MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist

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|359234318#section_name}}

Note that requests from new or unregistered users are not usually considered.

Admins: Use seth's tool to search the spamlists.

Indicators
Request completed:
Done	{{Done}}
Stale	{{StaleIP}}
Request withdrawn	{{withdrawn}}
Request declined:
Declined	{{Declined}}
Not done	{{Notdone}}
Information:
Additional information needed	{{MoreInfo}}
Note:	{{TakeNote}}

Proposed additions to Whitelist (sites to unblock)

www.google.com/cse/home?cx=004453055800956638747:6ed0u5bnolu&hl=en

I understand why the custom search engines from Google are blocked. However, I have tried to share this link with the Video Game and Pokémon project, and some have suggested I com here so that it can be linked to. This search engine searches only sources listed as reliable video game sources on WP:VG/RS, and can thus be invaluable in finding reception and development data where it is harder to do, and all sources are guaranteed reliable already, provided one makes sure to skip over user-generate content on these sites. In short, I believe it can be a good resource if it could be linked to and made available to a wider range of editors. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 13:00, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Just post it in the exact same way as you have added it here. Stifle (talk) 11:00, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

mehfiltube.magnify.net

I tried to link to mehfiltube just to find out that it is still blacklisted. The fear seems to be that mehfiltube host's copyrighted content, while in fact ANY recently created work is copyrighted by someone.All of mehfiltube's content is hosted by google and youtube.Mehfiltube just indexes videos that have been uploaded by the musicans themselves and/or they are all welcomed by the musicans as a free promotion of their music.Remember - this is not popular music and musicans are struggling to find some audience at all.Youtube is seen by many ICM musicans as a plattform to get known by international audiences.Yet the search on youtube totally sucks.The related videos youtube finds are often cats & dogs or even disturbing stuff.That is where mehfiltube steps in and provides content related browsing of the artists videos and these efforts are duely appreciated by the artists themselves.Mehfiltubians always add missing data to topic titles, such as missing raag names....etc. Mehfiltube's focus is on not so well known upcoming musicans that hardly anyone has heard of. Mehfiltube list's classical and semiclassical music in a way that no other site does - it allows for time raaga based browsing by using a flash interface.All contend can be browsed strctly ordered by raag, instrument and genre. It also ensures that all content is relevant through a peer filtering system of hundreds members that have to agree if a video is fit for mehfiltube. It is not one of these sites where bots just add content randomly. It is a site of great educational value (read article) and it seems to have been blacklisted by people with little understanding.There is also a flag/report button so in the case a video is linked to without consent, reporting it will disable that link on magnify.net inmediatly. This has been discussed before and it has been promised to whitelist the site, but it's still blacklisted. Another important reason to whitelist mehfiltube is that it tries to find a balance between Pakistani classical music and Indian classical music.This is very important as both countries where more then once at war - yet they share a religion/musical heritage/culture and language. It is mehfiltube and sarangi.info that are focusing on this sort of balance - most sites on ICM seem to ignore Pakistani Classical Music at all.There is tendency among some Indian wikipedians to bully anything from Pakistan "out of the way" and label ANY contribution or link from Pakistan on a shared heritage subject as "Spam". This is wrong! Please whitelist or you may also blacklist google and youtube [[[Special:Contributions/95.223.187.171|95.223.187.171]] (talk) 07:29, 22 April 2010 (UTC)]

This has actually been blocked for spamming; it may be unblocked if a trusted, high-volume editor requests it for a specific page or group of pages. Furthermore, this page is for requesting one or a few named pages from a blocked site be permitted; requests to remove a site from the list entirely go to MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist.  Not done. Stifle (talk) 11:02, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

examiner.com 2

I would also like to use examiner.com as a source on the upcoming book by Suzanne Collins, rumored to be called "The Victors". The previous two books (The Hunger Games and Catching Fire) were enormously popular, and were both National Bestsellers.GrandMattster 21:25, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Rumoured? I am sorry, we need reliable sources, especially for rumors. And Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. But could you be a bit more specific which document you'd like whitelisted? --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 08:28, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

The exact site is http://www. examiner . com/x-11219-Denver-Young-Adult-Fiction-Examiner~y2009m10d4-Suzanne-Collins-improves-on-The-Hunger-Games-in-sequel-Catching-Fire. GrandMattster 19:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Recommend no action. The source says nothing more than that there is a rumor as to the name of the new book. If there was a reported substance, it's conceivable I'd have recommended a courtesy whitelisting, to give you the chance to discuss it, but this is a lost cause, the only way it could be used is if nobody notices. However, if you find other examiner.com pages with stronger arguments for using, don't hesitate to ask here, and I'll try to help see that you get a much faster response. --Abd (talk) 00:56, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

 Not done Stifle (talk) 12:50, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

forums.encyclopediadramatica.com/showpost.php?p=164375&postcount=21

I'm trying to use this specific post as a citation for the Encyclopædia Dramatica section i'm creating concerning a recent problem that has arisen due to the hosting costs of their website. I would like this link to be whitelisted in order to give readers a basic idea of the hosting costs, which i have quoted in the short article but need the citation. Thanks --Bailo26 (talk) 01:34, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

While the monthly cost of running a website is of some interest, particularly if it means the site may close, the information is of little long-term encyclopedic value, and there is no chance that any statement on ED, particularly a forum posting, could be taken as a reliable source. Johnuniq (talk) 03:34, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

So is that a no then?--Bailo26 (talk) 02:25, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

There is an exemption from this in WP:ELOFFICIAL. I am somewhat inclined to approve the request but will see what other admins say. Stifle (talk) 09:22, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

• If this is a significant fact then it will be covered in reliable independent secondary sources. If it is not covered in such sources then it's just random forum wibble which can safely be ignored. The ED forums are not a reliable source for anything at all. Guy (Help!) 11:35, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
• recommend no action. If, however, the editor will show reasonable consent from Talk:Encyclopedia Dramatica for usage of this link, I would revise my recommendation so that the edit could be attempted. --Abd (talk) 01:07, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
• I really don't like that whitelisting decision have turned into content decisions. The value of a specific link is a matter for the article talk page. The decision here should be based on spam potential and spam potential alone. And a link this specific is no risk of spam. Whitelist it and let them decide on the article talk whether it's an appropriate link or not. Gigs (talk) 21:54, 20 March 2010 (UTC

