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 05:49, 14 March 2012 (→‎Google custom search: OK). 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|481803568#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)


    Resolution Vs. Motion in Corporate Minutes

    Apparently ehow.com is blacklisted. I don't know much about the rest of the site, but I found the entry at (www.ehow.com/info_8511196_resolution-vs-motion-corporate-minutes.html) to be helpful in explaining the distinction between a resolution and a motion. I was thwarted in my attempt to add the link to Corporate resolution. --Ben Best 00:28, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

    Have you read the /Common requests? MER-C 02:53, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Uncensored Interviews interview with Frightened Rabbit

    I'd like to add this video (www.uncensoredinterview.com/vlogs/7090-frightened-rabbit-snacks-selling-songs) on the band Frightened Rabbit's beginnings, so that I can cite it on the Frightened Rabbit page. I need this link, as it contains the only proof I have been able to find of the band's activity, sending out cookies as incentive to want demos. It is a reliable source, as it is the creator of the band telling the story, and it was explained to me that the site is indeed a source of spam (apparently over a two-year period before it was banned), but this video is important to the history of the band. Thanks for your consideration. The evacipated (talk) 04:26, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Is anyone there? The evacipated (talk) 01:33, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    This Google search yields plenty of interviews from other sources. So, no Declined. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:26, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    The only one that contains the bit of information about the cookies is the Uncensored Interviews one. I've looked. The evacipated (talk) 21:12, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Do a search for "biscuit" instead of "cookie" and you'll find plenty. OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:49, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Two Village Residents in Swedish Lapland, Where The Train Stops

    Reason: An interesting article about a place in Sweden which we have an article about. Not much else in English can be found on the web. --BIL (talk) 15:24, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    www.opposingviews.com/i/society/gay-issues/did-airman-randy-phillips-err-posting-video-coming-out-dad

    I'd like to use this link on the entry for Randy Phillips as evidence of web-based discussion/criticism about his activity. It would amplify two citations in which journalists express such criticism. In no way critical, but it appears a valid social-media style discussion of social media behavior. I guess I am citing it as an example rather than a source as such. Thanks. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 16:03, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    www.examiner.com/animal-shelters-in-san-francisco/scathing-editorial-breathes-new-life-s-f-no-kill-reform-effort

    I'm trying to find a better source for the "St. Francis Terrier" portion of the Pit Bull article than the Animal People story. See the section on ACC v SF/SPCA on the labeling of Pit Bulls and how the ACC allowed aggressive dogs to be adopted - which ended the program, as opposed to the now oft cited "the dogs killed cats". Inkless (talk) 19:08, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    s14.invisionfree.com/Conchologist_Forum/ar/t2125.htm

    I would like to use this description of the dwarf surf clam for an article I am writing which will soon be moving into mainspace as Mulinia lateralis. I have been unable to find a good description of this shell elsewhere. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:24, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    If you just need a text description, is there any reason why a forum posting is preferable the numerous reliable sources that already exist on the topic?
    If you need one of the images, have you asked the author of those images to upload one of them to Wikipedia (or better yet, Commons)? That would be more useful to the article than an external link.
    This isn't a denial of your request, just a request for clarification. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:37, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I wanted a text description because I could find no other. Admittedly, I might have found more information if I had searched further but once one has looked at the first thirty or so results of a Google search, one loses enthusiasm. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:19, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Judge William Wilson house

    The Judge William Wilson House is the only antebellum structure in the city limits of Atlanta on its original spot. This link is the only source I could find documenting the current state of the property other than a "legit" source which is from 2001. I would like to properly attribute that source and would ask this one page on the examiner.com site be whitelisted. Keizers (talk) 13:27, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. Why not use the legitimate source instead? Here's one that documents the state of that property: http://www.atlantapreservationcenter.com/place_detail?id=17&pt=1&year=all and that one isn't blacklisted. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:15, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    www.examiner.com/collin-county-independent-in-dallas/seth-hollist

    Seth Hollist is a potential candidate running against Pete_Sessions#2012_election in 2012. A link to his bio on Examiner.com would allow people to see his work and points of view. Spaldam (talk) 04:59, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    www.examiner.com/the-doors-in-national/were-the-doors-trying-to-replace-jim-morrison

    Request to whitelist the specific link above to use in Howard Werth biography as it contains a quote from Melody Maker 1973 which is not available elsewhere. MaxLondon (talk) 23:51, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. The original source of the quotation should be cited, not a secondhand source. Melody Maker can likely be found in library archives; clearly the author of that article had access to a copy. There is no need to provide an external link for valid citations. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:09, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    backupurl.com/zo9cxt

