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 Anachronist (talk | contribs) at 15:57, 16 July 2012 (→‎skins.net: partially done). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives (current)→

    Spam blacklists
    Shortcuts

    The Spam-whitelist page is used in conjunction with the Mediawiki SpamBlacklist extension, and lists strings of text that override Meta's blacklist and the local spam-blacklist. Any administrator can edit the spam whitelist. Please post comments to the appropriate section below: Proposed additions (web pages to unblock), Proposed removals (sites to reblock), or Troubleshooting and problems; read the messageboxes at the top of each section for an explanation. See also MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist.

    Please enter your requests at the bottom of the Proposed additions to Whitelist section and not at the very bottom of the page. Sign your requests with four tildes: ~~~~

    Also in your request, please include the following:

    1. The link that you want whitelisted in the section title, like === example.com/help/index.php === .
    2. The Wikipedia page on which you want to use the link
    3. An explanation why it would be useful to the encyclopedia article proper
    4. If the site you're requesting is listed at /Common requests, please include confirmation that you have read the reason why requests regarding the site are commonly denied and that you still desire to proceed with your request

    Important: You must provide a full link to the specific web page you want to be whitelisted (leave out the http:// from the front; otherwise you will not be able to save your edit to this page). Requests quoting only a domain (i.e. ending in .com or similar with nothing after the / character) are likely to be denied. If you wish to have a site fully unblocked please visit the relevant section of MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist.

    Note: Do not request links to be whitelisted where you can reasonably suspect that the material you want to link to is in violation of copyright (see WP:LINKVIO). Such requests will likely be summarily rejected.

    There is no automated notification system in place for the results of requests, and you will not be notified when your request has a response. You should therefore add this page to your personal watch list, to your notifications through the subscribe feature, or check back here every few days to see if there is any progress on it; in particular, you should check whether administrators have raised any additional queries or expressed any concerns about the request, as failure to reply to these promptly will generally result in the request being denied.

    Completed requests are archived, additions and removal are logged. →snippet for logging: {{/request|502639849#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)


    volunteers.magnify.net/video/Be-The-Star-You-Are

    Hi I would like to add this to an article about Cynthia Brian which I am working on now. This video talks about her and reinforces what I wrote. I would be relevant for the article I am publishing soon on Cynthia Brian. Thank You. --Navigator01 (talk) 02:45, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined, since the article did not survive in main space. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:47, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Site xuarez.comoj.com

    I'm the owner of the site xuarez.comoj.com It's a recent site and it's part of a research project of Valladolid University (Spain). There's no malicious software, there's no spam or publicity in the site. It's an academic site. It could be relevant for entries as Alonso Xuárez I'm a professor and the web is part of our university work. I have detected the problem is with the domine comoj.com, that is in the Spam black list since 2009, but our site has nothing to see with it.

    We proposed to remove our site of black list as you can see in m:Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2012-04#xuarez.comoj.com and we received the idea of to use this way.

    We had the same problem with SiteAdvisor of McAfee. With them the problem was there was a site called comoj.com with malicious software, but there's no relation betwen comoj.com and xuarez.comoj.com, our site. McAfee has rectified. You can see our request here: https://community.mcafee.com/thread/44163.

    Then, we propose the site xuarez.comoj.com was whitelisted

    Thank you for your help

    --Axuarez (talk) 21:08, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    We generally don't white-list at the request of a site owner although I am not opposed to it in this case. I'd like some others to comment. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:57, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    A History of Broadcasting in the Philippines From World War II to the Birth of Philippine Television

    I have finally found a summarized history of broadcasting in the Philippines, this self-published work(www.socyberty.com/history/a-history-of-broadcasting-in-the-philippines-from-world-war-ii-to-the-birth-of-philippine-television) is from a reliable author, but apparently the domain is currently blacklisted. I hope to use this on the history section of ABS-CBN Corporation to support the statements written on the article. The article has too many unsupported statements and needs verification. Thank you. Hollyckuhno (talk) 12:48, 27 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]

    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]

    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]
    It's been more than 2 weeks with no response to this. — Posted by Luke Goodsell, 13:29, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    To answer your final question: Citations do not require links. Links are a convenience, not a necessity, on Wikipedia. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:01, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for responding. (That's not sarcastic; I'm grateful for a response).
    OK, so what reason is there to keep this specific URL blocked? Or must a link fulfil particular criteria to be worthy of an exception being made? — Posted by Luke Goodsell, 23:28, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    We simply do not need to use indirect urls, direct urls work perfectly fine. Redirecting urls are abused, and problematic for that reason. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:14, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Understood, but in this case, the original URL is no longer active as the content has been removed and the URL now redirects to a more recent article. I used backupurl to make a copy of the page before the content was archived. While the printed publication is still available in libraries, the backupurl page is the only one I know of that makes a faithful reproduction of the article online. — Posted by Luke Goodsell, 09:54, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Can I please get some feedback on this issue? I believe I have outlined why this URL is useful to include. It is not a redirection URL, but a mirror of content no longer available online. A print publication is available, but inclusion of this URL would allow for speedier verification of claims. — Posted by Luke Goodsell, 08:59, 15 July 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]

    Hi, it has been a month since I made this request. Could you please have a look? Thanks. Erkcan (talk) 21:03, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Statsheet

    statsheet.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 Hi, I was wondering if statsheet.com/mcb/referees/gene-steratore could be used as a reference for the Gene Steratore article to document some general information about his refereeing (e.g., conferences he officiates in, total number of games officiated, etc.). The site has similar stats for numerous NCAA officials and I think Wikipedia benefits from having articles on more well known refs such as Steratore (who also refs NFL--his primary job). I didn't want to add the information w/o citations, so I will wait for some sort of answer until I do so. Thank you. Go Phightins! (talk) 00:10, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Anyone? Go Phightins! (talk) 14:00, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    See MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/April_2011#statsheet.com_and_associated_sites. There has been a massive problem on Wikipedia involving many sockpuppets and hundreds of domains related to statsheet. They have deliberately targeted Wikipedia in ways to get around blacklisting. This is a fansite that has gone over the top in its abusive activities, it has long overstayed its welcome and all its related domains need to be expunged from Wikipedia forever. That is my view. On the other hand, I have no objection to another admin whitelisting all the referees pages if judged an appropriate reliable source. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:16, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I was unaware of the previous spam issues, but I've been using this site to look of college basketball officials for years and found most of its information to be completely reliable and invaluable to some of my research. Go Phightins! (talk) 01:29, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    FYI, the site appears as an external link in Ed Hightower. Go Phightins! (talk) 01:33, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    That link existed before the blacklisting. If that link is removed from the article, it cannot be added back. The same is true for all 356 other statsheet links currently on Wikipedia. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:54, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I am just perturbed that (in my estimation) the only site for referee info. can't be used to cite on wikipedia. Go Phightins! (talk) 19:03, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Clipmarks

    clipmarks.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

    No idea why the hell anyone would even blacklist this, but anyway, I need to insert it into the article I'm writing about Clipmarks, so...yeah. Please whitelist.--Newbiepedian (Hailing Frequencies) 05:40, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    It was blocked globally in 2009, because it just wraps a frame with ads around any other page (which allows it to be used to link to other blacklisted pages). See m:Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2009-07#clipmarks.com. I see the site is currently "discontinued", pointing to a replacement at "clipboard.com"; I've requested that also be blacklisted globally. Anomie⚔ 16:55, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Please try to see whether there is a specific link representing the site that can be whitelisted, without it being the whole domain. E.g. for 'en.wikipedia.org' we would not whitelist that, but 'en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page'. Often there is an index.html or an about.htm or something similar that is useful. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:38, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Huh? I have no clue what you mean by "wraps a frame with ads around any other page"? It collected clipped bookmarks from sites, I never saw it frame anything, anywhere, with or without ads. It was just full of annotated images. You must be confusing something...--Newbiepedian (Hailing Frequencies) 15:31, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    cbronline: 26 April 1992 article

    http://www.examiner.com/classic-movie-in-new-york/nancy-s-story

    http://www.examiner.com/classic-movie-in-new-york/nancy-s-story was written by Mel Neuhaus. I plan to use it for To Whom It May Concern: Ka Shen's Journey.