As I said, if it's a significant story then it will be covered somewhere other than the forums. WP:NOR means we don't take stuff direct from the primary source, as a rule, and comments about such issues on the forums are unlikely to be reliable or neutral without the context that would be provided by independent coverage. Guy (Help!) 16:26, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Interview with Miracle Laurie at Examiner.com

The alert triggered when I tried to save a page with an interview Examiner.com indicated that I can just request a specific page be allowed. Since this is an interview with Miracle Laurie, and it looks legit, can it be unblocked? The odd thing is that the url was already in that article before I edited it; I just added more material from it, and changed the ref tag into a ref name tag in order to cite it twice. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 05:13, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

What is the complete URL (you can add some spaces here to be able to save this post)? --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 08:54, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

The url is: h t t p : / / w w w . examiner.com/x-585-Entertainment-Examiner~y2009m9d29-A-Conversation-with-Dollhouse-doll-Miracle-Laurie. Nightscream (talk) 00:34, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Due to past abuse we'd normally only whitelist a link if it provides a reliable source for something not covered elsewhere. There is no shortage of interviews, after all. Guy (Help!) 19:38, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

 Not done Stifle (talk) 12:51, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

It is a source for stuff not covered elsewhere. It's a good-length interview that provides information on her life and career. I wouldn't know where to find the material that's in it elsewhere. Nightscream (talk) 03:28, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Interview on justjared.buzznet.com

There is an ongoing edit curfuffle at Miranda Kerr concerning her ethnic background. Numerous sites around the web list one thing while this interview done by justjared (justjared.buzznet.com/2009/09/11/miranda-kerrs-biggest-runway-mishap-flying-shoe/) contradicts that information and appears to set the record straight from the mouth of Miranda Kerr. I don't know anything about justjared or its history on WP other than discovering it's blacklisted (when I tried to add the reference) but perhaps they can be trusted for an interview? I've searched the internet for a couple of hours now (egads!) trying to find any other source for either side that appears definitive and have come up empty. I see here that a similar request was approved but not with a lot of confidence. I would like to remove the contentious part from the article and be done with it but I'm guessing it'll just keep popping up since a lot of people seem to really care about her ethnic background. If this one page were whitelisted maybe the issue would calm down. SQGibbon (talk) 19:52, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

What makes that site a reliable source? Stifle (talk) 11:51, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

The site in general? Probably nothing, but I'm not that familiar with it either way (other than its reputation here on Wikipedia). An interview though? While it could be completely made up I've seen no indication that this has been a problem with interviews they've claimed to have done in the past. But then I haven't seen them defended on this count either. I would think that just transcribing an interview could be considered as separate to their reliability as a source otherwise. SQGibbon (talk) 19:45, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

 Stale Stifle (talk) 11:03, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

FreeRepublic webmaster quote

The FreeRepublic article, right near the bottom, has an uncited quote from its webmaster Jim Robinson over his personal feelings about a potential Presidential candidate, and how the website will be active in disparaging said candidate should he receive the nomination for President. The quote is real and you can see it here ( www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2440862/posts?page=25#25 ). The reason this quote is significant is because it backs up many allegations of mistreatment from members who believe the website discriminates against those who do not conform with what the webmaster believes. There's an entire section of the article devoted to the mistreatment of members. Even if the quote is not included verbatim, I feel a link to this specific post he made would further substantiate those claims, and is significant enough to note. I'd like to ask for that specific link to be allowed, but not FreeRepublic as a whole to be unblocked. Kelseypedia (talk) 01:03, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd also like to request a whitelist for the following to fill a cite for another uncited quote. This link ( www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2101737/posts ) shows that the webmaster did indeed endorse McCain near the end of the 2008 elections - something which was also near the end of teh article and unsourced. I will see if I can find his post about Bush. Kelseypedia (talk) 01:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

• If it's not covered by reliable independent sources then it's not significant and should simply be removed. Guy (Help!) 23:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
• Stale
  Guy (Help!) 13:13, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Green County Indian's County Web Site

It seems the web site run by the Green County government is on the blacklist. This whole issue should be reviewed (it is a county-run web site), but barring that, I'd like to have greenecountyindiana.com/attractions/viaduct_aka_the_tulip_tressle added to the white list so that it can be used as a proper reference on the Tulip Viaduct page.--P Todd (talk) 01:00, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

This page has details of how the page got onto the blacklist. More here. I am minded to allow this request but will leave open for a few days in case others have something to chip in. Stifle (talk) 09:29, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done Stifle (talk) 12:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

MoneyWeek: Michael O'Leary profile

Please whitelist:

• Lewis, Jane (2006-10-19). "Michael O'Leary: the outrageous Irish airline entrepeneur". Moneyweek. Retrieved 2010-03-07.

so that it can be used as a reference on Michael O'Leary (Ryanair), Ryanair, Tillingdale, et al. The article contains information about O'Leary's business history including those prior to his becoming CEO of Ryanair. Note that the URL is fudged to allow this request to be filed. —Sladen (talk) 18:40, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Could you put the url you want to be whitelisted in nowiki-tags, or remove the http:// from the beginning so we know where to look. Also, is this a reliable source for that information? --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 09:35, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

s/honeyweek/moneyweek/: http://www.moneyweek.com/news-and-charts/michael-oleary-the-outrageous-irish-airline-entrepeneur.aspx —Sladen (talk) 21:42, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Examiner.com

I've used examiner.com/x-26018-SE-Michigan-Islamic-Examiner~y2010m3d5-Muslims-grieve-for-beloved-leader--Aminah-Asslimi-a-leader-in-the-American-Muslim-landscape as a reference for the life (and death) of Aminah Assilmi. Can we whitelist that one? Anyone know why it was blacklisted? – Toon 21:10, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

I would expect there to be better sources for this information. Examiner.com was blacklisted for various reasons, one of them being that most information is not reliable. Especially for the (recent) death of a BLP the sources should be of higher quality. I do get quite some hits on this on Google, may I suggest to find a better source? --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 09:40, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh really? I wasn't aware it was unreliable. I'll go hunting then. Cheers, – Toon 15:17, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

The site contains user submitted content with different degrees of reliability (which is generally the case for user submitted content). But there is more, including abuse, spam incentives, etc. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 15:41, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

•  Declined due to past abuse and lack of reliability. A better source surely exists. Guy (Help!) 14:49, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

nzartconference.cjb.net

Please unblock the above site.

There will be reference material on this site relating to Amateur Radio following the technical fourms which will be of interest to the general Radio Amateur.

