articles would benefit from the addition of the link: any of their other television movies' articles. See the List of Hallmark Channel Original Films
    • The specific link to the page be added: Chasing a Dream (External Links section)

    Thanks! Cactusjump (talk) 01:49, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Please provide the exact link at hallmarkchannelpress.com to be added, not the Wikipedia page you want to add it to. Stifle (talk) 12:15, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done due to lack of reply. Stifle (talk) 10:06, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Allmusic

    While trying to edit Chuck Wagon and the Wheels I got a message saying that allmusic was a blacklisted link. It wasn't just a minute ago. What the heck happened? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 01:48, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I can't find it on any of the blacklists. I suspect it might have been an erroneous addition which was reverted. If you're still having the problem, please state the exact URL. Stifle (talk) 12:21, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done due to lack of reply. Stifle (talk) 10:06, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Norton AntiVirus

    Editing the above article, I tried to reference the Washington Post, and got a message saying that it was blacklisted. I checked the blacklist, both the local and global ones, and couldn't find the root domain name. I tried again. Blocked. Hope this doesn't count against me in anyway. TechOutsider (talk) 01:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)TechOutsider[reply]

    Can you provide the exact URL? Put in spaces after the .s so that it won't be blocked here. Stifle (talk) 12:22, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done due to lack of reply. Stifle (talk) 10:06, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    question why on earth are we blacklisting the Washington Post? DGG (talk) 05:34, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Are we? The main URL does not appear to explicitly be on any blacklist. Have you verified that it is a problem? Kuru talk 12:11, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Because the original poster has not posted the exact URL that is triggering the blacklist, it's impossible to determine what the problem is. It could be another part of the URL. Stifle (talk) 13:21, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    forbes.com

    I'm trying to restore blanked content on Talk:Meez. The page contains a link to a relevant article at forbes.com, but since the URL contains the word "chat" (meez is in large part a chat service), it is running up against the black list.

    gotta be a glitch here - I'll head to help desk . — Ched (talk) 02:18, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    It's being worked on. — Ched (talk) 03:39, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    We can't help you here without the exact URL; if you are still having a problem, please post the exact URL (put in spaces after the .s if necessary). Stifle (talk) 12:22, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done due to lack of reply. Stifle (talk) 10:06, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Withdrawn or Otherwise Past Relevance

    animenewsnetwork.com

    Anime News Network is a reliable source for Japanese animation news, it has been used in numerous of anime-related articles in Wikipedia including FA such as Serial Experiments Lain or MADLAX. While I don't see ANN blocked in the blacklist, in the article I'm creating, the {{ann company}} template triggered the SPAM blacklist for some reason. I think it should be safe to whitelist this URL. —29th ((☎)) 02:00, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Can you please give the exact URL that triggered the spam list? Stifle (talk) 12:17, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    It was this one that triggered the SPAM list. Seems to solved now for some reason. Sorry for the noise. —29th ((☎)) 10:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    No need to be sorry; thanks for coming back. Stifle (talk) 19:19, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals from Whitelist (sites to block)

    Troubleshooting and problems

    Procedures

    To get a perfectly good link whitelisted is an ordeal. I actually have given up (for the second time). I feel myself like a criminal explaning that he did nothing wrong. Where should I discuss simplification of whitelisting rules or, alternatively, the unwillingness of admins to apply the rules, whichever may be the case? Debresser (talk) 09:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia:Village pump (policy), probably. Stifle (talk) 11:27, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Discussion

    This is a very low-traffic page, perhaps we should open a process for it in the Wikipedia namespace. Stifle (talk) 14:54, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Other projects with active whitelists

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

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist&oldid=278108829"