    His [http://www.examiner.com/classic-movie-in-new-york/mel-neuhaus about page]WebCite states:

    Mel Neuhaus has spent the past three decades writing almost exclusively about and for his lifelong passion: the movies. His articles/interviews/reviews have appeared worldwide in such renowned publications and on-line sites as Turner Classic Movies, Home Theater and Sound & Vision.

    In other words, he has published or reviewed for Turner Classic Movies, Home Theater Network, and Sound & Vision. Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources#Self-published sources (online and paper) states,

    Self-published material may be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. Self-published sources should never be used as third-party sources about living persons, even if the author is a well-known professional researcher or writer; see WP:BLP#Reliable sources.

    I believe that Neuhaus meets the criteria of being an "established expert" in the field of film. I will primarily use the information in the article, particularly the interview, with film director Brian Jamieson to extend the "background and production" section. I will use critical commentary from Neuhaus to expand the "Reception" section. Cunard (talk) 06:41, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Request for edit on Denver

    ERROR! Link blocked; could not save page! Had to remove link summary! Please ensure that this page is exempted from the filter! Attempted to make legitimate edit to Denver and the associated talk page, using an Examiner reference. Since my attempted edits were filtered, I am hosting my edits as text documents here (attempted page edit) and here (attempted talk page edit to bottom section of page). Copy and paste the text into the appropriate places to generate a diff so you can see the edit. Thanks. 75.53.218.81 (talk) 23:39, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    UPDATE: I have made an edit to Denver and the respective talk page. The reference was of course blocked, so I ask that this request still be looked into. I also had to modify the header since the spam filter is now being triggered when it was not triggered before. Please ensure that this page is exempted from the filter! Thanks. 75.53.218.81 (talk) 21:28, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    One way that you could do it is to omit the http — if you're trying to place a link to http://www.example.com and the system blocks you, simply write www.example.com and the software won't realise that it's a link, so it won't try to block you. Nyttend (talk) 02:30, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Just to reinstate the data. We are talking about:

    --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:28, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    www.justjaredjr.com/2012/04/01/taylor-swift-kids-choice-awards-2012   on article Taylor Swift

    A request to add only this specific website to reference Taylor Swift article and pic in winning an award for her multiple charitable organizations. The news was also repeated elsewhere and televised, so it isn't an unverified item, and it is a good pic of her with Michelle Obama. I don't understand why this entertainment source is blacklisted entirely. According to its 'About' section, "...Today, JustJared.com and Just JaredJr.com receive over 14 million unique visitors a month. Just Jared was recently named to Yahoo’s prestigious Top 10 Bloggers Roll (alongside the Huffington Post & TMZ) and was previously highlighted by Vanity Fair & InStyle as one of the world’s leading Entertainment Sites." Can someone please explain the reason for blacklisting the entire site? I presume JustJared.com is also blacklisted. If they are for a legitimate reason (please explain), can you allow this one reference on Taylor Swift's page? Thank you. Katydidit (talk) 21:31, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    bit.ly/wlafghan2

    bit.ly: 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

    • bit.ly/wlafghan2

    I would like this link to be whitelisted, please, for use as a source in en:Bradley Manning. It is referred to in a tweet by WikiLeaks, and that tweet is used as a source in the article for a key date. But when I link to it, the article can't be saved because bit.ly is on the blacklist. Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 04:21, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    That URL shortener url redirects to http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/06/afghan-airstrike-video-goes-down-the-memory-hole/. Is there any reason you cannot use that directly as your source? Anomie⚔ 11:13, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, I'm quoting a tweet from WikiLeaks in a footnote, and I'd like to quote it exactly for the sake of precision, because the date and contents of the tweet are important. But because this is on the blacklist, I'm not able to reproduce the tweet the way it was posted. SlimVirgin (talk) 15:21, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Would it be an option to quote it with 'nowiki' tags on the link? --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:29, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I could do that, or I could leave it as I have it now (see below). It's just that looks a bit odd and unnecessary (and would still require an invisible note explaining about the blacklist, which I currently have too), and especially odd in an article about freedom of information. Mind you, I might be the only one who ever notices it -- I probably shouldn't assume that readers pore through every footnote. But the point is that I'm quoting Julian Assange, and it would be nice to quote precisely what he wrote, as he wrote it. The footnote is as follows:

    For the WikiLeaks tweet, see "Have encrypted videos ...", Twitter, January 8, 2010, accessed April 6, 2012. The tweet said: "Have encrypted videos of US bomb strikes on civilians ... bit.ly/wlafghan2 we need super computer time http://ljsf.org/"

    SlimVirgin (talk) 13:56, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    www.fort-kochi.com

    This site is blacklisted because www.kochi.com, quite another website, is on the spam-blacklist. So please put www.fort-kochi.com on the whitelist. www.fort-kochi.com is a private non-commercial website which is of value for tourists visiting Fort Kochi, India. A link is to be placed at Fort Kochi.

    outrate.net

    This domain is no longer active, but http://www.archive.org/ still has it. Nevertheless, the domain is listed as a blacklist. I intend to use the review from that defunct website for the Inch by Inch (film) article, but I guess there is no way, as long as the domain is blacklisted. --George Ho (talk) 11:32, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    outrate.net: 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

    You can still use a site as a reference, even if a working link is not possible. However, what is the exact url to the document that you want to use a sa reference? --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:44, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I tried to post the exact url here, but it won't let me, archived or not. --George Ho (talk) 11:47, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    If you post it without the starting http://, it works. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:45, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Here: http://web.archive.org/web/20101126192052/http://outrate.net/?p=53 --George Ho (talk) 07:41, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Traditio-ru.org

    I would like Traditio site to be unblocked, due to the fact that its Russian site and had issues with Russian Wikipedia in the past, but not anymore. It have nothing against the English Wikipedia, or any other Wikipedias for that matter, except for maybe Russian, that as mentioned was in the past in 2007. Since that year, the site have improved, and in order for it to be even more improved Wikipedia and Traditio should work together, and all of the users there agreed with it. Not to mention, there are users that joined on both Russian and English Wikipedias and Traditio as well, and treat both sites with respect. Again, as said before, we need to work together, and by blocking a specific site we only create divisions between the Russian people. Traditio promises that they will not agitate against Wikipedia, and I seen all by myself that it have been minimized. So, I hope people will understand that blocking will result into more division of users, noty to mention, some people might even want to use this site for some projects. I for example, like both sites, and I know some users that migh agree with me here.