Thanks Doug.

Dougcooke2004 (talk) 19:35, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

How is this a reliable source? Fletsi (aklt) 11:06, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

 Denied due to lack of reply. Stifle (talk) 15:09, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

kfantransmittertour.co.cc/index.html

Please whitelist the page so that it can be used on KFAN (AM). A previous request from an IP states:

it is the new (relocated) home of the defunct geocities pages created and maintained by the former Chief Engineer of the stations which the articles are about. The information contained at that site has been researched and presented by the individual who maintained and supervised the technical operations of the two radio stations under discussion. This person has first-hand knowledge of the subjects, having been employed by the owner of the stations in the position responsible for proper and legal operation and maintenance.

This is a primary source, rather than a reliable secondary source, but it includes photographs and technical information not available on the station's official site, and does not appear to carry advertising. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 13:34, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

 Added (\bkfantransmittertour\.co\.cc\b (i.e., the whole site). I presume this is going to be used as a reference for something. This indeed seems to be the original/only copy of this page. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 07:50, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

songr.co.cc

It is the official site of Songr (Windows software for searching music), but it looks like co.cc domains are blocked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Antiufo (talk • contribs) 07:34, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Seems to be the official site indeed.  Added. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 09:16, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Immediate Actions by the Romanian Government in an Accident in Singapore

Please white list this link: h t t p ://w w w . p e t i t i o n o n l i n e c o m/romsgacc/petition.html would like to add it to the reference on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silviu_Ionescu about Online peition. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronald2010 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Ronald, we don't link to petitions. See the External Links Guideline and especially the Wikipedia is Not a Soapbox or Means of Promotion Policy. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:34, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

This petition was already closed. It is not for linking there for people to sign the petition, it is linking there for people who want to see what the text of the petition is about. Thank you. Please reconsider. Otherwise, can you please suggest another way ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.7.53.23 (talk) 13:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

•  Declined, obviously inappropriate. Guy (Help!) 16:21, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

uccp-auec.co.cc

Please whitelist this URL (uccp-auec.coc.cc) as this URL is used by the UCCP-Alabang United Evangelical Church as its official website. The link will be added to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mintinlupa_City entry under Churches.202.7.209.160 (talk) 13:44, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

The only reasonable place for this link would be on UCCP-Alabang United Evangelical Church. On the page you suggest (do I see correctly that it does not exist yet), a wikilink to UCCP-Alabang United Evangelical Church could then be included, but it does not belong on the page where you want to include it. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 15:21, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

 Denied Stifle (talk) 12:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

investmentcalculator.co.cc

• investmentcalculator.co.cc: 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

I found that this website is useful for the general population to do investment calculation and wish to add it at external links of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investment however I think the co.cc makes me unable to put it on. I say it is useful because it is simple, unlike other investment calculators which are flooded with inflation, expected salary increase etc inputs which most of the population don't really know what to put in. I believe this website can show and educate the general population the power of investment and how simple the calculation actually is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Walxyer (talk • contribs) 04:43, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

We are not the yellow pages, and links to online calculators of any type violate that policy. If you need an online calculator, you can use Google (or include it in the open directory already linked), if you need to explain how investment calculations work you can write about it in Wikipedia. So, unless the calculator is notable enough for an own article (where it then would be needed as an external link), I would decline this request. I hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 09:00, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments:

• This site does not appear in a Google search, possibly indicating that it's been blacklisted by Google for link-spamming.^[1][2]
• You've ignored 4 warnings in the past for link-spamming.^[3]
• co.cc is a redirect domain similar to tinyurl.com; we blacklist these on sight since they've been used by spammers to circumvent the blacklist.

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

 Declined: this request

 Defer to Global blacklist: for 9 other Walxyer domains.

Reference:

• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#Walxyer spam (permanent link)
• meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#Walxyer spam (permanent link)

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:20, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

guyharveyinc.com/Biography.php

The Guy Harvey article currently has a ref pointing to guyharveyinc.com/home.html which is a dead link.

A better target subpage for the material being cited with that ref would be guyharveyinc.com/Biography.php

Can this subpage be whitelisted? Once done, I can update the ref to point to the biographical information. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes? No? Maybe? Comments? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:15, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

The site was blacklisted for spamming; this page seems reasonable to whitelist and I'll approve this request in a few days unless a reason not to arises. Stifle (talk) 15:07, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

 Closed

Not a problem, I understand; in fact, one of the spam reports shown in the log that lead to the blacklisting was one that I had submitted.

However, I think that I can withdraw this sub-page whitelisting request now. I've now found a handful of third-party sites that provide this same biographical information, which could be used instead of whitelisting this page from his official site. The additional sources are press releases, so still primary sources; but they're externally published on PR Newswire and News Blaze, so no SBL issues. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:39, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Examiner.com review

Can i get this page --> examiner.com/x-26357-SXSW-Examiner~y2010m3d22-SXSW-Party-Review-Perez-Hiltons-One-Night-in-Austin-party-featured-Snoop-Dogg-VV-Brown <-- whitelisted please, it's the only link with venue and date etc. i could find. It is a review so it's reliable as the person was actually there. The Perez Hilton site doesn't even give the venue and date even though they hosted the party. They just say 'Saturday'. I need it for the Nobody's_Daughter#Tour_dates section to verify that they attended. Thank you. Beautiful&Dying (talk) 22:11, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

• So it's a fact so trivial that you have to go to examiner.com to find it? What makes you think it's significant enough for inclusion? Guy (Help!) 18:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Not done due to lack of reply. Stifle (talk) 12:56, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Hellotxt Entry

I am requesting that my site Hellotxt, a social aggregator, be white listed. I am told that because we redirect URLs our URL is blocked. This makes it so that I cannot update a proper entry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RoRoHello/hellotxt.com)-- although I have seen many other sites that are the same with no problems in their listings. User:RoroHello