    Requesting whitelist of specifc backupurl page. I used an article as a reference in Daily Mail#Famous_stories (currently reference 57, Private Eye 1305) that has since been taken down. Fortunately, I created a backup using backupurl.com at the above address, which I would like to include using the archiveurl and deadurl parameters of the reference. The reference is important as it provides a useful summary of the section from a reputable news outlet. — Posted by Luke Goodsell, 11:29, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Additional supporting reasons: the Private Eye is a reputable publication that prominently features criticisms of other newspapers and media, and this article in particular highlights hypocrisy in the Daily Mail. There doesn't seem to be any other reliable online source for this article, and BackupURL.com claims keep a given URL untouched indefinitely. — Posted by Luke Goodsell, 17:41, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Have you looked at /Common requests? There are reasons why we don't link to URL shorteners. Among other things, backupurl.com doesn't seem to reveal the original URL, so there's no way to know if the saved page was legitimate or a forgery.
    If you're using this as a citation, citations do not need external links if the link no longer exists. An alternative link appears to be here: http://rightsandwrongs.co.uk/component/content/article/12620-reference-streets-of-shame-private-eye ~Amatulić (talk) 18:06, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I have indeed, but backupurl.com is not just a URL shortener but a mirror service. I completely support the blacklisting of backupurl.com links except in cases where a specific URL has been verified to not be circumventing a block and to be of value. In this case, the scraped page is not from a blacklisted domain/URL.
    There are several places that have copied the content of the article into their own page (such as that to which you linked), but these are much more prone to tampering than an automatic mirror service such as backupurl.
    Of course, a link is not required, but should be there to assist in verification of the cited material. I would prefer no link at all than a copy/pasted article. However, until such a time as backupurl.com has been shown to tamper with the content of any page that it mirrors, in this specific case it provides a valuable and relatively trustworthy aid to the verification of cited material.
    So, to summarise the arguments against allowing this exception and my rebuttals:
    • It obfuscates the original URL, potentially blacklisting the source.
    This is why backupurl.com links should be blocked by default, but in this case the mirrored page is from a domain that is not blocked and was previously used, except that the content has been removed and is no longer hosted online.
    • The material is available from other sources
    Those other sources are manually copy/pasted pages and so are much more liable to tampering post hoc, rendering them much less reliable sources. That they exist provides a modicum of verification for the content currently hosted at the above URL.
    • As the original page is not available, it is not possible to verify the content of the mirrored page on backupurl.com
    The other copy/pasted pages currently agree, providing some degree of verification. The sensible alternative would be to have no link at all, forcing all verification of the cited material to rely on people having access to the print edition of the publication in question. Is it better to have no link at all than one that currently appears valid, with no evidence to believe the contrary?
    Does that address your concerns? — Posted by Luke Goodsell, 21:07, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    www.examiner.com/vintage-rock-n-roll-in-national/interview-davy-jones-when-it-comes-to-the-monkees-never-say-never

    examiner.com: 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

    Requesting a whitelist of the link above to use in An Evening with The Monkees: The 45th Anniversary Tour. The link contains a December 2011 first person interview with Davy Jones that specifically addresses the reasons for the cancellation of the tour. I have not seen this quote elsewhere. Under.the.covers (talk) 05:11, 2 March 2012 (UTC) User:Under.The.Covers, 21:10, 1 March 2012.[reply]

    The article looks like hearsay. It seems clear the author of that article didn't interview Davy Jones, and that he's quoting from another source. The other Examiner link in that article references Jones' Facebook page. I can't see how this can be considered a reliable source. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:38, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    www.examiner.com/historic-americans-in-national/angelic-navy-personnel-enchant-the-multitudes

    examiner.com: 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

    Requesting a whitelist of this link due to the great factual information contained in the article, which would benefit the Blue Angels wikipedia entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jslynch (talk • contribs)

    Have you read the /Common requests? MER-C 02:48, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Calendar Published by AIP on lulu.com

    lulu.com: 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 would like to insert a reference link to a calendar published on that site by the American Institute of Physics: http://www. lulu. com/content/legacy-lulustudio-calendar/esva-2012-calendar/11198291 See the use case here: Betsy Ancker-Johnson Erkcan (talk) 22:14, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Google custom search

    google.com: 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

    • google.com/cse/tools/create_onthefly

    I'm interested in this Google custom search, which would allow all of the links on an article page to be directly searched through. It could be an asset to readers, researchers, or those attempting to verify content in articles. I recognize that adding this to live articles would require consensus, but I can't even test it out (on my talk page) with the site blacklisted. The domain was previously blocked (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2007-04#Referral_Profiteering.3F) because it was being used for promotion, but this specific subpage does nothing else except create a search engine which would allow one to dig through linked references and wikilinks on a page. I think it could be a valuable addition, although as a proprietary program, might require an open-source alternative. Still, discussion can deal with that issue provided the site is not blocked. Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 18:29, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    The /cse is blacklisted because custom search engines are basically a form of redirect service, and those can be (and often are/were) abused to circumvent the blacklist. Specific ones that are not created for that reason can be whitelisted (of course, /cse will hardly ever, if ever, have place in mainspace, but for specifics outside that they are very useful). plus Added. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:43, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Dirk, thanks for understanding and adding the page. It turns out the custom search engine code also includes the general domain: google.com/cse, as well as: google.com/cse/tools/onthefly?form=searchbox_demo&lang=. I don't know if you can unblock those as well, without opening up a pandora's box, but those exact links (nothing longer or different) would also be needed. Thanks for your help. Ocaasi t | c 21:03, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    'google.com/cse is the basis, that one should not be whitelisted, as that would allow every custom search engine to be open. We should only focus on specific engines - the latter would be fine - I'll add 'google.com/cse/tools/onthefly' (so the ordering of the parameters after that does not matter). --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:49, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Approved requests

    www.infibeam.com

    Infibeam.com should be unblocked because it is a major Indian ecommerce portal, which was blocked few years back on account of spamming. It was a mistake by some former employees and the company would be more responsible in linking its URL only to places which are relevant and would serve the purpose for which Wikipedia works. This is a request not to block the usage of the URL because of mistakes done 2-3 years back and add it to the whitelist. The site now also has a Wikipedia Page which is an effort to inform the readers about the Indian ecommerce market.