    Sincerely Wikipedia/Traditio user,

    --Mishae (talk) 15:42, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    S. :meta:Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2012-04#traditio.ru / traditio-ru.org --DR (talk) 20:21, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Archiving talk page content that happens to mention examiner.com

    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

    Just trying to move the section "Controversy RE deranking of GLBT books / #amazonfail" from Talk:Amazon.com to Talk:Amazon.com/Archive 1 and the spam filter is blocking me despite trying to obfuscate the link. -- Beland (talk) 06:03, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    I cannot un-delete the section from Talk:Amazon.com after the archiving failed, also due to the spam filter. -- Beland (talk) 06:08, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I had something similar yesterday - I removed a working link, but still was not able to save. Is there something changed in the software, does it hook in a wrong place? Beland, I presume that you 'took off the 'http://' from the link in your first post to make it savable? --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:16, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I had to do this and this, because I was not allowed to save the page, even after changing the links. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:19, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    And how was this edit possible, we have '\bgoogle\..*?\/url\?' on the global blacklist, which MUST catch that link. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:21, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    [1] The problem was search.twitter.com, not examiner.com. MER-C 06:22, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Re the google.de edit, it appears that MediaWiki interpreted the text "http://www.google.de/url?" as a link to "http://www.google.de/url" followed by a question mark, rather than as a link to http://www.google.de/url?. The code that does this is in makeFreeExternalLink in parser/Parser.php, it basically assumes that certain punctuation at the end of a bare url is not part of the url. Since the blacklist entry requires the '?' in the url, it didn't match. Anomie⚔ 12:24, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm, curious that I then could not save the thread, but anyways, it has been resolved. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:42, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    It was probably picking up the "link" in the edit summary when you edited the section ("/* http://www.google.de/url? */"); the edit summaries are just added verbatim to the text to check against the blacklist, without any sort of parsing. Anomie⚔ 19:56, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh my, I forgot about that. I should have adapted the edit summary. I hope however that the point that the original post could be saved is not propagating, I still don't know why the original post did save while my edit of it was blocked - I did not change anything in the URL. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:32, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    examiner.com on Terry Riley

    I've used www.examiner.com/article/terry-riley-s-benefit-performance-for-old-first-concerts as a reference (URL currently commented out) on Terry Riley. It's a run-of-the-mill concert review; I have no connection with the author. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:02, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    z4.invisionfree.com

    I would like z4.invisionfree.com/telenovelas/index.php?showtopic=1732 to be unblocked as I'm using it as a filmography reference for Alejandro Felipe. I have searched other sites, but there is none, apart from IMDB, but I'm not using that as a reference.--Mjs1991 (talk) 08:50, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    UKMIX page

    I would like to request that www.ukmix.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=3755535 be unblocked so that the music sales it mentions can be used in the list of best-selling singles worldwide.

    It is useful as a temporary or placeholder reference for UK single sales for which a more reliable link cannot be found:

    I remember I recorded the Official Beyoncé Top 20 on MTV Hits a few weeks ago. Sorry I couldn't record the whole show though
    Here's what they said:
    Beautiful Liar : 410,000
    Best Thing I Never Had : 410,000 (over 450,000 now)
    Sweet Dreams : 420,000
    Crazy in Love : 460,000
    Halo : 560,000
    Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It) : 620,000 (already updated)
    Telephone : 650,000
    If I Were A Boy : 680,000 (already updated)

    The preceding sales data should be here in the original and official list that appears on MTV.co.uk. However, the sales listed in that link happen to be outdated, and the newer data can only be found at sites like the forum link above.

    Please unblock the first web page so we can include this much-needed data in the aforementioned best-selling singles list.--Mauri96 (talk) 22:29, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Uncensored Interviews interview with Poni Hoax

    I would like this particular URL to be unblocked so that I can cite it on the Poni Hoax page. This link contains 100% unique VIDEO interviews that cannot be found on any other website. (After 6 hours of research for an important project I should know...). The article on Poni Hoax is a stub, and I regularly contributed to the article (I made an account since, but my IP address is the newest one as of this post) because I know alot about the band, and it appears that no one else is willing to post any other information on them. These collections of interviews help improve the quality of an article on a band that's on Rock Band 3 (a very popular music game) and anyone who wishes to find out anything about them should be able to verify the sources I used in the article. If they can't, they could delete important, valid, unique information (especially that pertaining to their 3rd album still in the planning stages) that has the potential to be viewed by a great quantity of people. Sageamagoo (talk) 01:40, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Bad 25 Release Details PDF

    Particular URL is for a official document linked to by the MJ Online Team (The Michael Jackson Estate) HERE. At this point in time this is the only official source. This is to be used as a citation on Bad 25 until a better source is found.

    pantheon.org

    Creating mythology articles for Wikipedia for example Alitha (Judiac Mythology), and I would like pantheon.org/articles/a/alitha.html. Unsure why the website is blocked.--Mjs1991 (talk) 03:23, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    It was added after this discussion, due to concerns that it contained unreliable information. Anomie⚔ 05:36, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    www.examiner.com/article/paul-triple-h-levesque-gives-an-insider-view-of-inside-out-and-the-wwe

    ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹Speak 19:15, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    www.examiner.com/martial-arts-in-san-francisco/molly-hale-an-incredible-martial-artist-making-a-difference

    Requesting the whitelist status of the examiner.com article which would allow people to acknowledge Molly Hale's ability to do Aikido despite that she was deemed a paralytic from the neck down after her accident. It could also help to inspire people who suffer similar issues. The article which would benefit Moment by Moment: The Healing Journey of Molly Hale (film) 99.24.220.45 (talk) 04:29, 28 March 2012 (UTC)june flowerchild[reply]

    thebestof.co.uk/local/monmouth/events/323660/open-evening

    Please note that this is my first request to whitelist a link. I am only requesting that this specific page, the best of monmouth, be whitelisted. During the course of creating a page yesterday, Wye Bridge Ward, I came across a short article, The Royal Oak, Monmouth, that seemed to be in danger of deletion. It only had one reference. I went ahead and added a reference and a small amount of text. I reconsidered though, and decided to copy edit the article, including adding sources for existing material. Concerned that it wouldn't be enough to save the article, I decided to do a full expansion. This particular page is the only one that I have found so far that specifically describes the Monmouth Rotary Club event at The Royal Oak. The Monmouth Rotary Club is a philanthropic organization, which I think is deserving of an article of its own. I was hoping to use this page for both the preexisting article The Royal Oak, Monmouth and a future article on the Monmouth Rotary Club. In addition, I have been able to verify the accuracy of the contents of the lecture given that evening by the guest speaker with a BBC source. Thank you. Anne (talk) 13:53, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    examiner.com/finance-examiner-in-national/president-obama-signs-executive-order-allowing-for-control-over-all-us-resources

    this is a combination opinion and fact piece. I want to use it on the site National Defense Resources Preparedness executive order I am creating as an example of the [right-wing] criticism of the order. Yes, I have read Common requests, and I have also read the comments on the examiner's talk page. Kdammers (talk) 02:01, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Examiner Interview with Matt Noveskey

