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 06:15, 8 December 2015 (→‎www.examiner.com/article/forte-builds-on-agt-fan-base-with-new-cd-and-pcf-gig: added). 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|694278565#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}}

    Notice to everyone about our Reliable sources and External links noticeboards

    If you have a source that you would like to add to the spam-whitelist, but you are uncertain that it meets Wikipedia's guideline on reliability, please ask for opinions on the Reliable sources noticeboard, to confirm that it does meet that guideline, before submitting your whitelisting request here. In your request, link to the confirming discussion on that noticeboard.

    Likewise, if you have an external link that you are uncertain meets Wikipedia's guideline on external links, please get confirmation on the External links noticeboard before submitting your whitelisting request here.

    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 achieve consensus at one of the above noticeboards.

    Proposed additions to Whitelist (web pages to unblock)

    cse.google.com/cse/publicurl?cx=009672802819881781139:txwkuymijva

    cse.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

    I'd like to include this link in {{Find sources twl}} as a poor man's federated search for all Wikipedia Library resources. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:33, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    cse.google.com/cse/publicurl?cx=009672802819881781139:d0vvkjtl31e

    cse.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

    As above, federated search option for use in Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library/Navbox and possibly other pages such as WP:TWL. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:19, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Oaks,_Maryland

    I would like to include information about the 3 major fires that have happened in this planned community in doing so I want to link 2 youtube videos and 1 news article. The youtube videos are blocked, one is mine one is not mine. Here are the youtube videos that I would like to link: youtube.com/watch?v=K2boCMpTslU&feature=youtu.be AND youtube.com/watch?v=UP6kZtpw9x0 This is my first time attempting to modify any wiki page so please forgive me if I am not doing it right 96.244.250.178 (talk) 17:50, 1 November 2015 (UTC)taradke[reply]

    • Those pages aren't blocked, although if added by a new user they may be reverted by User:XLinkBot.  Not done. Stifle (talk) 13:33, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    en.mediamass.net/people/jessica-mcnamee/birthday.html

    en.mediamass.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 link would be helpful for the Jessica McNamee article. It provides her birthdate which has proven difficult to find otherwise. Dismas|(talk) 19:34, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Three Google CSEs

    • cse.google.com/cse/publicurl?cx=004797186867496047826:1nnbom_igns (art RS)
    • cse.google.com/cse/publicurl?cx=004797186867496047826:coodxrnfwsm (music RS)
    • cse.google.com/cse/publicurl?cx=004797186867496047826:rxardw9mwz0 (tech RS)

    cse.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

    In keeping with the precedent to whitelist Google custom search engines that would be helpful in project/userspace (while keeping the general domain blacklisted to avoid spam and trickery), I'd like my three custom engines that search specific kinds of reliable sources to be whitelisted, please. As of now, I can't easily link to the search in my drafts or at AfD, where it would be most useful. – czar 07:31, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    typography.guru

    typography.guru: 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

    Reposted from blacklist removals

    How can the site be useful This could be (and no doubt will be) described pejoratively as "a blog site", but it's by someone, Ralf Herrmann, who is WP:RS in the field of typography and particularly usability as it applies to typography. Typography.guru was launched in February 2015, but it's really more of a split of an existing site for English language coverage, away from his main German language site at http://Typografie.info

    Why it should not be blacklisted It has just been swept in the bulk addition [3] of *.guru to the blacklist.