    • Not unblocking the whole domain, but if there is an index or about page that you can specify I can whitelist that. Stifle (talk) 18:00, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please let me know why the whole domain cannot be unblocked so that if possible, I can take adequate steps to resolve the problem. I would request to unblock the home page www.infibeam.com and the About us page www.infibeam.com/static/help/about-us.html Articleonline (talk) 05:37, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Unblock so you "can take adequate steps to resolve the problem"? What is there to resolve? The site has been massively spammed on Wikipedia. Are you associated with that site? Please be aware that we do not accept unblock requests from a domain owner, employees, or anyone else with a conflict of interest. If a trusted, high-volume editor requests that the whole domain be unblocked, we would consider it.
    The home page exists purely to sell products. Wikipedia is not a portal to merchant sites. If you want to include a link in an article about the company, then the "about" page should be sufficient for that purpose. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:12, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm happy to unblock www.infibeam.com/static/help/about-us.html, but that will be all. Stifle (talk) 15:44, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done on reflection, seems like a driveby request. Stifle (talk) 10:05, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Can we allow this link at least at Infibeam? This is a bit silly to have an article and blocking the official URL in this article... mabdul 11:26, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Approved Stifle (talk) 17:03, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Your addition didn't solve the problem: I wanted to add the official link www.infibeam.com within the URL/Official template twice and hit the edit filter. So please update the additional regex again. mabdul 02:04, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    The link that was approved was http://www.infibeam.com/static/help/about-us.html; anything else won't work. Stifle (talk) 15:03, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Yfrog image for flood

    I'd like to link to yfrog.com/nwk7kkgj from the external links section of Barr Beacon Reservoir. No other suitable image is, as yet, available. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 12:53, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    And that photo library may not be stable. It may be better to contact the photographer and suggest he upload it to Commons. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:02, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Any external site may be unstable. Open-licensing of the image has been requested, but may not be forthcoming, or at least not quickly, as it belongs to a large organisation, not an individual. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:24, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I would be supportive of this request. Leaving open briefly for further comment. Stifle (talk) 12:25, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Approved Stifle (talk) 09:27, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    examiner.com/soccer-in-national/dcu-evp-stephen-zack-explains-dc-united-women-partnership

    examiner.com: 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 have read and understand why examiner.com as a whole is blocked; however, I wish to add to above article to the pages for D.C. United Women and perhaps to the D.C. United page as well. This article contains an interview with an executive vice-president of D.C. United whose statements provide needed information on the history of the founding of D.C. United Women. Thanks for your consideration. Benuski (talk) 17:07, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I am minded to allow this request but will leave open for a short period for further opinions. Stifle (talk) 12:25, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Any other opinions on my request? Benuski (talk) 00:42, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    shanghairanking.com

    shanghairanking.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

    This domain was blacklisted on Meta recently with no discussion that I can find. The site is the home of the ARWU world university rankings, one of the very most globally inlfuential rankings out there. It is widely referred from at least Canadian and American university articles and templates, and is not spam by any definition I can imagine. Since it ranks the top 500 universities worldwide, we can eventually expecy at least 500 outgoing links, 1 per article, and it will still not be spam. Franamax (talk) 05:15, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Already removed from meta. Not spam by the old definitions of spam, but someone does have a vested interest in having their links pushed to Wikipedia without discussion, which does fit our definition of spam (more specifically, WP:REFSPAM). Please do help to convince the accounts that pushing their links through socking is not the way forward. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:19, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    An interview from The Metal Observer

    I'm expanding the Timeless Miracle article and this interview - www.metal-observer.com/articles.php?lid=1&sid=4&id=10646 - contains relevant biographical information. Óðinn (talk) 21:18, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

     Stale - er, should it really be taking 2 weeks to reply? It's not like this place is bombarded with requests... Óðinn (talk) 19:19, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • There are only around three sysops who understand the blacklisting process enough to process these items. This request is Approved. Stifle (talk) 11:12, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    www.raintaxi.com/online/2011summer/card.shtml

    This article is necessary to the background of Hamlet's Father, both as a citation and as an external link. Xavexgoem (talk) 02:43, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Was removed from the global blacklist, so this request should be moot. MER-C 02:17, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]


    Denied requests

    A page from Opus - Info

    I feel it would be helpful to whitelist the following page:

    www.opus-info.org/index.php?title=Preces

    While I can understand that the main web-site could be considered a propaganda site, the specific page shows a scan of a prayer which is being discussed on the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preces_(Opus_Dei)

    An argument has arisen in the discussion on that page about the appropriateness of reproducing the whole prayer on wikipedia, and I feel that providing a link to an external website which displayes it could be a reasonable compromise.