    Please add the following page: 1. examiner.com/article/matt-noveskey-talks-life-outside-blue-october 2. For this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Noveskey 3. It is useful because it is an interview with the subject of the article which contains relevant information to the article, and is not spam and should not be black listed. 4. I understand that www.examiner.com is on the black list for spam (not sure why) but this specific page is not spam. Thanks 207.98.141.6 (talk) 14:26, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Dying Scene

    Please add the following page. This specific interview with a band member of La Dispute is useful for: highlighting on the La Dispute page how the band got their band name. Highlighting the studio techniques they used for recording Wildlife. www.dyingscene.com/news/interview-jordan-dreyer-la-dispute-discusses-touring-wildlife-and-homemade-instruments/ Thank You Jonjonjohny (talk) 12:15, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Page; suite101.com interview with DJ Paul Rudd

    I am in the process of constructing an article about DJ Paul Rudd. I would like to cite an interview of him on suite101.com as a reference. /article/interview-with-dj-paul-rudd-sound-of-london-a402049#ixzz1ym3slwub: 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 appreciate requests to unblock this site are frequently denied, but this appears to be a legitimate interview. Thanks, Daicaregos (talk) 08:50, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Anyone, please. Daicaregos (talk) 20:04, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Still hoping for a response here. Thanks, Daicaregos (talk) 10:46, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Could someone take a look at this please. Thanks, Daicaregos (talk) 07:20, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    free-comic-book-day-what-a-haul

    Please add the following page: 1. examiner.com/article/free-comic-book-day-what-a-haul

    2. For this article: Free Comic Book Day

    3. It is useful because it supports the statement "However, successful Free Comic Book Day events in 2005 and 2006 did not have specific date tie-ins to comics-related movie openings, proving that the event is more than capable of standing on its own, while the 2004 event was linked with the July opening of the second Spider-Man movie and was deemed less successful for falling outside of the regular school year." within the Free Comic Book Day article.

    4. It directly supports that statement and it includes comments that support things within the FCBD article supported by other references (such as the distributor and purposes of FCBD), which would serve to verify the reliability of the article. Whitelisting requests for Examiner.com pages are usually denied because they might be written by the person they are about, but this article is about an event and not a person. I am a long time editor with no previous ties to Examiner.com or the author Robert Sodaro; I am only trying to add a reference to a sentence within the Free Comic Book Day article that needs one. Spidey104 14:34, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    skins.net

    skins.net: 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 URL was blacklisted in 2008 because it was associated with an overly promotional article by the company entitled "Skins Compression Garments": http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam&oldid=208662258#Skins_Compression_Garments There's now an impartial article on Skins (sportswear) which would benefit from having skins.net/index.aspx in the company infobox. There's also a page on the domain which outlines the scientific benefits of compression clothing in general as well as Skins, so this might be useful as a reference to the existing compression sportswear article: skins.net/why-skins/skins-science.aspx Erj501 (talk) 13:05, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

     Done for skins.net/index.aspx.  Not done for skins.net/why-skins/skins-science.aspx, because this page is primarily promotional. While that page does contain references to legitimate research articles, it would be best to reference those articles directly as needed, and as far as I can tell they are all available offsite from skins.net. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:57, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    examiner.com, one specific page

    please add the following page. 1. www.examiner.com/article/arlington-jones-presents-the-way-i-hear-it 2. For this page: CalebSean page that is in the process of being created: here is the sandbox: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Copious_323/Caleb_Sean_McCampbell 3. It is useful because it is a link to the article of Caleb's jazz performances in the area, which solidifies him not just as a producer for Beyonce, but also a performing musician Copious 323 (talk) 22:42, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Why do you think this is a reliable source? Have you read the /Common requests? MER-C 03:53, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined due to lack of response. Also I'm not sure I see the need for permitting a questionable link for something that isn't in main article space. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:49, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    bestonlinedating.co.uk/blog/best-dating-sites-uk/be2-adapts-online-matchmaking-product-to-requirements-of-local-markets/

    This is obviously an affiliate page picking up on a Danish story regarding the online dating company be2 that is also mentioned on Wikipedia. The information given here is very vague, and the only other available information is on a Danish website, which doesn't seem to be a useful source to link to. www.dr.dk/DR1/kontant/2011/01/25143954.htm A rough Google translation shows that the content of the English article her quite accurately reflects the outline of the cited consumer watchdog TV story and the company's responses. www.bestonlinedating.co.uk/blog/best-dating-sites-uk/be2-adapts-online-matchmaking-product-to-requirements-of-local-markets/ Although the source contains tradedoubler banners, the story itself does not contain any affiliate links and I think it would contribute to the article by providing specific details on the case in English. Thanks for looking into this. Weirdly-curious (talk) 15:31, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. Most of your request contains sufficient reason not to allow this site as a link. Please link to the Danish article instead. It is the original, therefore more authoritative source, and anyone who is curious can fire up a translator to get the gist of what it says. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:45, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Kooga-Rugby.com

    This is the homepage of the Rugby League and Rugby Union Brand Kooga. It is news and sale page for Kooga. Please can it be whitelisted so that reference material can be used from the website on the Wiki page about the Brand. ManWithTooMuchTime (talk) 12:44, 4 July 2012 (UTC)ManWithTooMuchTime 13:44 GMT[reply]

    First, the page already contains the "official" website kooga.com.au. Secondly, its wholly a sales-only site, so it fails Wikipedias specific requirements of our External Links policy, Verifiability Policy and Reliable Source guidelines. I'm not convinced how this could be used as as a citation.--Hu12 (talk) 16:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    www.emptynosesyndrome.org/what_is_ens.php#symptoms

    This is the symptoms page of the Empty Nose Syndrome Association, a nonprofit, public charity that tries to raise awareness about ENS. The link is needed in the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_nose_syndrome, because the article doesn’t mention all symptoms. Also, the symptoms page has an audio of Dr. Kern’s presentation about ENS at a nose conference, which is very revealing. I have already requested the removal of the whole site from the blacklist, and I hope it will be granted as well. There it is explained why the site was blacklisted in the first place. Thanks. Gewell (talk) 16:25, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    About-Us.FindTheBest.com

    • findthebest.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
    • Article:FindTheBest
    • This is the "about us" section of FindTheBest.com. A link to the site would be useful in the company "info box" section of the article. Wikipedia articles for similar tech companies/websites have a URL to the site in the "info box", for example Kayak.com, Zillow, Quora and Wolfram Alpha to name a few.
    • Also, I would like to add the FindTheBest logo to the "info box" but I cannot upload a logo and attribute the image to a screenshot from FindTheBest because the URL is blacklisted. How can I cite the image as a screenshot?
    • Disclosure: I am an employee of FindTheBest. The article has been discussed on the COI Noticeboard, the Spam-blacklist and the Notability board.