    I'm actually rather saddened to see that moments after he had blacklisted it, JzG then removed an EL from the X-height article (of course that conveniently prevents anyone else restoring it). A ref he had previously twice removed (it has been added by two independent editors) as "The .guru domain is blogs ans orherr such unreliable sources. feel free to cite him in a reliable source." The implication being that a RS stops being RS if they publish through a particular TLD, which is nonsense. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:59, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    For what it's worth, I think that Andy is right: Although the guru tld is ridiculous, this particular site appears to pass WP:SPS and its material has been used and useful. (I do take issue with the characterization of an author as a "reliable source" as that's not at all how we define reliability in this project but that's irrelevant.) ElKevbo (talk) 16:48, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    This is precisely why we have the whitelist. Guy (Help!) 21:48, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    The point is that he's an RS beforehand, because of a whole career outside WP and outside this site as an authority on typeface design. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:44, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Defer to Local blacklist for removal of \bguru\b, which was added in a good-faith attempt to blacklist the new .guru TLD. Stifle (talk) 10:36, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • minus Removed from blacklist, should be fine now. Stifle (talk) 10:36, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Re-added. @Stifle:, a better solution would have been to fix the regex in the blacklist and whitelist typography.guru. We already have a regex that blacklists the .onion TLD, so I re-added the .guru TLD to the blacklist using a similar regex pattern. I have also whitelisted typography.guru. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:21, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    nambla.org

    nambla.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

    • nambla.org
    • nambla.org/welcome.html
    • nambla.org/ginsberg.html
    • nambla.org/hayonmanboylove.html
    • nambla.org/pederasty.html

    Why it should be whitelisted: Deferred from blacklist "for reasons that should be obvious", despite no evidence of widescale spamming (other than a Fox News article), and that Wikipedia in other languages allows the page to be linked. These URLs are all already in use (except the top one), albeit using {{code}} or WebCite.

    What articles should it be used on? Any article which already links the page via {{code}}, WebCite, the Wayback Machine or other way of circumventing the filter. As of now, these are the pages I could find:

    Thank you. – Zumoarirodoka(talk)(email) 19:11, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    The purpose of this page isn't to request whitelisting of entire domains, but rather specific pages on blacklisted domains. The Ginsberg page has no useful information on it. The other two... maybe. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:26, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    change.org

    change.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

    Requesting its use specifically for article Ben Rattray, founder of the website in question. Site is blacklisted because people like to use Wikipedia to promote individual petitions on the site, but it is obviously of encyclopedia interest for article on man mainly known for the site. Link is only to site's front page, not to any individual cause or petition. --Nat Gertler (talk) 17:07, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @NatGertler: - It is not the official link of Ben Rattray, it is the official link of Change.org. For the latter I could agree to have it whitelisted, but we need an 'about.htm' or an 'index.htm' (or similar), we can not whitelist the main domain as that would negate the blacklisting. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:39, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    www.change.org/about is the About page of the site. I note that the infobox already contains a working link, though.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:59, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    web.archive.org/web/20070806181331/http:// www.rtnda.org/resources/speeches/rather3.shtml

    This link at the Internet Archive is used on the article Paul White (journalist). It has been used since May 25, 2014, as a citation for the content of the 1997 acceptance speech by journalist Dan Rather when he received the Paul White Award from the Radio Television Digital News Association (RTDNA). There is no archived copy of the speech on www.rtdna.org/content/paul_white_award the current RTDNA website, but the speech was saved at the Internet Archive. Rather's speech, in which he discusses Paul White, is quoted in the Paul White article. No other copy of it can be found, so the link is needed. — WFinch (talk) 15:13, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I've added a ' ' in the second half of the link to be able to save this and/or comment on this. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:18, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    web.archive.org/web/20040206185545/http:// www.rtnda.org/communicator/bliss_communicator.shtml

    This link at the Internet Archive is used on the article Ed Bliss. It has been used since May 29, 2014, as a citation for the content of an interview with Bliss conducted by the Radio Television Digital News Association (RTDNA). There is no archived copy of the interview on www.rtdna.org/, the current RTDNA website, but the interview was saved at the Internet Archive. The interview is used to cite biographical content in the Ed Bliss article, so the link is needed. FYI, the article has additional links to the Internet Archive copy of the site that were not flagged. — WFinch (talk) 15:22, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • I am minded to approve this request unless I see reason not to. Stifle (talk) 08:23, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Hi, Stifle — thanks for your attention. There are also two similar requests — one pending (for Paul White, above) and one denied (for Gwen Ifill, someone else's request to which I later added comments). The problem arises from the Internet Archive incorporating the former url for these old Radio Television Digital News Association pages, which have now been hijacked by some pharma-marketing site. The Internet Archive's full url is fine, but the segment following "web.archive.org/web/" etc. contains the url that triggered Cyberbot's blocking it. But as long as the full IA url is used, it links to the original RTDNA content. — WFinch (talk) 02:58, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    www.avoiceformen.com/a-voice-for-men/i-made-the-top-10-at-houston-press-barely-i-have-been-cheated/