    Link Summary: opus-info.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

    Anruari (talk) 12:40, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    yfrog.com/h392jzfj

    I would to add this to David Meerman Scott, Personal life section to cite surfing interest.

    Woz2 (talk) 23:31, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Looks to me like the page is already cited through Twylah. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:07, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Specific Examiner article

    I would like to add a specific article on Examiner.com to the white list - www.examiner.com/japanese-culture-in-new-york/a-culturally-stimulating-interview-with-the-insatiable-asa-akira - as I want to use it as a cite on the Asa Akira article. Yes I am an admin and yes I know I can edit the white list... I'm asking for two reasons: 1) I'm nervous about doing a screw-up while adding the link and somehow breaking something, and 2) get a different set of eyes to look at the article to confirm it's reliable (it seems to me). Tabercil (talk) 16:15, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Have you read the /Common requests? Stifle (talk) 18:21, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    No response => no Declined MER-C 09:47, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    vkontakte.ru

    – RVJ (talk) 06:30, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Is there a more specific link to whitelist? E.g. vkontakte.ru/index.html or vkontakte.ru/about.htm (or any other representable page which does not allow the whole site to be linked, since whitelisting vkontakte.ru would also allow all other use of the site). --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with Dirk. Stifle (talk) 18:21, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    This will be closed as not done if a specific page is not named in the next week or so. Stifle (talk) 12:26, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    No response =>  Not done. MER-C 09:46, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    petitionspot.com/petitions/ghostwhisperer/

    The link would be placed as a reference for the Ghost Whisperer Tv series (simply Ghost Whisperer) 'cancelation' section. It would be the eighth reference, I believe. The whitelisting of this petition might be of great reference to a lot of followers of the show. It is stated in the article that there is a petition for renewing the show for a sixth season, but there is no reference attached to it, therefore making it harder for a person to prove the statement true, especially if they are working on a research project or essay on the show. Whitelisting this specific petition might be of some possitive consequence regarding the show. Thank you very much for taking the time to read this.--190.92.44.206 (talk) 04:45, 3 January 2012 (UTC) ~~A.G.~~ January, 2nd, 2012.[reply]

     Not done Wikipedia is not a soapbox. We rarely (if ever) whitelist petition sites. OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:06, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    google?

    Why do you block NASA pdf on Google? THIS > ht tp://w ww.g oogl e.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=%2B%2522data%2Bacquisition%2Bdatabase%2522&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CFsQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww-misr.jpl.nasa.gov%2FgetData%2FlocalMode%2Flm_id.pdf&ei=p_K0ToTZCpGXtwfBg62nCw&usg=AFQjCNFVQWbSMuXKK-rFEZr3pqG1xyhieg (spaces injected to full out spam filter)

    • Put the url in place U2 in last edit in database talk or post a msg when the filter will be fixed.99.90.197.87 (talk)
    That URL just redirects to http://www-misr.jpl.nasa.gov/getData/localMode/lm_id.pdf. Use that directly instead. Anomie⚔ 14:42, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, Thx. 99.90.197.87 (talk) 17:06, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:47, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Suite101 (cultural history articles)

    In the article "Femme Fatale" I wanted to include a link to an article that I found surprisingly good and certainly as useful, or more so, than any of the web links currently included in the article. (I can say this with some authority because I am a historian of culture.) Much to my surprise, I found that I could not do it because apparently the website (in its entirety?) is blocked here.

    Now, I don't know what the reasons for blacklisting Suite 101 might be, but I find it outrageous to blacklist articles by this specific author (to whose articles I have directed a few people that I am tutoring to consult them).

    Here is the offending article:

    helle-h.suite101.com/what-makes-a-femme-fatale-a200658

    And here are three other examples of writing by the same author:

    helle-h.suite101.com/mary-mother-of-jesus---her-place-in-islam-a201407

    helle-h.suite101.com/wind-of-war-the-battle-of-the-frigidus-a199158

    helle-h.suite101.com/femmes-fatales---maria-tarnowska-a199746

    There are many other truly fine articles, by other authors, there - too many to have even the authors listed here, never mind the articles themselves. I see no "spam" on that website; there are only advertisements that nobody is forced to click on. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sehnsucherin (talk • contribs) 16:56, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Suite101.com advertises with:
    Writing for Suite101 provides you with the opportunity to:
    1. Receive lifelong royalties generated by your articles. ...
    That is why this whole site is blocked, and individual links can be whitelisted upon review by admins. The very nature of the site makes it a site that gets spammed. No specific author is blocked. I hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:44, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:47, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


    vk.com/petrozavodsk

    vk.com: 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 you please whitelist an article vk.com/petrozavodsk becouse it is largest society (17,700 users) in the social network vk.com about city Petrozavodsk (263,540 inhabitants)
    I woul add link to article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrozavodsk

    • It is a social networking site. vk.com/petrozavodsk is not the official site of the area, it is a social networking site of the area. This would simply fail our external link guideline. We are not a web directory for all websites on a subject. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:51, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • no Declined, no different than linking to Facebook. Stifle (talk) 19:49, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • In Russia all use VKontakte, Facebook lags far behind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.109.30.9 (talk) 08:03, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Information about the history of Eminis

    I'd like to add a referance to E-mini S&P

    I am a long time day trader and am currently getting into eminis, I found this site that has a wealth of information and the citation that is needed on the emini s&p wikipedia page. I tried to update the post and it said something about something being blocked from spam but the site looks legitimate. The links I am trying to referance is: thedaytradingacademy.com/eminis/what-are-emini-futures-facts-about-eminis/ Please advise? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnwilston (talk • contribs) 08:50, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi there fellow trader (I trade the ES market also). While I agree that's an informative page, it doesn't contain any information that isn't already available from other reliable sources. I see several examples on Google Books.
    Also http://emini-watch.com/emini-trading/emini-futures/ has substantially similar content with identical graphics, making me wonder who is violating who's copyright. In the case of copyright violations we couldn't use either link. On that basis, this request must be no Declined. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:34, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Piracy in Europe: Danube River Pirates Arrested in Serbia

    //www.suite101.com/news/piracy-in-europe-danube-river-pirates-arrested-in-serbia-a393295 seems to be the only available English translation of the probably exclusive article in Serbo-Croatian[1]; the latter page doesn't look malicious or junk in any way. I wonder what is our policy on non-English references for this matter? Should I just leave the translation on the talk page, and drop its link? Ukrained (talk) 20:09, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    This request is no Declined although it's a good question. There is no problem citing non-English sources. The relevant policy is WP:NOENG.
    If you're just citing the source, there's no need to provide an English translation (Google Translate does a decent job of that). If you're quoting a non-English source, you should provide a translation of the quotation. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:21, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    e mathematical constant

    I want to add this link to the pages concerning Euler and his mathematical constant. Together with my uncle G. Lasters, who is a mathematician and math teacher in Belgium, I made this video. It is our goal to explain the constant e for students and interested people by showing it's birth, starting with a simple equation. We believe that video can hold added value in the process of understanding math. In the same way a teacher explains something in class. This can be clearer than learning it from a book. Therefor I ask to allow my link to youtube. N. Lasters. Thanks. N lasters (talk) 16:44, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    youtu.be/oowPChmFq00 is a redirect for http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oowPChmFq00. Please use the non-redirected link (if it complies with the external links guideline). Hence, no Declined. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:40, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    It doesn't comply anyway. We don't usually link amateur content. Dicklyon (talk) 07:23, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Global Flight

    Global Flight (.net/.de) is a useful and neutral resource for Frequent Flyer Programs, including notably the world's most comprehensive listing of all Frequent Flyer/Traveller Programs. Global Flight is considered as leading resource in the loyalty industry worldwide. It seems that the site was blocked by some German guy for personal (racist?) reasons, but certainly not based on any rationale reasons. We kindly ask you to remove these links from all blacklists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.90.92.91 (talk • contribs)

    Reviewed, it is WP:SPAM. - Ahunt (talk) 11:35, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Rejected for baseless personal attacks and attempted blacklist evasion. MER-C 02:11, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    eduroute university ranking

    i need to unblock this site to add it as a reffrenc to our university ranking please do it if it's ok thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.66.129.33 (talk • contribs)

     Denied. This site was spammed abusively by a number of IP addresses. Furthermore, we do not whitelist entire domains. MER-C 02:01, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Yachtpals

    Requests for this site to be whitelisted have been many, and rejected because of a perception that the owners of the site are attempting the whitelist process. I have never heard of the site prior to looking for material for my focus on sailing; the listed link shows the down-side of solo transatlantic racing with difficult-to-find photos. Also, inexplicable rationale for denying the whitelisting was that there is no page with this link (which, of course, is impossible because it is blacklisted). --John Bessa (talk) 00:36, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    (Previous) This is a source for both-views news about sailing and racing, a necessary service sailing news tends to be from the perspective of race organizers, boat builders, and others who may benefit from one-sided reporting.--John Bessa (talk) 00:28, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't have a lot of time at the moment to focus on what appears to be an irrational blacklist. You can contact me through this Wp email link. My option is, of course, to take my work to another wiki site, perhaps one I create, and benefit the world from there. --John Bessa (talk) 13:53, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Previous discussions
    Accounts
    75.13.114.125 (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)
    69.228.217.138 (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)
    69.228.227.222 (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)
    69.228.95.14 (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)
    Sailingpeople (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)
    Jeremlurker (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)
    69.228.205.178 (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)
    Abuse such as WP:SPAM,WP:COI and WP:NOTLINKFARM and attempts to circumvent the blacklist, would all seem to be reasonable and rational reasons for its addition. I have failed to find instaces of any "inexplicable rationale" you claim. So, In addition to the previously stated reasons for denial, I've also considered your statement..."My option is, of course, to take my work to another wiki site..", and have concluded that threatening editorial Blackmail is not a valid reason to remove this link from the blacklist.no Declined as Vexatious--Hu12 (talk) 15:29, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    I forgot that I asked COIBot .. 'yachtpals.com/sailing-mini-transat-9438 is caught by blacklists: [w:en] \byachtpals\.com\b, [w:ar] \byachtpals\.com\b, [w:gl] \byachtpals\.com\b' .. blacklisted on three different, totally independent, wikis. Seen the languages, it is even unlikely that the same admin has blacklisted this. Seen your 'My option is, of course, to take my work to another wiki site..', I want you to have a look at WP:BOOMERANG, while we  Defer to Global blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:42, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    www.examiner.com/tv-in-national/jackie-evancho-sings-like-an-angel-on-the-view-video