As was explained on the blacklisting, you will need a specific link, e.g. hellotxt.com/about.htm. The whole site is not going to be de-blacklisted or fully whitelisted as it is basically a redirect service, which use is not allowed on Wikipedia. Therefore, only specific links will be whitelisted. I hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 10:30, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi Dirk, thanks for the reply. I just tried posting the link to our blog's "About Us" page and it blocked me. How do I go about showing you that link for the request? -- Ryan —Preceding unsigned comment added by RoRoHello (talk • contribs) 11:51, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Can you actually tell us what the link was? Leave out the http://www part and it'll post here fine. Stifle (talk) 12:56, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

blog.hellotxt.com/about-us/

-Ryan —Preceding unsigned comment added by RoRoHello (talk • contribs) 14:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

hello Internet gods? any news? User:RoroHello

www.examiner.com/a-817319~Movie_stars_film_in_Havre_de_Grace.html

• This a proposal for the removal of a specific article in examiner.com
• I wanted to link to a Baltimore Examiner article concerning the movie From Within in context of the city Havre de Grace, MD. Examiner.com seems to be blocked. This link, however, is the only available link for the written Baltimore Examiner article. This is the link: www.examiner.com/a-817319~Movie_stars_film_in_Havre_de_Grace.html. -RickNightCrawler (talk) 22:31, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Examiner.com is not the Baltimore Examiner, it is an independent website with limited to no editorial oversight and where users are offered financial incentives to increase page views.  Not done per WP:RS. Stifle (talk) 15:00, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Tunisia.com

Please whitelist:

• www.tunisia.com/tunisia/travel/star-wars-tunisia

There is useful information on the page which would serve as an appropriate external link for articles such as Tattooine. Granted, it's not the most reliable source in the world, but it provides a good, comprehensive, and interesting collection of information about the various Star Wars sites in Tunisia, which is why I think it would qualify for WP:EL. --Elonka 23:43, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

• I am inclined to approve this request and will do so in a few days unless I see a reason not to. Stifle (talk) 12:57, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

ezinearticles.com/?Seedbox---Solution-For-Those-Who-Prefer-Ultra-High-Speed-Without-Compromising-Quality&id=3712035

Please whitelist: I got something interesting about seedbox here- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seedbox. But one of the link associated with references section is invalid. Please have a look and whitelist the page so that it can be live. It looks very good article on seedbox and deserve to be associated with wiki. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Panki1vik (talk • contribs) 08:55, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

What makes this a reliable source? Stifle (talk) 13:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

El Bombin

Please whitelist:

• www.elbombin.co.cc

The previous url (elbombin.stuarthomfray.co.uk) was deemed acceptable as a WP:EL and after I changed hosting and lost my previous web address, I decided to re-upload my site to elbombin.co.cc. The content is still the same, of course, so links to any of the relevant pages on elbombin.co.cc should be acceptable WP:EL The specific page is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Reynolds_%28footballer_born_1881%29 but there may be other related pages on WP that I would need to edit too. --J4ckplug (talk) 17:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Web Based Training DA-20/100 Katana

Please whitellist:

• wbtda20katana.co.cc

It's a personal project where people can learn how to fly the Diamond Aircraft Da-20 Katana for free. It's a Web Based Training used nowadays by my university in Spain to train new students. The articles about the company Diamond Aircraft would benefit of that website. The link to the pages I am requesting to be added are: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_Aircraft_Industries and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diamond_DA20 --84.78.207.51 (talk) 16:47, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

What makes this a reliable source? Stifle (talk) 13:02, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

The university where I did my studies is using this WBT since I published it in 2007 (www.cesda.com) and I contacted with Diamond-Air (www.diamond-air.at) who told me "you did a very god job!". You are free to contact both of them anytime and ask for my project.--84.78.207.51 (talk) 22:08, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

This appears to be a student paper; I am inclined to decline this request but will wait a few days in case there are independent opinions. Stifle (talk) 14:09, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

It was my Final Degree Project in my 4 year grade in Commercial Aviation in the first University of Aviation in Spain and in Europe. I am now working as an airline pilot and found it interesting to share my knoweledge with people who wants to be a pilot and who will fly this airplane. And I want to share it for free as I think that knoweledge is culture and culture must be free.--84.78.207.51 (talk) 23:34, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

metapedia.org

• metapedia.org: 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

Could we get this site (or perhaps just the homepage) whitelisted for the Metapedia (encyclopedia) article? The article would benefit from a link to the subject's homepage, and perhaps other pages within the site for primary referencing. ThemFromSpace 03:12, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

canadianfinancialdiy.blogspot.com

could you please whitelist this site so that I can add an external link in the article Canadian tax preparation software for personal use. I cannot fathom why my blog is on your blacklist (nor can I actually find it in either the Global or Local black lists for that matter). The link I wish to add in particular is * [canadianfinancialdiy.blogspot.com/2010/04/review-and-ratings-of-canadian-online.html CanadianFinancialDIY reviews and rates online tax preparation software for 2009 taxes]. The link is to unique original content I created - no one else has actually bothered to test the software products as I have. Reasons for the reliability of my review: published and explicit assessment method; detailed comments which a reader is able to verify for him or her self. It is similar to, but for the above reason, better than other external links to reviews already found in the Wikipedia article. cheers, Jean Lespérance--Lesperancje (talk) 23:51, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

 Not done See WP:COI and WP:Reliable sources. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:58, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

algaecenter.com

I don't know how relevant other additions to articles relating to Soley Biotechnology Institute and its related biotech websites are, but this one was added to the 'links' section of Botryococcus_braunii, and though a misplaced link, it is appropriate as it is a source of specimens of this algae. If the institute is bunk or thieves or whatever, that's a separate issue. I was the one that started the Botryoccus braunii article some years ago and have been the primary editor. I request that www.algaecenter.com/culture-collection.html be whitelisted. I have no connection to this organisation. Bobkeyes (talk) 23:56, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

iblogger.org

I wish to change some links to pages moved to sub domains of iblogger.org

Since TPG have taken over MySoul, my site at home.mysoul.com.au/graemecook/ will close on 22 January 2010 Other sites have been moved since the closure of geocites in October 2009.

The new sub domains are:

greatestbattles.iblogger.org smx.iblogger.org dutcheastindies.iblogger.org marmon-herrington.iblogger.org These are the sub domains I would like added to the white list.

Existing links to this material are: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipu_Sultan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyder_Ali http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_history_of_Mysore_and_Coorg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewin_Bentham_Bowring http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mangalorean_Catholics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Scurry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captivity_of_Mangalorean_Catholics_at_Seringapatam http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sid_Meier%27s_Gettysburg! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_East_Indies_campaign & 45 more: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&redirs=1&search=geocities.com%2Fdutcheastindies%2F&fulltext=Search&ns0=1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marmon-Herrington_Armoured_Car http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marmon-Herrington_CTLS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sid_Meier%27s_Gettysburg!