    I wanted to put A Voice for Men up for re-review, someone above stated WP:RS as a reason and didn't provide the specific entry, I've read the entire article 3 (three) times today and couldn't find why A Voice for Men couldn't be used, meanwhile less reliable sites which barely contain any research like Cracked and Jezebel are allowed on Wikipedia as sources, meanwhile several well notable and respected people like Erin Pizzey and Warren Farrell are notable and frequent editors on A Voice for Men, I request this specific link to be used on an article about Men's rights specifically about how Paul Elam is sometimes misquoted. --Hoang the Hoangest (talk) 06:23, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Hoang the Hoangest: Avoiceformen.com was blacklisted because it was abused, spammed, pushed. If a certain document on the server contains info that can not be sourced elsewhere, then specific links can be whitelisted. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:19, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


    www.change.org/about

    Adam Cheyer was involved with the development of change.org, and it makes sense to reference that - the reference (which admittedly was broken) was removed with the recent update. Disavian (talk) 22:41, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Disavian: I would suggest to open the whole /about-tree ('\bchange\.org\/about' as regex on the whitelist) to allow for the about pages to be used as references and official links on the pages of interest (including change.org). --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:29, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    That sounds like a good plan. I edited the section name accordingly. Disavian (talk) 06:35, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    retrotv

    I am getting the blacklist message when I try to add this as the official link in External links at Retro Television Network. Trying to post this request is generating a "filter" message with no instructions on how to fix this, so I put a space in the middle of the url. I found this discussion, which was about blocking deeplinks, not the main url. It also points out that List of Retro Television Network affiliates shoukd include the official url. Instead, it uses a "RabbitEars" link, which I assume is some commercial site. I find this surprising, especially as this was addressed in 2009. Please fix the incorrect blacklist message generator, and please do something to allow the official link for the article to be included. Thank you. 71.23.178.214 (talk) 14:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    We'll need a /about.htm or similar, per /Common requests regarding official pages - we can't just whitelist the domain itself. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:43, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Does that gobbledygook message mean you have no intention of fixing *any* of the problems I pointed out, starting with the "software" providing the wrong message? 71.23.178.214 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:25, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    When you saved the link, you got the following message:

    Your edit was not saved because it contains a new external link to a site registered on Wikipedia's blacklist. To save your changes now, you must go back and remove the blocked link (shown below), and then save. Note that if you used a redirection link or URL shortener (like e.g. 'goo.gl', 't.co', 'youtu.be', 'bit.ly'), you may still be able to save your changes by using the direct, non-shortened link - you generally obtain the non-shortened link by following the link, and copying the contents of the address bar of your web-browser after the page has loaded. Links containing 'google.com/url?' are resulting from a copy/paste from the result page of a Google search - please follow the link on the result page, and copy/paste the contents of the address bar of your web-browser after the page has loaded. If you feel the link is needed, you can: Request that the entire website be allowed, that is, removed from the local or global spam blacklists (check both lists to see which one is affecting you). Request that just the specific page be allowed, without unblocking the whole website, by asking on the spam whitelist talk page. Blacklisting indicates past problems with the link, so any requests should clearly demonstrate how inclusion would benefit Wikipedia. The following link has triggered a protection filter: myretrotv.com

    Either that exact link, or a portion of it (typically the root domain name) is currently blocked.
    So I don't understand why you say that you did not get instructions on how to fix this, there is a clear "If you feel the link is needed, you can:" with options that lead e.g. here.
    Per my previous remark, we can not whitelist the domain, we need a specific page, preferably an about-page on the website. You can save the link here if you leave off the 'http://', or maim the link otherwise. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:43, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Note to handling admin: myretrotv.com/affiliates--schedules.html should whitelisted in the same go, it is used as a (now broken) reference on List of Retro Television Network affiliates. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:45, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • @71.23.178.214:: If you want to be helped, a good way not to go about it is throwing around insults and calling people's responses "gobbledygook". Stifle (talk) 08:49, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Specific pages at India-Forums.com