    examiner.com: 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 would like to add this article as a link to the Jackie Evancho entry . This article has a good summary of Evancho's activities, and I am particularly interested in using it as a source for the facts noted in this excerpt: "[Evancho] travels back to Tokyo in January to take part in the re-opening celebration of the newly-refurbished Bunkamura Orchard Concert Hall, followed by two days of solo concert appearances. ..." The article is written by a credentialed journalist who has clearly done her homework in researching facts about Evancho. Would you kindly let me know on my talk page if this is approved? Thanks for your consideration. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:46, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    There seem to be other sources for this same information besides Examiner. Such as the official Bunakura concert hall schedule, for example. http://www.bunkamura.co.jp/orchard/schedule/schedule.php?yy=2012&mm=1&dd=1 (use Google translator to translate it if you can't read the Japanese).
    I don't see a compelling reason to white-list yet another examiner page when other sources are available. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:53, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
     Denied Stifle (talk) 12:26, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]


    ezinearticles.com/?Tape-Recovery---How-Tape-Works&id=1727784 - Specific article unblock request

    Could you please whitelist an article from ezinearticles.com as above for use as a reference for a section in IBM Magstar MP 3570
    Was looking to cite it to support an topic expansion. The subject is computer tape-based data-storage drives by IBM.. Pretty dry stuff. There's no POV issues etc, it's just boring old IT equipment.
    Reviewing some history, I understand the listed site is used as self-reference by some and generally isn't a reliable source. However the article in question provides background on the author, and based on this, I think the author could be considered reliable and authoritative (even if generally the whole site isn't). The content of the article is certainly accurate and detailed enough IMO. I have no personal interest in either the wiki topic or the blacklisted site/article. My motivation is to expand knowledge on topics I have a professional familiarity with. There may be other sources available, but this was the most concise and relevant source I found at the time. Citing this article will simply provide factual cross-references, and while it would take some time, one could always get absolute verification by cross-checking each claim against the manufacturer's product literature. Hopefully this won't be required, given the topic is an obsolete old tape drive format :)

    exinearticles.com: 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 benryanau 08:14, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    • Given your limited contribution history, please obtain consensus at WP:RSN that the source is appropriate, and return here if/when you get it. Stifle (talk) 09:31, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Okay, thanks. I'll see if I can get a verdict and link it back here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benryanau (talk • contribs) 13:54, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • You do not seem to have started an RSN thread. Please do so soon or this request will be denied. If you have already done so, please provide a link. Stifle (talk) 19:50, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Denied due to failure to pursue. Stifle (talk) 17:27, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    ascenderfonts.com

    ascenderfonts.com: 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 do not understand why this web site has been blacklisted. It contains useful typeface information, and it pertains to Ascender Corporation, a notable company. I want to insert citations from this web site and do not have the intention to spam Wikipedia with it. —Fitoschido [shouttrack] @ 28 December, 2011; 13:51

    It isn't blacklisted on Wikipedia, it's blacklisted globally on meta.  Defer to Global blacklist for de-listing requests.
    The purpose of this page is not to white-list entire web sites, but to white-list specific pages. If you want to white-list a single specific page for use in an article about the company, please suggest a full URL. None of the standard links to the home page work (ascenderfonts.com/index.php, ascenderfonts.com/index.htm, ascenderfonts.com/index.html, ascenderfonts.com/index.asp, ascenderfonts.com/index.aspx), so you'd have to propose some other page on that site. For the company article, I'd suggest the "about" page at www.ascenderfonts.com/info/about.aspx. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:59, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Introducing a Set of Books about TOEFL

    I would like to add a specific article on test-toefl.com to the white list - www.test-toefl.com/index.php/toefl-material/toefl-books - as I want to use it as a cite on the TOEFL article. This link is useful since there are a number of books mentioned for self-study, so that people who are looking for TOEFL explanations can have access to a trustworthy source TOEFL published by ETS, Princeton, Barron's and some more giant publishers. I appreciate your help.