I have previously been unable to cite other material from geocites pages and wish to add these now for .iblogger.org sub domains. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jena-Auerstedt http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solferino,_Battle_of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sid_Meier http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austerlitz:_Napoleon%27s_Greatest_Victory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saratoga_campaign

This material includes the only on-line full text of the public domain 1893 book: HAIDAR ALI AND TIPU SULTAN AND THE STRUGGLE WITH THE MUSALMAN POWERS OF THE SOUTH BY LEWIN B. BOWRING, C.S.I. FORMERLY CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF MYSORE;

A large database on the Dutch East Indies Campaign of World War II; A database of Military Vehicles by the Marmon Herrington Company The largest source of user made modifications for the computer games: Sid Meier's Gettysburg, Waterloo: Napoleon's Last Battle & Austerlitz: Napoleon's Greatest Victory plus supporting historical material on the battles depicted in these modifications.

Graeme Cook (talk) 02:21, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

• How are these reliable sources? Stifle (talk) 11:40, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Dear Stifle,

Lewin B. Bowring was commisioner for Mysore. As his book was published in 1893 & he is writing about the 1790s he is not a primary source but his book is well foot-noted.

The Official Reports of the American Civil war are primary sources. The officers who wrote them may not be unbiased but they are accurate in the sense that this is what they wrote in their reports and for balance there are the reports of other officers, both Union & Confederate, of the same events. The cross referencing of unit names where they are referred to by their commander's name and the spreadsheet of casualties by regiment is draw from the official reports themselves.

The Dutch East Indies Campaign material is drawn from multiple sources in English, Dutch and Japanese. Contributors & some sources are listed on the credits page, others on the individual pages.

Peter Hofschröer uses German language sources (listed in the Bibliography) rather than the usual English sources for the battle of Jena in 1806 between the French and Prussians.

The Marmon-Herrington Military Vehicles material is from sources (listed on individual pages) including manufacturer's documents, official reports, various books & magazines and contemporary photographs.

etc.

Graeme Cook (talk) 22:04, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

As there are no objections and 7 weeks having passed, would you now approve this request?

Graeme Cook (talk) 01:51, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

• You did not really answer the question. Much of the content you describe sounds like copyright violations. Guy (Help!) 09:22, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Dear Guy,

Actually the question asked was "How are these reliable sources?". Some contributors have retained copyright of their articles. The intention is not to copy this material to Wikipedia but to cite it where appropriate.

Graeme Cook (talk) 10:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Guy did bring up a good point. I am concerned about WP:LINKVIO. Some of the material has obviously had its copyright expire (Lewin Bentham Bowring died in 1910. The American Civil War ended in 1865. Those items have expired copyrights). The problem is with certain articles that still appear to be copyrighted, such as those by Peter Hofschröer, George Gush and others. There is no indication on those pages that these people have released their works into the public domain. Are you able to provide evidence that they have allowed your site to host their material? 152.16.16.75 (talk) 11:08, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Copyright notices requiring permission to reproduce have only been placed when requested. In contrast, where this some of the same George Gush's material appears on http://www.myarmoury.com/feature_armies_swiss.html the site both acknowledges use with permission and claims copyright for themselves.

A list of books by Peter_Hofschröer can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Hofschr%C3%B6er but he also contributes to websites eg: http://napoleonistyka.atspace.com/Waterloo_myths_1.html http://www.achart.ca/wellington/siborne.htm http://www.achart.ca/wellington/waterloo1.htm http://www.scott-ludwig.com/NWC/Prussia/archives/grape1.htm

Graeme Cook (talk) 10:46, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

There is a George Gush page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Gush

Graeme Cook (talk) 11:08, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Is there a quick method for deleting multiple dead links? Graeme Cook (talk) 22:58, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

As the site at http://home.mysoul.com.au/graemecook/ has not closed down and this appears to be permanent, those pages that do not change need not be on iblogger.org (I no longer have access to change them).

Instead I have added two more digital books to iblogger.org: "1815, Waterloo" by Henry Houssaye, 1905 and "The battle of Wavre and Grouchy's retreat; a study of an obscure part of the Waterloo campaign" by Hyde Kelly 1905.

Graeme Cook (talk) 04:50, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

commonpurpose.org.uk

commonpurpose.org.uk is the website of registered UK charity Common Purpose UK and it seems reasonable to extlink to this website in that article. It is caught by a blacklist rule for commonpurpose.org. (commonpurpose.org seems to be the international version of the charity, and I don't understand why that should be black-listed, but that is not an immediate problem.) Rwendland (talk) 23:47, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Additional info: it looks from the original blocking discussion[4] the reason was because one IP user added www.commonpurpose.org to about 12 articles internationally (about 6 of the listed edits are for adding the unrelated nourishkefir.co.uk). If this is the only reason, it seems a rather drastic measure for one IP's action in 2008. Rwendland (talk) 12:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, have you been following the article itself? What was it .. diff (note, this specific IP is not registered to Common Purpose UK, but in the edit history one can find several that are). Bottomline, they are very aware that Wikipedia is a good place to keep themselves visible, and do a lot to make sure that it stays clean. Please be careful with this site. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 21:02, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Yep, the article is poor. Common Purpose UK is a new organisation to me and I'm not pro or against it. But there seems to be vociferous lobbies against Common Purpose UK, two of whom the article extlinks to. One of the current extlinks says on its front page says "Common Purpose is a Bilderberg-type group for upper and middle management implementing the Agenda 21, sustainable development and Communitarian policies of the New World Order and is being used to form a New World Order control grid in the UK." If we have extlinks like that, I think we should permit some balance with an extlink to the charity itself. This is a substantial registered charity with a turnover of about £7 million a year, run by extremely substantial trustees (eg major business leaders, a Bishop), (see commonpurpose.org.uk/about/governance) warranting reasonable coverage in WP. The content of commonpurpose.org.uk does not seem objectionable in any way, so it seems very strange we should block extlinks to it. Rwendland (talk) 21:56, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Wait!!