    Hello, I'm presuming the domain India-Forums.com is blacklisted because the forums section of the site is user-generated and no doubt a hotbed of unreliability and copyright infringement (like most forum sites). However, the site apparently also maintains a staff of journalists whose articles appear professional and not plagiarized, complete with bylines.

    I am presently working on a draft article with a newer editor. It is about an actress in India so reliable sources in English are somehwat scarce. It would be a great help to Draft:Khushbu Thakkar if the following pages could be whitelisted:

    • www.india-forums.com/tellybuzz/starry-takes/12915-i-was-hesitant-to-hug-him-khushbu-thakkar.htm
    • www.india-forums.com/tellybuzz/buzzin-hot/11167-khushbu-thakkar-to-do-a-cameo-in-kya-huaa-tera-vaada.htm
    • www.india-forums.com/tellybuzz/wassup/20720-khushbu-thakkar-divine-trip-to-amarnath.htm
    • www.india-forums.com/tellybuzz/buzzin-hot/22668-khushbu-thakkar-in-comedy-classes.htm
    • www.india-forums.com/tellybuzz/creative-cocktail/20565-i-love-to-have-italian-cuisine-khushbu-thakkar.htm
    • www.india-forums.com/tellybuzz/buzzin-hot/26383-khushbhu-thakkar-to-feature-in-emotional-atyachar.htm

    And here is the LinkSummary for india-forums.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 . Thanks in advance, for either whitelisting or explaining why that isn't possible. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 04:04, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    (added a sixth link) —GrammarFascist contribstalk 16:19, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Can you please gather a consensus at WP:RSN that these are sufficiently reliable, and specify which article you plan to use the links on if approved? Stifle (talk) 14:05, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Beacon Press

    beacon.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

    I'm trying to correct errors in Mary Oliver's article, and it tells me that her bio on the Beacon Press website is blocked. Beacon Press is a Poetry publisher-- most notably, it is Mary Oliver's publisher. Why is this blocked? Beacon Press is not some fly-by-night self-publishing scam; they've been around since the 1800s. Oddly, the wikipedia article on Beacon Press has a link to their web page-- apparently for some reason only Mary Oliver's bio is blocked? The original page is www.beacon.org/contributorinfo.cfm?ContribID=1299 the page I'm trying to link is web.archive.org/web/20090508075809/http:// www.beacon.org/contributorinfo.cfm?ContribID=1299. --Geoffrey.landis (talk) 14:30, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I give up. I don't know how to list the link without wikipedia either telling me that I can't post because it's a blocked link, and it does some sort of weird thing when I try the "linkSummary" approach recommended in the beginning of this article. The pages under discussion are w#w#w.beacon.org/contributorinfo.cfm?ContribID=1299 and w#e#b.archive.org/web/20090508075809/h#t#t#p://www.beacon.org/contributorinfo.cfm?ContribID=1299 - (remove all the # to read the link).
    Geoffrey.landis (talk) 14:37, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Geoffrey.landis: I've updated your request. The problem is the embedded link in the archive.org link. I've maimed the link. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:05, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    It seems very counterintuitive that on a page for which the sole purpose is to post blocked links, you get an error message if you post blocked links. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 16:03, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    True, the software simply does not allow per-page excemptions (<rant>The developers have more important things to do than solving long-requested bugs or upgrades to be resolved - somewhere in Phabricator is a request for an overhaul of this system, which would preferably also allow per-page exceptions)</rant>). The description at the top of the page suggests to leave-off the 'http://' from the front, but for these embedded links that is not enough either. Maiming is the only way. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:33, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Regarding the issue itself, the company is very active (also after blacklisting, at least until beginning of last year) with promoting their business, in apparent violation of our Terms of use and local policies/guidelines. I presume you need the link as a reference? --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:33, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    The article is about Mary Oliver, a very well known (and Pulitzer-prize winning) poet. Beacon Press is her publisher. This is her bio on the Beacon Press page. I don't understand why it is blocked, particularly when the Beacon Press page itself is not blocked.
    It does seem reasonable to me that a publisher's web page would promote its business. That's why they have web pages in the first place. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 02:47, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    That is indeed reasonable, what is not reasonable is that a publisher comes to Wikipedia itself, and promotes their business on Wikipedia. The latter is in direct violation our policies and guidelines.
    That the link is there on Beacon Press is likely because the homepage is whitelisted or because it was there before the link got blacklisted.
    plus Added. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:56, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    testing: http://web.archive.org/web/20090508075809/http://www.beacon.org/contributorinfo.cfm?ContribID=1299 - if this saves then both the direct page, and the web archive work. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:58, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Jakec/Hettesheimer Run