    Evan (talk) 23:16, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

     Done!
    Hi again Evan, and congratulations on writing a decent, neutral article about your employer and getting it vetted by the community. To reference a blacklisted URL in an uploaded image, simply omit the http:// part of the URL. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:36, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Amatulić ! I've learned a lot through the process and it's sparked my interest in contributing to other pages as well. Thanks again for your help, suggestions and guidance. Evan (talk) 00:21, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    cypress.com

    • cypress.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
    • Article: UART
    • This is an article for a topic in microcontrollers, for which I wish to add an external source which presents additional technical information and usage examples.
    • These sources will be independent material created by Cypress.com employees as well as others in the electronics community (students/hobbyists)
    • All relevant sources will start in www.cypress.com/?rID=. Since I'm not sure if a specific substring of a URL can be white-listed, I request you to kindly do so for the domain.

    Kn8alpha (talk) 13:15, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. While we can add wildcard URLs as you suggested, it makes no sense to add them in anticipation of future usefulness. Each page would need to be reviewed and possibly discussed at WP:RSN first, on a case-by-case basis. Furthermore, I am hesitant to whitelist a URL at the request of a new account with no established history, who appears to have a conflict of interest with the company. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:36, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Approved requests

    Goo.gl/maps

    goo.gl: 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

    • goo.gl/maps
    Until a few days ago, Google Maps had been using Google's proprietary URL shortener, g.co, which we allow on Wikipedia since only official Google websites can make use of that shortcut. However, in the last few days, Google Maps appears to have reverted to using the older goo.gl/maps. Unfortunately we block goo.gl because that service CAN be used for ANY internet site. However, only Google Maps makes use of goo.gl/maps. To avoid having to make use of links that can spread across 5 or more lines in the edit window yet impart no useful information to a reader or editor, I think it makes perfect sense to whitelist this. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 22:32, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I recall that you could click something and it would give you the full link. The full link is no problem, that is anyway what technically should be used (per WP:ELNEVER), even if it does not convey information - it is not a problem either. However, we could consider the /maps whitelist (though maybe better would be an adapted blacklisting rule on meta for that to avoid that all Wikis will need to whitelist this). --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:49, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    My apologies, but I'm trying to find what in WP:ELNEVER even brushes on URL shorteners. I remember there was a page somewhere that basically said something along the lines of "links shouldn't surprise readers and for that reason we normally block sites that allow you to shorten any URL."
    In this case it is Google Maps specific, which would still be indicated in the short URL, and it simply knocks off all the POST data. If the blacklist of goo.gl is in meta, then it probably makes sense for the exception to be made at that level as well. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 13:15, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    OI, I thought that was part of WP:ELNEVER, but it is separate: Wikipedia:External links#Redirection sites. To me, there were only very, very few exceptions so I thought it should be part of WP:ELNEVER. However, I think it is only true for any site that can be used to circumvent the spam-blacklist in an abusive way or just makes live way more difficult - this is certainly not one of them. I guess:  Defer to Global blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:52, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Partially delisted on meta. MER-C 08:55, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Denied requests

    Let Me Google That For You

    I would understand blacking this website out for most purposes, considering that it could be abused as a link and used as a weapon of personal attack inappropriate on a wikipedia page. However, I believe it should be allowed on the page describing the concept "Let Me Google That For You" in order to describe it as a ubiquitous enough phrase to warrant a website named after it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.63.54.224 (talk • contribs) 12:55, 14 May 2012‎

    no Declined. See LMGTFY.com_on_article_RTFM. --Hu12 (talk) 04:05, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    seazoria.com

    The following discussion is an archived report. Please do not modify it. Subsequent reports should be made in a new section.

    Seazoria.com 1. The links and articles will be used to populate the Wikipedia database for others to use for research and information of the discovery of the Hallettestoneion Seazoria Dragons and the advanced marine biology. These sites contain Important Valid and Verified information of the discovery, field research, excavation and photos of the biggest discovery in history. The Hallettestoneion Seazoria Dragons, discovered by Mike Hallett should be whitelisted and available for public search. Unsure as to why the hubpages.com/Seazoria was blocked but now needs to be released.

    2. seazoria.com, seazoria.hubpages.com, scribd.com/seazoria

    3.seazoria.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 seazoria.hubpages.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 scribd.com/seazoria: 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 JenEda (talk) 23:05, 30 May 2012 (UTC)JenEda[reply]

    no Declined. The domain seazoria.com doesn't appear to be blacklisted, neither on the English Wikipedia nor on meta. No action is required. If you are experiencing a blacklist message, please explain here.
    As for seazoria.hubpages.com and scribd.com, they will remain blacklisted. Please see /Common requests. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:00, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Template:Additional Information. Thank you Amatulic. We have read /Common requests and understand the denied use of hubpages.com. However, we are willing to go the Extra Mile for the Seazoria articles. These articles are reliable and we are not connected with the site owner of hubpages in any way shape or form. We are happy to proceed. I did not notice Scribd.com listed on the /Common requests. and unsure as to how to proceed and use them in our page creations for the Hallettestoneion Seazoria Dragons page. Thank You In Advance. JenEda (talk) 01:49, 31 May 2012 (UTC)JenEda[reply]
    The concern here is that youve requested this before, and in doing so stated;
    "All the Seazoria pages belong to my partner, Mike Hallett."
    Cleary you have a conflict of interest (WP:COI). Which you did acknowledged April 10th The External Links policy on Advertising and conflicts of interest states explicitly; "you should avoid linking to a site that you own, maintain, or represent—even if WP guidelines seem to imply that it may otherwise be linked." and is in line with WP's conflict-of-interest guidelines. There's a multitude of issues involved in this case. but truly the most concerning are the statements;
    Wikipedia is WP:NOT a vehicle for advertising and since you have no other contributions other than related to seazoria.com, the policy Wikipedia:BLOCK#Disruption could also be applied here;
    There also may be issues that seazoria.com may fail Wikipedia's core content policies:
    Several times you've alluded to publishing mikes pages here to Wikipedia[4][5], understand we do not allow WP:OR. Wile the primary url is not currently blacklisted, there appears to be a clear intent to populate Wikipedia with these links and their content. I'll be adding this to Xlinkbot as a result. hubpages.com and Scribd are no Declined--Hu12 (talk) 02:58, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Attn:Hu12 It is not my intent to spam or allude to anything but to try and understand the appropriate method for Mike Hallett to add his OWN pages. He is not computer literate enough to understand the wikipedia methods. I will not be publishing the pages, Mike Hallett will be doing the articles not me.(Mike is my partner)but for him to do them I need to understand the process to show him how. I am sorry you find it necessary to belittle someone that is new to this forum and trying to self educate by asking questions. The Seazoria pages are not self promoting,or for the primary purpose of promoting a person, company, product, service, or organization. This is a historical discovery that has actual scientific facts surrounding this discovery and worthy of being in an encyclopedia environment. I guess maybe I posted to the wrong board to ask "newbie" type questions. My apologies.. Where should I have started? Many of you have been doing the admin duties and write-ups for a long time, I am merely trying to understand the process so that I may assist another in posting the article in the correct place with the correct citations. You mention adding the url to the Xlinkbot, what is that?? The way it is worded sounds to me that you are already planning to block it. Which in turn would prevent the real author Mike H to write any articles pertaining to this discovery. Is my assumption correct? The Content is verifiable, reliable and will be coming from the discoverer himself.. Not from me. JenEda (talk) 05:16, 31 May 2012 (UTC)JenEda[reply]