• commonpurpose.org: 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
• commonpurpose.org.uk: 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

on en:

• 217.150.113.250 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)

(note, this (COI) IP is, next to massive spamming, involved in said cleaning, with removing an external link because the website linked to contains texts that this editor disagrees with ("Unfortunately states "Common Purpose is a criminal organisation". Accusation of criminal activity would incur legal challenges - safer to remove."), while the wording of the link itself is neutral ("A Critique without CP Marketing Propaganda"). Then they make the link less neutral by doing this, so it reads "A Critique by UKIP fringe group EUTruth" .. the former is a problem that CommonPurpose has with the eutruth.org.uk site, not with Wikipedia, while in the latter edit I could see that that wording would be problematic for Wikipedia)

The (globally) blacklisted regex is \bcommonpurpose\.org\b, which also catches commonpurpose.org.uk. The former of the two (the .org) was spammed quite aggressively, the .uk is 'collateral damage'. Both were spammed aggressively.

Nonetheless, what I meant, Rwendland, is that Common Purpose is actively promoting their organisation on Wikipedia. Though I agree that Common Purpose UK 'deserves' a link to their organisation, that is just part of the problem. Any link we whitelist here, can be used throughout en.wikipedia. If we whitelist the mainpage, this is again possible, or worse.

I would not consider the spamming/promotional campaign to be over. Maybe we should whitelist a specific about.php or index.htm in this case? --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 08:17, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

If I understand the situation correctly from the above, only one IP user (a Common Purpose UK IP) has been involved in this spamming of commonpurpose.org* (in about 12 edits)? Doesn't Wikipedia:Spam blacklist say in such a case blocking the single user is the appropriate action to solve the problem? Since this all happened in 2008, isn't the appropriate measure now to step-down action to the XLinkBot as per suggested at Wikipedia:Spam blacklist and User:XLinkBot? As I understand it COI issues should be resolved ultimately by blocking the user; I cannot see in WP:COI where it says COI issues will be extending it into blocking URLs on the SPAM blacklists. Rwendland (talk) 20:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

NB I noticed that the existing whitelist already allows www.commonpurpose.org.uk/home/aboutus.aspx, so I've used that as an Official website URL. That's good enough for my immediate need. But it still seems to me that this URL should move to XLinkBot, as I read the current policy. Rwendland (talk) 21:03, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Beetstra, have you read the www.eutruth.org.uk/cp.pdf document you criticised the COI IP user for removing links to? I just have. Two unsubstantiated quotes, clearly unfounded, are "Common Purpose specifically targets children from the age of 13, and more recently age 4, for sex or ..." and "A typical story is a husband describing the decline in his wife from the time she becomes a Common Purpose graduate. Loss of sparkle, enthusiasm, anxious and ‘changed’, and she initiated a divorce." It seems to me perfectly proper for such a link to be removed from WP, even if the IP comes from the organisation concerned. (NB you have left links to this doc above.) Rwendland (talk) 13:57, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Rwendland, as I explained, the issue was not commonpurpose.org.uk only, the issue was commonpurpose.org, the .uk site was indeed spammed on a lesser scale, but both are related to the same organisation (and were in fact spammed by the same COI IP). The issue was cross-wiki and hence blocking the IP (especially in 2008) was not a solution (that option was unavailable in 2008), XLinkBot would only have done en.wikipedia (and actually has, as it is (or maybe was) on XLinkBot's revertlist). There are several warnings, 2 of XLinkBot and a some of other editors on en.wikipedia (which shows persistence), the link was already blacklisted on other wikis (then and still on pt.wikipedia, now also on pt.wikiquote), there are WT:WPSPAM discussions about it. So at that time, global blacklisting the link was the only solution. Also note that there is a second editor involved in this, who, by editing, has shown to be using the IP in question.

Secondly, I am not opposing whitelisting, I was only mentioning to be careful with it (though I think that the COI editor knows what the problem is, and will probably not repeat this). --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 09:10, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

adding a reference on Black Jesus disambiguation

In the interest of being thorough I feel a link to http://encycloped.iadrama.tica.com/Black_Jesus should be allowed, so the following line can be added to the Black Jesus disambiguation page:

• Barack Obama, in reference to the Cult of personality around him in the 2008 presidential election.[dramatica link]

please don't delete this request, it's not vandalism!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.231.242.111 (talk • contribs)

Do you want to use this as a source?? Alike here, encylopediadramatica.com does fail the reliable sources guideline as well.  Declined --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 08:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

www.aceshowbiz.com/news/view/00032012.html

Alot of info in article that i need to cite to majorly expand To the Sky page to recreate with more info to avoid another deleation. STAT- Verse 04:53, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I am going to add this.  Added --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 08:48, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

www.examiner.com/x-6928-Houston-Page-One-Examiner~y2010m4d20-Houston-Police-Chief-issues-decree-on-Gay-Pride-Parade-responding-to-Mayor-memo?cid=edition-rss-Houston

I'd like to have this page listed if possible for an additional reference History of the Houston Police Department. Didn't think this was website that was blacklisted, is there a place where i can find out why for future references? so to speak.--Hourick (talk) 06:33, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

 Added. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 08:45, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I did not answer the other question. Basically, examiner.com is a website where anyone can create an account (with minimal or no scrutiny), publish documents (which can be reliable, but generally would fail our reliable sources guideline, or can even be scraped or copied, or copyrighted) and link that from wherever one wants (and a high traffic webpage like Wikipedia is a good place to start ...). Every time someone follows your link you earn money, not because the information is good, peer reviewed, but just because the link is followed.

Although other sites generally have editors who earn money when their information is well linked-to or followed (and we do occasionally see such people or their organisations link to their site, though such editors and organisations tend to be careful), these pay-per-view type of sites (like examiner.com, associated content, lulu, etc. etc.) give that power to 'the man in the street', which is a huge spam incentive which is almost impossible to control.

It should be noted that a lot of the info (but certainly not all) on examiner.com can be found from better sources as well, and where it is unique sometimes one has to ask if the information is worthy of inclusion for Wikipedia anyway. And much is of questionable reliability.

I hope this explains a bit. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 09:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

It surely does clarify quite a bit, and I will take care to see if I can find a reference other than this site, but I have found that it has articles that are hard to find any other way. Thanks for answering! BTW: you might put that in a macro, I'm sure you will get that asked again in the future!--Hourick (talk) 09:49, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

petitions.number10.gov.uk/dontdisconnectus/

I would like to add this to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TalkTalk as a reference to the company's campaign against the Digital EConomy bill. Site is a UK government site. Debz 82 (talk) 10:11, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

That is either a primary source and would not prove a thing, or it is a call for the petition. Please find independent sourcing for this, otherwise it is not even worth mentioning in the article.  Declined; I hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 10:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

squidoo.com/Dr_Ambedkar_Visionary

I am requesting that this article: www.squidoo.com/Dr_Ambedkar_Visionary be whitelisted.