    • Was using wind.energy-business-review.com/news/bps_wyoming_county_wind_farm_causes_concern_among_residents_090120 to work on the above-linked draft, but got hit by the spam blacklist. Seems to be reasonably credible and I found no other sources for it. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 23:58, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Please file your request in the correct section above, using the prescribed format, and linking to a non-redlinked host page. This request will not be actioned. Stifle (talk) 08:37, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I've moved it for you to the correct place, Jakec (and tracked / repaired the link for clarity).
    Most of this data is just scraped from the original with minimal rewriting, basically nothing more than a seconded primary source. However, sometimes the original is gone, making this all that is left over. Is the original not somewhere in a web archive? --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:53, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Draft has been moved to mainspace: Hettesheimer Run Stifle (talk) 15:54, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Stifle and Beetstra: Google only shows 100 results for "Hettesheimer Run" and that one appears to be the only source with that information. I suppose it is not impossible that another document with similar information is archived somewhere, but I would have no clue about how to find it. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 22:42, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    You'd have to search for the text or title of the article. This is another copy of the article: http://www.windaction.org/posts/18675-wyoming-county-wind-farm-causes-stir#.VjBX8NIrI-U - which has been truncated as they think/know it is copyrighted by Times Tribune. As the link I provided suggests that the content on that site is scraped, then that probably also means that the article on wind.energy-business-review.com is scraped. However, the original does not seem to be available online (but that is also not a necessity, a reference does not have to be available), I wonder if there will be an archive site that has the original. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:10, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Actually, I noticed that, but the link to the Times-Tribune is dead and is not archived. (and the windaction site does not appear to contain all the information that I'm using in the article). --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 11:00, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I am a bit weary about the remark on the windaction site - that one is truncated for copyright-reasons. I have seen quite literal scraped pages on the -business-review.com sites as well .. and EBR does not even mention the original ... --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:09, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    kavkazcenter.com

    On 1 March 2011, the site was blacklisted after this request.

    Motivation: the requester alleged the site to be "radical Islamic" which he wrote between citation marks ("). Why does he not simply say it is radical Islamic without such citation marks? (Apparently he is not sure of his claim 'radical Islamic'.) Granted that the site is probably giving a very colored, one-sided, ('radical') view on many topics: so what? That should result in the site being not accepted as reliable source in many cases--except perhaps in the case that we want to refer just to those biased opinions of them! (as a colleague said, 7May2015: "it fails WP:RS for anything except sourcing claims by the rebels").

    On page Wikipedia,Reliable sources,Noticeboard, version 1 March 2011 section 12 (Kavkaz Center- everyone can help!), the consensus is again that the site in many cases (!) is not reliable, which obviously is quite likely the case. But the requester also called the site "awful", and as I said: that's not a good reason for blacklisting. Herostratus then advised to ask for spam-blacklisting, which seems to me an incorrect advise, but is was followed up and it resulted in blacklisting.

    In March 2015, a colleague asked for whitelisting, on MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#www.kavkazcenter.com. Dirk Beetstra reacted: make your request for whitelisting on WT:BLACKLIST (which is here).