    Since you clearly stated you and mike "will" be adding link in order to "populate the Wikipedia database" (despite acknowledging the policy April 10th, would be in apparent violation of Conflict of interest and anti-spam guidelines). I've added it to Xlinkbot in order to monitor those additions. You have made multiple requests 10 April 2012, 29 May 2012, 30 May 2012 for removal of something that is not listed. Seazoria.com is not blacklisted, nor has it ever been. As for the issue issues that seazoria.com may fail Wikipedia's core content policies, I see nothing other than the primary source listed in these quick searches;
    Please also don't cross post(as you did on my page) the same message to multiple pages as duplicate discussions become confusing. Neutrality is an important objective at Wikipedia, so here are some related guidelines to be aware of;
    I have added a welcome message on your talk page which has links that should answer all your other editing type related questions. The MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist is for administration of the Wikipedia project and not intended as a help desk for editing questions. Closed. thanks.--Hu12 (talk) 15:11, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    Page: MokiMobility.com/about

    To be added to the article MokiMobility describing the company and services it provides. --Bradem1976 (talk) 18:26, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined, since the article has been speedy-deleted under WP:CSD#A7. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:59, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Page: usedbabies.zapto.org

    usedbabies.zapto.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

    • usedpabies.zapto.org/bang

    To be added to the article Bang!

    I created a web version of Bang! I added links to the Bang! page with the IP address of the website. The IP address has changed. Now the server uses the No-ip redirector URL zapto.org. It is understandable that this free service would be abused and blocked by default. 70.27.36.33 (talk) 13:13, 4 June 2012 (UTC)ccarrster@gmail.com[reply]

    no Declined. We don't white-list a web page at the request of a web page owner. That page is very sparse, there is no way it could be used as a reference in the article, and clearly doesn't belong as an external link according to WP:ELNO. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:37, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    skatecycle.freeforums.org

    Hey, please do nod and give a green light for this only forum for the Skatecycle article: Qubric (talk) 20:11, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined with prejudice. Fails WP:ELNO, and totally not suitable for referencing let alone having a stand-alone link in an article. That site opens up a spam "you have won!" page upon the first access, and is in no way an official forum site for the product. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:08, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    What Do you mean with "You have won"? I am just giving an information that google is refusing. How do you want people to engage in improving this article? When even a link is declined. I am not from the producer team but i just try to study and explore the vehicle 217.185.67.79 (talk) 17:11, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    That is just one of the spam messages that pop up when I access the site. It may not be the fault of the skatecycle forum; the ad may be put there by the freeforums service. In any case, please review WP:ELNO. This is a newly-created forum, with hardly any activity on it, and is not an official resource for Skatecycle. You would not be able to use it in a citation within the article because it's a forum, and it can't be used as a stand-alone link because it isn't an official site. Even if freeforums.org were not blacklisted, that link would never survive in the article.
    You ask, "how do you want people to engage in improving this article?" You improve an article by expanding its encyclopedic content, not by adding external links. External links are a convenience, not a necessity, for an encyclopedia. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:28, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Total posts 13 • Total topics 11 • Total members 2 • WP:LINKSTOAVOID # 1,4,10,11. Agreed..no Declined--Hu12 (talk) 20:56, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, I never surf with JavaScript. And btw this seems to be the only forum yet Qubric (talk) 21:26, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Other people do surf that way, and we can't have Wikipedia be the conduit for potential malware. The fact that it's the only forum is irrelevant. Bottom line, according to Wikipedia guidelines, it can't be used as a reference and it isn't suitable as a stand-alone external link. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:12, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Uncensored Interview for Amanda Palmer

    Wanting to add the link to Amanda Palmer's interview about #LOFNOTC from Uncensored Interview's website. Specifically, I wanto to link to: uncensoredinterview.com/vlogs/11836-amanda-palmer-friday-night-freaks-er-lofnotc. Not sure why this would even need to be blocked. Is it due to profanity? It's one of the main sources to document the beginning of her fan group on Twitter. Thanks. LKPotts talk 2:42AM, 14 June 2012 (EST)

    no Declined. It is blacklisted due to a spamming incident from 2008. There are over 600,000 Google hits for interviews with Amanda Palmer. Surely a few of those would be sufficient for citing in the article? ~Amatulić (talk) 01:03, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    LMGTFY.com on article RTFM

    In the article RTFM, specificially the item LMGTFY in the list in the section RTFM#Encouraging the use of at least a basic search. This is the one article where the link should be allowed. It explains the acronym and its common use, and couldn't be more directly relevant - the website is the reason for the popularity of the acronym. I see this request was denied in 2010 but no reason was given, it was just two no votes "I don't see why", despite policy. Also the article is better now. (I'd appreciate whoever replies putting a {{Talkback}} on my talk page since watching this page is impractical as it doesn't break up into sub-pages like the other meta-discussions eg. AfD...) ··gracefool☺ 22:59, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. The RTFM article gives a mere mention to the acronym LMGTFY, does not mention the domain lmgtfy.com anywhere, and I see no evidence that the acronym exists because of that web site rather than the other way round. It cannot possibly used as a citation for anything in the article. Furthermore, the original request was declined also because this venue is for requesting white-listing of specific pages, not whitelisting entire domains. Finally, see also /Common requests, the part about URL shorteners. The domain lmgtfy.com is a URL shortener, and requests to whitelist those are almost always denied because they are used to get around blacklists. ~Amatulic (talk) 23:08, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    [I was unsure after editing the declined section whether it would be seen as a new request so I've shrunken the original request and decline in small text here, also there is a user above with a pending request for the same (we may need a page in the initial section of this page linked to a description of how these sections should be edited)]
    Reopening previous user's request. RTFM is the redirect for "lmgtfy". There is no page the describe the site lmgtfy.com either. Before today I didn't know we had an external link blacklist. I was originally removing the reference to LMGTFY being the source of the website as it is likely the other way around (the site owners seem to be active on a few forums and could probably be asked outright).
    I was adding a link to their mainpage as well as an example of what the site actually does (in this case I was having result in a Google search for "wikipedia" ("lmgtfy.com/?q=wikipedia"). The site itself is simply a javascript animation describing a Google search with the result being the actual search results on google.com. Lmgtfy.com is not a URL shortener (additional evidence is from LongURL which lists known shorteners).
    If anything, if the site is not to be removed from the blacklist (of which I may start a specific discussion on the blacklist talk page if necessary), at least whitelisting "lmgtfy.com/?q=wikipedia" should be plausible as it is innocuous, gets the point across, and provides at least some hint as to a potential source or common use when there is none elsewhere on Wikipedia. LMGTFY would likely make for a very short stub which is a likely reason it became a redirect (I haven't check the history of the redirect). I am leaving what I intended to say commented out in RTFM#Encouraging the use of at least a basic search until this is resolved. Zephalis (talk) 03:38, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    One other option would be limited whitelisting on a stub for lmgtfy.com and producing a disambiguation for LMGTFY and lmgtfy.com. [is wikipage specific whitelisting of links possible?] Zephalis (talk) 03:38, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    LMGTFY.COM uses a script which creates a redirecting URL for search results on another domain. Specifically, LMGTFY.COM is a Link normally to be avoided and fails all of Wikipedias specific inclusion requirements of our External Links policy, Verifiability Policy and Reliable Source guidelines. Perhaps this might have its place outside of wikipedia, however, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - as such many links do not belong here, such as lmgtfy.com.no Declined--Hu12 (talk) 03:47, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    After reading the description and the pages you listed I understand why links to the domain are improper. Would an exception be made if the link was on a wikipage specific to lmgtfy.com? The reason I ask is that what lmgtfy.com does cannot be properly presented with still images. Would an animated GIF be a better choice? Zephalis (talk) 03:31, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    A Wikipedia article on lmgtfy.com, assuming it would survive a deletion proposal, would be deserving of a link to the site that is the topic of such an article. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:26, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Pattern day trader

    Please add the following the page. Thanks.