    •  Denied, link is to a commercial site and we don't prefer one bookseller over another. Stifle (talk) 09:33, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • With all due respect, I suppose you didn't check the link completely because there is no book selling in the link. Even there is no link to the books; how that can be book selling? This is just a source to introduce books. That is why I am asking for a review of my request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.163.122.234 (talk) 18:38, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      I don't understand the purpose of such a link in the TOEFL article. There is no reason to believe that this is a comprehensive list, so there is no reason to link to the page. Can't readers simply search for TOEFL study aids on their own? It might be better simply to list the books in the article without linking to any site. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:41, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    smashinginterviews.com/interviews/actors/jane-leeves-interview-actress-hits-the-mark-in-new-series-hot-in-cleveland

    I would like to add this link to the Jane Leeves page as it explains that her production company is longer in business (currently the page only has information implying it's still around). I cannot find any other source for this information. Johnny "ThunderPeel2001" Walker (talk) 02:02, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    This site has a history of deliberate spamming from its founders, and has been blacklisted as a result. I don't think that this case warrants changing that position. Here's an alternative link (from Digital Spy) that can verify the text about the production company. --Ckatzchatspy 04:09, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
     Not done Stifle (talk) 11:10, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    62mckinneyfacts.com

    Mini articles and tips for the consumer on various topics. It appears that Wikipedia immediately blocked it as spam and was put on the blacklist because the link appeared to be a shortened url, which it is not but is the actual registered domain name. This can be verified on any domain registry. Would you be so kind to allow my domain to be removed off the Blacklist? Thank you kindly.--Zeus62 (talk) 04:32, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Simply, NO, no Declined. These websites are made with the purpose to make money, and that is why they are blacklisted. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:55, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    www.gayot.com/restaurants/sals-dallas-tx-75219_15df00108.html

    gayot.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com This site has been blacklisted because of spamming on the site. The site's owner, however, is well-regarded. I would like to use this specific link to improve the Sal's Pizza (Dallas) article with links outside the D/FW geographic region. I'm still trying to dig up an old Texas Monthly link that has aged off the website. In the meantime, the basically accurate and seemingly neutral and independent mention on this site would help demonstrate notability. Pawsplay (talk) 08:18, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Article has been deleted  Not done--Hu12 (talk) 15:14, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]


    www.examiner.com/film-industry-in-dallas/raid-of-the-rainbow-lounge-documentary-sets-date-for-world-premiere

    This article on Examiner.com is for reference regarding world premiere of new documentary on this GLBT / hate crime event. Raine533 (talk) 07:31, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Examiner.com:
    • Content has no editorial oversight, articles are self-published (see WP:RS)
    • Offers financial incentives for authors to increase pageviews
    • Wikipedia is not a vehicle to drive traffic to your article Raine
    no Declined--Hu12 (talk) 15:11, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Expired requests (not done due to lack of reply)

    Withdrawn requests, and requests that are malformed, invalid, or otherwise past relevance

    Archived Letchworth Rugby History

    I would like to add a specific article from the Letchworth Girls' Rugby website to the white list - www.letchworthgirls.blogspot.com/2010/09/team-to-beat-black-ferns.html - as I want to use it as a cite on the Jamie Burke (rugby) article. Although personal blogs are typically not allowed as links, this is an archived site now that the rugby team has moved to a real website. It exists to preserve news and information about girls' rugby. I'm specifically linking to it to validate the honours of women rugby players other than the New Zealand Black Ferns. --Dinkfeet (talk) 16:53, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    • I am minded to approve this request but will leave open for a short period for further comment. Stifle (talk) 09:31, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I this actually blacklisted? Blogspot is revertlisted, but not much of blogspot is blacklisted. If this specific blogspot is blacklisted, then that must have had a reason. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:49, 14 January 2012 (UTC
    • I'm a novice to Wikipedia, but from the response on my edit when I added it, was under the impression is was blacklisted. Not sure why this specific page, it's a pretty innocuous page from a recreational sports team. --Dinkfeet (talk) 00:59, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, it's revertlisted rather than blacklisted. That means an experienced editor can add it. Nothing to do here. Stifle (talk) 19:48, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    nell-rose.hubpages.com/hub/A-Step-Through-Time-The-True-story-of-Anne-Moberly-and-Eleanor-Jourdain-Two-Women-who-Crossed-the-veil-of-Time

    I want to use this link to back-up the supposed (please do notice "supposed") true story'ness of a song about the palace of Versailles. The link is not to prove it's a true story, but to give a good impression of what the song (by White Soxx) is about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berend123 (talk • contribs) 23:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    I see. After reading your reply I started to dig deeper into the story and found a better reference. (I didn't know the common title for this urban legend/hoax.) Thanks anyway! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.83.115.88 (talk) 23:01, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Interview of Bob Arno, Pickpocket King, on examiner.com

    I'd like just this page as an external link on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Arno

    Doesn't seem to be anything wrong with the one page… Reason: good interview by an L.A. TV Insider reporter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mercurie (talk • contribs)