    The strange thing is, that, while blacklisted (for presumably wrong reasons, namely "not reliable"), the site is nevertheless today being used as source in Foreign rebel fighters in the Syrian Civil War#Chechnya and Russia--which seems contradictory to me. If the main argument for (inappropriately) blacklisting was: 'unreliable', than the site should not serve as source in an article except perhaps on very specific statements. --Corriebertus (talk) 11:20, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    No, you misunderstood that. I explained a response from Stifle, which said that requests for whitelisting a complete domain have to be on WT:BLACKLIST (which is here, but this should have redirected you to the spam-blacklist talkpage; I explained that at the right point already), and for specific links should be on the whitelist. The 'whitelisting of the whole domain' has been denied, so now the only option is to whitelist specific links:  Defer to Whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:40, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Corriebertus: As explained in the previous request, whitelisting should be requested for specific links for specific pages. Which links on kavkazcenter.com do you intend to use on which Wikipedia page, can you show that it is reliable information on that site (as reliability has been questioned for that site), and can you show that the information is not available from other, more reliable sources? The whole site is not going to be whitelisted (as that is the same as de-blacklisting, an action which has after a long discussion been denied). Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:22, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    www.examiner.com/article/abbey-road-on-the-river-beatles-festival-pays-tribute-to-john-lennon

    Is it possible to whitelist the aforementioned link for use in Abbey Road on the River? More specifically, it would be used to source the statement "Julia Baird, John Lennon's half-sister, was a featured guest in 2015 to celebrate John's 75th birthday. " in Abbey Road on the River#Speakers and noted guests.The author of the article/post, Steve Marinucci, seems to be, at least from his bio info, an experienced and reputable journalist (30 years + experience at the San Jose Mercury News).

    Would it also be possible to whitelist the following two articles written by Marinucci well:

    • www.examiner.com/article/former-members-of-elo-laurence-juber-to-headline-abbey-road-on-the-river
    • www.examiner.com/article/three-ex-wings-to-sing-tribute-to-paul-mccartney

    For reference, Examiner.com seems to have lots of articles by Marinucci (See www.examiner.com/topic/abbey-road-on-the-river) about the event, so if the above three satisfy WP:RS (I think they do), then I might ask for whitelisting for some others too. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:26, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Marchjuly: Not directly discounting this one, but I do seem to find other sources that state the same through a Google search. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:01, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    No problem. I tried Googling, but must have missed them. Would you mind posting the ones you found links or on the article talk? -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:12, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I tried Julia Baird, John Lennon's half-sister, was a featured guest in 2015 to celebrate John's 75th birthday .. that seems to get some announcements, but also some other reports. The examiner report is only later in that list. I did not check further, but the number of results seems hopeful. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:30, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Dirk Beetstra. I tweaked your search suggestion just a bit and found something I could use that works fine. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:41, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Sherry Jackson interview - Examiner.com

    One interview, in three parts, for use in Sherry Jackson, a WP:BLP.

    • www.examiner.com/article/from-baby-sherry-to-sherry-baby-my-memorable-afternoon-with-sherry-jackson
    • www.examiner.com/article/60-s-chic-k-the-retro-fantasy-world-of-sherry-jackson
    • www.examiner.com/article/the-times-they-are-a-strange-thing-sherry-jackson-and-the-end-of-the-1960s

    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

    These articles are taken from a day-long interview conducted 35 years after then end of the actor's career. She talks about her family, early work, financial trouble, on-set experiences, and career determinants, topics which are not covered elsewhere. In particular she talks about the spurious nude scene in Gunn which lurks, inaccurate and unreferenced, in the article.

    The interview will be a primary source for details of family and personal life - parents, childhood, financial and career difficulties, creative and professional influences - which are now absent from the article and from her official website. It will support some of her appearances until secondary sources are added; currently none of the Filmography entries are referenced. It might be used for a first-person account of how her career developed as it did. Her career was over long before this interview, so she is in a position to consider it more objectively from a distance than in earlier interviews. (And maybe she does.)