    Say you buy 100 shares of IBM stock one day, then next day sell 100 shares of IBM. Towards the end of the second day, you buy 100 shares of IBM stock. This is not a day trade. http://ngureco.hubpages.com/hub/Rules-of-Day-Trading-Pattern-Day-Trader-Restrictions-and-Pattern-Day-Trades-Examples

    Imagine Reason (talk) 20:05, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    What would be the purpose of whitelisting this? There are thousands of sites out there that describe pattern day trading. I see over 38,000 Google hits for the string "pattern day trader", many of which would be an equal or better quality source than somebody's personal hubpages site.
    The example given doesn't apply to pattern day trading because the trades must be day trades, not position trades held overnight. That much should be clear enough from the official SEC source, and it's already clear in the pattern day trader article. Therefore, this request is no Declined. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:22, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]


    Examiner Movie Review of "Travelling Salesman" by Jonathan Newman

    Please add the following page: 1. examiner.com/review/travelling-salesman-walking-the-tightrope-of-morality-math-science 2. For this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travelling_Salesman_(2012_film) 3. It is useful because it is the first review of the film following its premiere. 4. According to your "commonly requested sites" page, the Examiner is a self-written, commission paying site. However, the particular link in question, which I am attempting to get put on the whitelist, is pretty much the only review of this particular film that exists following the premiere, and therefore should be a pertinent part of the main article on the film itself. The film does not play again until the New York International Film Festival later this summer, so it is necessary to get the only review from the premiere cited and quoted on the article. The author, Jonathan Newman, is well established as a film reviewer, and has been doing so since 1996 (http://jonnewman.com/reviews.htm). Thank you kindly Thebaueroflove (talk) 20:50, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Why this particular review instead of a number of others? For example:
    I don't see that these reviews are so rare that we need to white-list yet another examiner.com page. no Declined. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:58, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for reviewing the case. The third review MAY work. However, just for your information, links 1, 2, and 4 are not actually reviews of the film, but reactions to the trailer. Those reviewers have not seen the film yet and are just working off the trailer and synopsis. I think a review from someone who actually attended the premiere would be an important part of the article. Review #3 seems to be someone who saw some advanced clips, and is dated a month before the premiere. I hope you can reconsider. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebaueroflove (talk • contribs) 02:13, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Home page for Vallejo Community Issues Examiner

    Currently Wikipedia has a wholesale block on my parent company URL. I am asking that my home page URL for the Vallejo Community Issues Examiner be whitelisted so that I can add it to the Media section of the city of Vallejo page on Wikipedia. I have been editing and publishing this blog in Vallejo for 3.5 years and am a respected member of the media community not only in Vallejo but also around the world. I am a veteran business, technology and lifestyle journalist with many local, regional, national and international outlets to my credit. PKutza (talk) 21:51, 22 June 2012 (UTC)Patricia Kutza 14:25, 22 June 2012[reply]

    First, please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You clearly have one.
    Second, blogs are usually links to be avoided.
    Third, we don't whitelist sites based on the request of the site owner or company representative. If a trusted, high-volume editor deems your blog necessary for enhancing the value of an article, we would consider such a request. Until then, however, this request must be no Declined. Thank you for your understanding. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:07, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    youtube, one particular video

    this is a request to allow a link to a you tube video to be posted on the wiki page for David Tinker. i trust i am giving you the information requested. David Tinker was my brother, and was killed in the Falklands war, aged 25. he wrote a series of fairly remarkable poems as a teenager which were only discovered after his death. some of them have been published in the book "Letters from the Falklands" and one is on the SAMA 82 website, because i posted it there. this last mentioned poem which is particularly remarkable has been set to music, and was given its first performance in november last year, around remembrance day. the video in question is a practice version, a pre performance version, of that poem as performed in its musical form. it is totally unique and unavailable anywhere else. i have put it together, with the composer's permission, and with my own photographs, as a tribute to my brother on the 30th anniversary of the falklands war and of his death. it is a personal tribute to someone who is no longer around, and serves to keep his memory alive, and to make his unique view of the world available to others. it is not the greatest work of art ever, of course, but it speaks to people, and i sincerely believe it is worth being within the public realm. as wikipedia is certainly the source that people might turn to first to find out something about him, this seems to me the best place for this tribute. the url code on the youtube site is AQlIAciYul0. perhaps you need it written as youtu.be/AQlIAciYul0.

    mark tinker

    82.138.218.177 (talk) 20:53, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. Youtube.com is not blacklisted. Youtu.be is blacklisted and will remain so. There is no reason to whitelist one link on youtu.be when the full link on youtube.com is available. Please use the full URL for youtube.com.
    While I sympathize with your loss, I must ask that you please read WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Wikipedia is not a place to post memorials or tributes. Wikipedia is not a place to keep someone's memory alive. Best of luck including the link, but it will probably be kept in the David Tinker article. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:12, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Expired requests (not done due to lack of reply)

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

    www.google.de/url?

    I would like to have www.google.de/url? whitelisted. I often want to collect links from Google searches on a page in my userspace for later use and this triggers the spam filter and prevents me from saving the edit. My edits are done in good faith to improve the encyclopedia with these links. Often I don't have the time to create a correctly formatted reference in the article and thus want to quickly store a large number of such links in my userspace for later formatting and use in articles. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 12:29, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Yes, I am not doubting about the good faith use of this, but this can be abused as a redirect site (and similar urls have been abused for this reason). This would enable the very basis of search engine optimisation. Please include your google-search pastes in <nowiki>-tags, or paste the results into an off-wiki document, and it will be fine. Or, click on the link and copy the real address of the page that google found for you. I am sorry, whitelisting this will result in problems, there is no use of it in Wikipedia, like, ever, per WP:ELNEVER. no Declined. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:55, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Just as a bit more info: Say you are a spammer, who wants to link to hisspammysite.com. Google would not see those links from Wikipedia, since Wikipedia is not nofollow on links. And if people follow your link, you might make money from the person visiting your site, but it would not help your search results. However, if you would link to www.google.de/url?<codingforyoursite>, every click from Wikipedia gets counted by Google as a hit, improving your result in the ranking, ánd you might make money from people visiting your site. Having that loophole open is a source for problems. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:32, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that this is probably not really necessary, since one click on the Google search result will bring to the proper url to copy/paste and that shouldn't take too much additional time. Thanks. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 14:51, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    ehow.com/how_4621475_almond-jelly-dessert.html