    First of all, can you give us the full path to the document (the full link, but leave off the http:// at the start). In this way it is difficult to examine what document you mean, and we are not going to whitelist the whole domain. --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:37, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Of course. I'm sorry. www.examiner.com/tv-insider-in-los-angeles/video-nat-geo-s-pickpocket-king-bob-arno-previews-his-craft Thanks… 70.162.163.119 (talk) 04:33, 16 January 2012 (UTC) • Hello? Should I do something else to get this request processed? Re-post? Mercurie (talk) 15:57, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks, just read it. Although the examiner article is true and correct, and I am in no way connected with it, I do not need to add an iffy source to the wiki page. Thanks for steering me to a good explanation. 190.88.35.175 (talk) 19:40, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


    www.examiner.com/humanist-in-national/quiverfull-duggar-family-conservative-christian-ideology

    There appears to be some controversy as to whether the Duggars, of 19 Kids and Counting fame are part of the quiverfull movement. This article, apparently blacklisted because it's from examiner.com (?) sheds light on that question. Rather than a complete block to citation of the article, perhaps citation with qualifying information about the reliability of the cite would better advance Wikipedia goals? Lahaun (talk) 04:29, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    • Have you read the /Common requests? Stifle (talk) 11:11, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Request withdrawn after reading /Common requests. I thought examiner.com was site of SF Examiner and affiliates. Should I just delete the whole request or leave it as a cautionary tale? Lahaun (talk) 03:45, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]


    www.examiner.com/florida-keys-travel-in-miami/key-largo-hosts-world-s-only-underwater-research-lab

    Requesting whitelist to use in User:Gildir/Craig Cooper (aquanaut)#Aquarius as second citation for Cooper's retirement in February/March 2010. (The other citation I currently have for Cooper's retirement is to a Miami Herald article which is no longer available from their website, and the link I have is to an abbreviated version of the article.) The Examiner.com article seems to be reliable; it agrees with everything else I have read online and elsewhere about the Aquarius underwater habitat. I have no connection with Examiner.com. However, given everything I've read about Examiner.com on this board and elsewhere on Wikipedia (including /Common requests), I'll certainly understand if the request is denied -- in that case, should I omit the reference, or only omit the URL (as I have done in the current draft of the article)? Gildir (talk) 21:52, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    BTW, the article would also be useful for a future Wikipedia article on Ellen Prager, who is interviewed in it. Gildir (talk) 22:19, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    On further consideration, I've deleted the Examiner reference in the draft for now (partly because I found a URL for a less radically abbreviated version of the Miami Herald article). I considered withdrawing this request, but I think I'll leave it on the off chance that it's approved, especially since the Examiner piece would be more useful for a prospective article on Ellen Prager than for the Craig Cooper article. Gildir (talk) 18:30, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I have also now found a second reference for Cooper's retirement anyway (another abbreviated newspaper article). All in all, I think I should withdraw the request now. So:  Request withdrawn. Gildir (talk) 19:24, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals from whitelist (sites to reblock)

    Troubleshooting and problems

    Hi,

    I've create a page misnamed "[Editing ISO/IEC JTC1/SC36]"instead of [ISO/IEC JTC1/SC36]. This new page was marked for deletion yesterday. I've explained the difference between SC 34 page and this new SC36 to the editor. After the editor unmarked the page for deletion, it was move to WP:BLACKLIST. If there is an offending link, could you please advice me and move back the page to WHITELIST so that I can continue with edition. Thanks. --108.161.117.248 (talk) 01:44, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Here is the message that I received from the editor who first marked the page for deletion:

    I actually noticed that they were different articles, so I undid my nomintation for speedy deletion. However, I tried to move the page myself and discovered that the title was on our WP:BLACKLIST. I'm not an admin, so I can't override it. I'm not quite sure why, but you can ask someone to change the page title at WP:RM. Funnyfarmofdoom (talk to me) 21:55, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

    I managed to move the page to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC36 without any problem. Even though I'm an admin, I am not exempt from being blocked from inserting something that's blacklisted.
    As a further test, I copied the entire article content to Wikipedia:Sandbox which would also trigger the blacklist. Nothing, no error. I'm not sure what caused the problem you experienced, but if it happens again, please drop me a note on my talk page and I'll investigate. ~Amatulić (talk) 02:49, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe the title blacklist? (which admins can override).. --Versageek 02:58, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm, I can't see anything on Wikipedia:Titleblacklist that would trigger on that title. But then it's almost humanly impossible to scan that thing with a mental regex. As the OP said, there's already another article with a very similar title (different only by a digit in it).
    Even if admins can override it, wouldn't I get some sort of warning? ~Amatulić (talk) 05:48, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    The problem is the following line in MediaWiki:Titleblacklist:
    .*\p{Lu}(\P{L}*\p{Lu}){9}.* <casesensitive | moveonly>  # Disallows moves with more than nine consecutive capital letters
    That will match any title that has 10 or more uppercase letters in a row without any intervening lowercase letters, but will block moves only and not page creations. Note that admins (and accountcreators) can override the title blacklist, just not the spam blacklist. Anomie⚔ 16:44, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Discussion

    Other projects with active whitelists

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

    Notice to everyone about our Reliable sources and External links noticeboards

    If your whitelist request falls under one of these two categories, the admins will be more willing to have the source whitelisted if you can acheive consensus at one of the above noticeboards. Thanks! A Quest For Knowledge (talk)

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist&oldid=481803568"