    The interviewer is an NYU film studies graduate [www.examiner.com/classic-movie-in-new-york/mel-neuhaus] [4] with apparently a lot of experience writing about film but no paid experience as a film critic or journalist. Yappy2bhere (talk) 22:03, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    www.mixcloud.com/onlineradioawards/

    to link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monocle_24, to be able to cite a mention that one of Monocle 24's shows won a Mixcloud award. Griffindd (talk) 11:03, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Griffindd: You would by any chance not have an independent source for that (a source writing about mixcloud awarding Monocle 24 showing independent notability of the awarding of that award)? --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:26, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    nope Griffindd (talk) 12:30, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    her.yourstory.com

    It seams like the domain that trigger the was very different, according to the info box. The site used in the article for "Ladakhi Women's Travel Company" goes to an online Indian entrepreneurs portal that has multiple article on the subject from around the world. OK, my entry could not be save because it triggers the blacklist. So I apologize for messing with the format above. To tired to read all the instruction right now. Llidstrom (talk) 19:43, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. If you can't be bothered to read the instructions, why should we care about this request?
    This page isn't for requesting de-listing of entire domains. If you have a specific page you want to white-list for a specific purpose, state it. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:17, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry, but I don't fully understand this process. Its not that I did not read any of the instructions. I did, but could not quite figure out how they all fit together and what they all mean. Perhaps someone could point me to a WP article that could help me with this. I did read the one in the infobox, but like I said, could not quite make sense of it all. Llidstrom (talk) 10:28, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Freedom (magazine) - freedommag.org

    I'd like to link to www.freedommag.org/going-clear/videos/alex-gibney-stacking-the-deck.html to illustrate the Church of Scientology's commentary about the late Sara Northrup Hubbard, as part of the final section of the article (which is a Good Article). Unfortunately the blacklist is preventing the use of that link. See also [5] for a selective whitelisting of URLs from this domain. Prioryman (talk) 23:32, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    YourStory.com

    Hi, I want to submit request to whitelist the yourstory.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 root domain. Your Story is a popular and respected media site in India, which covers stories about technology start-ups and entrepreneurs in India.[1] It's funded by many reputed investors including Ratan Tata [2]. It's similar to The Huffington Post and Business Insider.

    - Your Story can be useful while adding citations of notable entrepreneurs and startup in India. For example: Snapdeal, Zomato and Flipkart. It's specially useful when you want to add early life or background about a notable living person or company.

    - Additional sources. Please try looking up Your Story on Facebook, Twitter and Google.

    - More specifically, I am trying to use this yourstory.com/2015/11/danish-sheikh/: 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 to add additional citation in Early Life section of Danish Sheikh. Sid69pua (talk) 07:28, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    1. ^ business-standard.com/article/companies/ratan-tata-invests-in-yourstory-115081700158_1.html
    2. ^ http://tech.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/startups/yourstory-funding-ratan-tata/48508274

    atomic7brandladiesshoes.com

    • Why: False positive of a generic broader regex filter (per Talk:Atomic 7). Despite its weird name this is the legit homepage of a rock band (see Atomic 7). A Google search for this name showed a few valid usages in forums and other rock-related sites, mainly as provider of band information and music.
    • Affected article: the band's legit main article.
    • Specific link to whitelist: www.atomic7brandladiesshoes.com (the only URL in use, see External link section).

    Just a minor cleanup request, as this band's homepage URL is caught by an unrelated edit filter due to its weird name choice (it probably has some fancy background meaning). GermanJoe (talk) 16:43, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Further to that:
    • The link is permissable per the External links policy for official websites
    • The term "ladiesshoes" triggers the blacklist for shopping websites. This is not a shopping website.
    -- Callinus (talk) 17:22, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    y6xjgkgwj47us5ca.onion

    • Why: This is an example of an onion address that should be allowed to link directly. It is better a user can link to this important area of the site, rather than barely noticing the features existence from Wikipedia.
    • Affected article: The Intercept
    • Specific link to whitelist: https:// y6xjgkgwj47us5ca.onion Blog on the subject