    Hi, it's not a lot of information but it's informative and useful for the Almond jelly article, which currently requires sources, and which this page has a little bit of Chinese history on. Thanks Jenova20 16:14, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    I would actually like to retract this request now since i understand Ehow has been blocked for user-generated content and is therefore not reliable. Thanks Jenova20 09:41, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Taketomi Tourist Association

    painusimastory.ti-da.net: 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

    • painusimastory.ti-da.net

    This is the offical website for the Taketomi, Okinawa Tourist Association. I would like to link to this site for the Iriomote cat article in regard to the conservation efforts of and mascot character created by the tourist association. I specifically wish to link to this page: painusimastory.ti-da.net/e2961086.html

    I can't find the site listed on the blacklists, however when I attempt to add this link to the article it says that it's blocked. I assume a part of the domain is tripping the list. This link is also included on the corresponding Japanese article (which is rated as a Good article), so I'm somewhat confused. Thanks for your help. purplepumpkins (talk) 12:01, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Just a comment: The domain ti-da.net is blacklisted globally on meta, not just on the English Wikipedia. Therefore if it were removed from the Japanese Wikipedia article, it could not be added back in.
    The request is reasonable and I would not object if any admin agrees to it. However, when I go to that site, it describes itself as a blog, not the official web site. I guess it's an official blog, although I am somewhat bothered by trivia from a seemingly non-notable tourist blog being used as a reference in a science article. ~Amatulić (talk) 01:13, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I see your concern over the usage of the link in a science article. The specific link was to be used under the Relationship with humans->Mascot character section, in which the link would have relevance (though I suppose it's up for debate as to if the section of the article itself has relevance).
    Upon further thought and reading through the current reference to that section, the present citation already covers all the bases. With that and your misgivings in mind, I'd say it wouldn't be a loss to close this request and just keep the URL blocked. purplepumpkins (talk) 06:14, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Request withdrawn--Hu12 (talk) 02:01, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Online-Scratch-Card

    online-scratch-card.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 had a previous request HERE to remove a blocked site to include as a source for Online scratch card. Since that time, I cited the source without using a clickable link based on a recommendation on the admin notice board HERE. I have since been told that this would be the proper forum to discuss this request. I am looking NOT for the entire site to be unblocked, but simple the URL to the article to be unblocked. The site looks like it was used under the "external link" section months ago by someone who was trying to get traffic to the site. There was no affiliate link tied to it so I am unsure if it was egregious or just someone not understanding the criteria to have their site placed there. Regardless, I would request that the link to the article that I cited (www.online-scratch-card.com/news/2011/11/camelot-defends-against-false-claims-minors-gambling-854) be unblocked so that you can click through to the cited page. Let me be clear that I am not requesting the entire site be unblocked, just this specific link. Thanks again for your consideration. --Morning277 (talk) 15:40, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    I am just following up on the above referenced request. If there is additional information that you need in order to evaluate this request, please let me know. Thank you in advance. --Morning277 (talk) 14:06, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • This does not seem to me to be a reliable source. I am minded to deny this request but will leave it for a short period in case I can be convinced otherwise. Stifle (talk) 08:52, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for addressing this. There are 2 reasons why I continued this request. The first is to go through the process as I have learned more about different Wikipedia processes. The second is that the reference, while it may not seem to be a reliable source, it is the best source available for the topic. When you search for information on online scratch cards, you get thousands of websites that are either affiliate sites trying to get you to play or actual gaming sites which I will never site on Wikipedia. The link that I want unblocked is to an article on a site that reviews online scratch card sites. While it is more than likely an affiliate site, the specific link that I want to site speaks to controversies with online scratch cards and not an attempt to refer someone to online scratch cards. The reason I changed my request to the specific link and not the entire site is because I now believe that unblocking the entire site could be suicide. You can see from the history of the link that the site spammed Wikipedia on different occasions. If it is completely unblocked it is likely that this will happen again. However, I believe that the link by itself will work for a specific issue about the topic within a single article. Thanks in advance for your consideration. --Morning277 (talk) 13:31, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Just checking to see if there is any progress on evaluating my follow-up response. Thanks. --Morning277 (talk) 19:44, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Please let me know if there is additional information needed to process this request. Thanks. --Morning277 (talk) 15:00, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    I see more reliable sources that might serve the same purpose you intend for this link:
    Why not use one of those? ~Amatulić (talk) 17:33, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I am familiar with the policy but did not find the sources that you pointed out or I would have definitely used them. Thanks for addressing this and you can withdraw my request. Thanks. --Morning277 (talk) 18:43, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I went ahead and added the Daily UK source as it looks the most reliable. --Morning277 (talk) 18:45, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
     Request withdrawn. Glad to help. Finding those sources turned out to be pretty easy. I just Googled for a quotation that appeared in the source you originally found. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:49, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    gcaptain.com/world%E2%80%99s-largest-carrier-roro/

    gcaptain.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

    • Article: [6]
    • Reason: On this topic, GCaptain has some interesting coverage which goes beyond that in other reliable sources. I'd like to use it to expand the article. I don't know why the site was blacklisted before but in this case I'm trying to use it as a source; I'm not a spammer. If it is possible to whitelist other pages I may come back here later and request whitelisting to allow improvements in other shipping articles on enwiki. bobrayner (talk) 14:14, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    travelkashmir.net

    travelkashmir.net: 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 was blocked last due to my negligence last year. This website is actually the new version of vKashmir.com who's domain is no longer in use & has expired in last month. This is a website regarding Kashmir one of the beautiful destination in Asia. I would appreciate you "admin" can take my request in to consideration and remove it from blacklisted group.

    Today i tried to replace the vKashmir.com domain link with travelKashmir.net on one of the wiki pages and was not able to do it as it was blacklisted.

    It is absolutely at your disposal to remove it or keep it as blacklisted. I am just requesting almost after 1 year to remove it from black list.

    regards

    no Declined due to invalid request. This page is for white-listing specific URLs for use in specific articles, if a website is otherwise blacklisted. The place to request delisting is at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist, although I doubt a removal request will get much traction there for reasons described at WP:ELNO and WP:NOTTRAVEL. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:37, 9 July 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

    Proposed changes to the way this page is constructed

    • It would be helpful if we could "watch" just the section associated with our request using the template/subpage mechanism that DYK and GAN use, for example. Woz2 (talk) 11:24, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I support Woz2's suggestion. An easy way to do that would be similar to how Articles for Deletion discussions are separate, but listed on a group page for easy ways to find them. Spidey104 14:39, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't support this, although I don't oppose either. I think this suggestion is more practical for things like WP:AFD or WP:SPI, where you have discussion among several participants. Here, there's really no discussion, just a request by one person and an answer by an admin. Also, we wouldn't want to structure this page on a schedule like AFD either, since there are comparatively few admins participating here and some requests remain open for months. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:51, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Question

    Are the requests on this page need every time a formal closure? Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 05:57, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Other projects with active whitelists

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

    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=502639849"