This article provides important spiritual and historical information about Dr. Ambedkar, Buddhism and the Dalits in India.

It will be valuable to the articles on Dr. Ambedkar, Buddhism, Dalits, Sangharakshita and Dharmachari Subhuti.

Zhana21 (talk) 12:50, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

yfrog.com/0pmtvnhdj

photo taken of new mtvn hd logo from television. not near good enough quality to be used for article but talk page discussion ongoing regarding the channels name. this image could be used to confirm channel name. purely for use on the [[[MTVNHD]] talk page chocobogamer mine 00:02, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

ezinearticles.com/?The-Bay-Tourism-Association&id=4180706

I am requesting that this article: ezinearticles.com/?The-Bay-Tourism-Association&id=4180706 be whitelisted. Information in the article that I need to cite in minor edit to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morecambe. Cafbar (talk) 10:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Approved Requests

Two links for St. Patrick's Day

hubpages.com/hub/Orange-on-St-Patricks-Day

This article, written by a staff member of HubPages (see their "elite" page at /elite/), is to be used as another source of information for wearing orange on St. Patrick's Day. ₪— CelticWonder (T·C) " 20:30, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

examiner.com/examiner/x-34698-Tuscaloosa-History-Examiner~y2010m3d16-Wear-Orange-on-St-Patricks-Day

This article, written by a staffed member of Examiner.com, is to be used as another source of information for wearing orange on St. Patrick's Day. ₪— CelticWonder (T·C) " 21:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Though I expect that there are better sources for this information (as in, properly peer reviewed information; though I did not look for that),  Added. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 09:27, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

The information is regarding account of an emergent tradition from multiple locations across the US, so unfortunately this is as yet the best that can be done BUT they are both written by staffed writers. Thank you very much. ₪— CelticWonder (T·C) " 17:32, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

www.commonpurpose.org.uk/about/governance/david-bell

Added per request from Stephen B Streater (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) as a source for David Bell (publisher). Guy (Help!) 08:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Denied Requests

ipetition web page to stop the TV show Pretty Wild linked to the Pretty Wild Article

Would like to you to consider whitelisting this page on ipetition, in order to cite it at the Pretty Wild article, the link would only be to this web page -ipetitions.com/petition/prettywild//petition to cancel unethical E! Entertainment show "Pretty Wild" - on Pretty Wild, I see that the ipetition domain is blacklisted but the article makes the point that the petition to stop this show was started soon after it aired for the first time and having a link that shows the petition created for that specific purpose adds credibility to that specific claim and also illustrates the action taken by the viewers to dissent while not involving the rest of the ipetition domain from the blacklist --Cleaner_TV (talk) --CleanerTV (talk) 05:29, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Declined, as we do not generally report on petitions unless they first establish notability independently. (For that same reason, I have already removed the text from the article in question.) Note that the simple fact that a petition exists is not sufficient to determine notability; the petition must become noteworthy enough to gain recognition beyond those who endorse it. --Ckatz^chat_spy 07:41, 20 March 2010 (UTC)O.K but I have seen the petition line added a couple of times so I won't be suprised if its added again, I think that if 200 people sign a public petition to take some show off the air after it has only aired one time, and given the controversial nature of the program in question (reality show about subjects with criminal involment) that is mentioned prominently on the article it would make sense to at least mention the issue of the petition list by viewers, but is your call. Also, it was mentioned in various forums that the page was in fact created before the show aired, which begs the question if eliminating all mentions of controversy just makes it a ad by the channel to promote the show.Just sayin'Thanks.--CleanerTV (talk) 13:03, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

 Declined Not notable, and Wikipedia is not a soapbox. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:17, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

www.associatedcontent.com/article/51596/my_interview_with_kat_von_d_of_miami.html?cat=33

I hereby request that the interview I created be allowed to be added to Kat Von D's profile page, along with the other interviews on her page.

Wikipedia can benefit from this addition as I have garnered high traffic from it on the link provided, and would like to share it with others who may also be interested in reading this article. Thank you for your consideration.SarahLee23 (talk) 20:47, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

 Declined for the very reasons that associatedcontent is blacklisted; inherent conflict-of-interest issues and failure to meet reliable sources guidelines. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:55, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Also see 'Earning Money'. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 15:20, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

petitions.number10.gov.uk/PSRyde/

petitions.number10.gov.uk/PSRyde/ - I wish to use this petition to back up the fact that over 3,000 signatures were collected on the petition to save PS Ryde. As the title is currently blacklisted I've had to come up with a bodge to get around the blacklisting. It would be much better to be able to actually cite the petition using the {{cite web}} template. Mjroots (talk) 16:14, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

That's a primary source, and the number does not actually mean anything without an external review of the voting. Seems to me pretty much the reason why this site was blacklisted in the first place. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 09:33, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree that it is a primary source, however, the existence of the petition is mentioned in a reliable secondary source. When that source went to press, over 2,000 signatures had been collected, but the petition was still open. What I really want to be able to quote is the exact number of signatures on the petition, which has now closed. As the ship is now (being) scrapped, the mention of the petition cannot be seen as being biased in favour of the PS Ryde Preservation Socitey or in favour of the preservation of the ship. Mjroots (talk) 13:42, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Then cite the secondary sources. Guy (Help!) 13:56, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

But the secondary sources do not give the exact figure. Mjroots (talk) 17:07, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Then it's not a significant fact. Guy (Help!) 10:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

 Declined Stifle (talk) 12:58, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

www.associatedcontent.com/article/2808524/donell_jones_lets_fans_know_whats_up.html

I was trying to update the entry on Donell Jones after completing an interview with him on Friday, but this link is blocked. I talked with him directly and have a recorded interview so I'm sure it's him. I understand that sometimes AC may not fact check, but I've done many interviews with celebs, and this one is valid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shamontiel (talk • contribs) 15:09, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

 Declined, this is just why this is blacklisted, associatedcontent is not a reliable source, you have a conflict of interest, and associatedcontent pays (also you) well for being linked to. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 15:18, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Also see 'Earning Money'. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 15:20, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

You say that AssociatedContent is not a reliable source even though the reporter, myself, talked with Donell Jones directly to get the information. Your site had the wrong year for him. You should be happy I corrected it for you. And just so we're clear, ANY Web site on the Internet has ads and money attached to it so if you're going to remove every site with monetary gain you'd have no links at all. This is a prime example of why I don't use Wikipedia. I just came on here to correct your year. Oh, and just so we're clear, there are other links to interviews written by me for other publications on Wikipedia. I will make sure to delete them as well. If those are okay to stay, then this one should be, too. Don't punish the reporter because you feel the site is "unreliable." The only difference between my interview here and my interview with other publications is the domain name. But since you want to blacklist a link, I'll change the birth year back to the incorrect information that Wikipedia has. Trust me, I won't help this site again.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shamontiel (talk • contribs)

I'm happy that you corrected it, but I am sure there are better sources for the information. And I explained why this site is blacklisted, and the others are not. That you have a conflict of interest is a lesser problem. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 08:47, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm shaking my head because you just said I could find a "better source." What better source is there than speaking directly with the artist I wanted to make the correction for. Now I understand why so many textbook, magazine and newspaper companies have told me upfront not to use your site as a reference. Even when you have a resource that clearly has the facts, you'd rather debate about the site it came from instead of the facts. I'm definitely going to write about this one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shamontiel (talk • contribs) 21:21, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Bennett Engineering: Lowry Centre Footbridge

Please whitelist:

• www.bennettmg.co.uk/Project_MS_Lowry_1.aspx

I would like to reference the information contained on this page for the Salford Quays lift bridge article. Roobarb! (talk) 14:08, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

How is this a reliable source? Stifle (talk) 21:26, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

 Not done due to lack of reply. Stifle (talk) 12:57, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Withdrawn, Invalid, Malformed or Otherwise Past Relevance

tvrage (attempts at blacklist evasion)

Hopefully, this is a one-off event... an IP posted the URL "http://69.64.63.153/redirect.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tvrage.com%2Fglee" (with descriptor "Glee Episode Guide, Previews, cast, Guest Stars & More") on the Glee series page. That URL redirects directly to TV Rage's Glee page, while the bare IP ("69.64.63.153") simply says "It works!" Looks like a deliberate attempt to hack around the blacklist, and yet another reason to deny any whitelist requests. --Ckatz^chat_spy 22:12, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I've requested that URL redirector be blacklisted on meta. MER-C 02:36, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

sajjadalifanclub.co.cc

1- this was previously run by friend of Sajjad Ali the pop singer of Pakistan. now it is officially maintained by his younger brother LUCKY ALI also musician, singer, song writer of Pakistan

2- this site is directly monitered by Sajjad ALi. and this should be whitelisted previously blacklisted on wiki site.

3- this is not a spam site you can check it yourself. its is regularly maintained and updated officially.

MUHAMMAD FARHAN SALEEM 02:56, 26 April 2010 (UTC) [— Preceding unsigned comment added by Chiefsab (talk • contribs) ]

1) It's a fansite

2) You present no argument as to why this site is useful to Wikipedia

3) You listed this in requests past relevance, so I'm assuming you don't want this actioned

 Declined MER-C 04:36, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Proposed removals from whitelist (sites to reblock)

lenr-canr.org

The site lenr-canr.org has a lax approach to copyright and was blacklisted for this and other abuses. Some links were whitelisted mainly at the request of user:Abd. Following the usual process of editorial debate and consensus only one of those remained in article space as of today, and I just removed it as it is an article copyright of Elsevier Publishing for which we already have a DOI link. Abd is now topic-banned from cold fusion. There are several regex expressions in the list which support the several requested links mainly as part of his project to rewrite the article in terms more favourable to the pro-cold fusion editors, but it's hard to see how that's actually going to be of any benefit as the three main advocates of this content, Abd, Jed Rothewell and Pcarbonn, are all indefinitely topic banned. The fact that the only link in mainspace was a copyright violation says it all, really. I think we should simply remove these links and discuss again as and when a good-faith editor requests them for some actual content, hopefully without the befuddling walls of text which characterised the earlier discussions. Guy (Help!) 22:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Links for reference:

• first request of two one link (added)
• request for entire site (declined)
• request for transcript of audio interview (added)
• request for 13 papers (9 added)

Note that Pcarbonn's topic ban has expired it has now been placed again and extended to indefinite. --Enric Naval (talk) 23:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh dear. We can do without that particular person "helping" us, I think. Guy (Help!) 16:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

1st of all, please don't de-list the transcript of the radio interview.

2nd, Jed (the website's owner) says that he got the permission of the authors of the text, which seems to be correct and true. However, looking at the copyright pages of the journals that published the papers, some say that the authors can only host copies in their own personal websites, while others reserve all rights.

3rd, I understand that in several occasions Jed has taken papers down when requested by its publisher, which seems to imply that he didn't have previous publisher permission for some of the papers, and that those papers only remained there because the publishers have not bothered to complain about them. This could perfectly be the case for several of the whitelisted papers.

4th, they were claimed as convenience copies of article sources, but they are not being used as sources anywhere due to strong disagreements in talk pages with other editors (like myself).

5th, and most importantly, those are all primary sources that were going to be used to counter the points made by secondary sources, aka original research. The secondary sources say that this sort of papers has been ignored by the majority of scientific community since the field was discredited long time ago (~1989). The intention was adding these primary sources to the article, then claim them as examples that the secondary sources are wrong, and list them as examples of what the scientists really thought of the developments in the field. --Enric Naval (talk) 14:50, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

• The authors do not have the right to give permission to publish material whose copyright they have, by virtue of submission and acceptance of publishing, assigned to the publisher concerned. They are allowed to publish papers on their own websites but not to release the material to other websites. This has been covered before. Guy (Help!) 11:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Troubleshooting and problems

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)

Spam whitelist proposal

A proposal to provide a standardized form when requesting additions to the spam whitelist is at WP:VPR#Change of format for MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist. Your comments are welcome. MER-C 11:03, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

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)

toutpondi.com for new article Emanci

A new article was created today but its source that comes from the number one ghit. Why is it spam listed and could this link be white-listed? --Morenooso (talk) 07:27, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

As far as i have been able to find the only pages on toutpondi.com with any mention of Emanci are two unambiguous advertisements for Emanci. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:34, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

The institute has its website on that site. Wikipedia's blacklist will not permit it to be listed. --Morenooso (talk) 14:00, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

There should be a means to have it listed as a source and this mediawiki is what get it whitelisted. Very little WP:RS sources are available for this article. Like every article, it should be able to have its own website as in the Sources section. --Morenooso (talk) 14:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)