    Given the https signed domain and the legitimacy of the organisation I would prefer this be globally whitelisted. Deku-shrub (talk) 00:51, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • I will need a more specific reason for why you feel this should be whitelisted (see WP:ELNO items 1, 4, 7, and 8 for reasons why it should not), a more specific link as we do not whitelist entire domains, and an explanation why the current situation of the link with nowiki tags is not sufficient. Stifle (talk) 16:01, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Item #1, the link is not a duplication of the main site, it is in fact a separate sub site which forms a key feature of the site. Something analogous would be something with distinct entry point, e.g. EFnet, or a different language version of an international site where the sites were significantly different from one another.
    R.e. #4, the link is not promotional, it is a key functional facet of the website.
    #7 + #8 raises an interesting point, to which I counter - it's not actually necessary for people to click this link. Most Wikipedia viewers are not Tor users and those that are will likely right-click copy the link into their separate Tor browser. I am being accused of circumventing the .onion blacklist on various occasions I use the nowiki syntax and in the absence of clear policy in this area I was suggested to go through the whitelisting process. Aside, is irc:// or magnet: similarly restricted?
    Ultimately, I'm fed up of being accused of circumventing the blacklist. I've written up and expanded probably the majority of hidden services on Wikipedia, to have so many of them attacked by people who thinking I'm trying to fool the spam filter is disheartening. Previously in depth discussions has me realise that I'm not going to get .onion globally unblacklisted any time soon and that I should pick some decent candidates for whitelisting instead, so this is what I've done. Deku-shrub (talk) 20:27, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Just a friendly piece of advice. If you are “fed up of being accused of circumventing the blacklist”, you should probably stop circumventing the blacklist. Other editors might be “fed up” with removing your circumventions of the blacklist. This only came to light when you added a link to get around access to a site that has been banned by many countries, whose founders all went to prison, and on a WP article that has banned, via numerous discussions and noticeboards, such links. Not sure what your purpose here is. Your edits appear to promote sites that sell stolen credit cards, sell illegal drugs, promote violation of property rights, and even the hiring of professional killers. Objective3000 (talk) 01:27, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia is not censored. I am a Tor and cybercrime researcher, I'm doing what most editors use Wikipedia for, clarifying and expanding upon topics that are otherwise hard to find and cross reference into one place. Your "advice" seems anything but friendly in tone and content. Also, you can't kill someone over the internet - that is an urban legend. Deku-shrub (talk) 19:47, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I thank you for your response. Censorship may be one of the most misused words in the English language. Please reread the link you provided and the included links for a fuller explanation. You should also understand the concept of Aiding and abetting. Objective3000 (talk) 01:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Good grief. I just read the article you linked to which is all your writing. You are one scary person. The "article" appears to be an essay of WP:OR authored solely by you quoting several underground sources with self-serving claims. Objective3000 (talk) 01:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    yourstory.com/2014/02/open-data-now/

    How can the site be useful This particular page is a book review by someone purporting to have qualifications to review this book. It is a quite nice review also.

    Why it should not be blacklisted Blacklist the site, just not this page.

    Affected article Open Data Now, the book being reviewed.

    Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:57, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Could be whitelisted imo. This article seems to be one of the better exceptions within yourstory. It was apparently written by a senior editor with a credible resume. The article is still biased pro-startup of course and has to be used with caution, but the source is only used to verify the reviewer's opinion and is clearly attributed as such. The article also contains some interesting background information on the book and its topic in general. GermanJoe (talk) 16:08, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    rominapower.guru

    rominapower.guru: 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

    Seems to the official website of Romina Power. Aside from the article on her it might also be useful for Al Bano and Romina Power and Albano Carrisi.--Kmhkmh (talk) 19:25, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    www.examiner.com/article/destination-historic-eudora-plantation

    I want to unblock this page to use as a reference in Eudora Plantation. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Bubba73: Have you read /Common requests? --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    No, I haven't, but I will. I tried adding this as a reference, it was blocked, and it said to add it here. This is the first time I've done one of these. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 05:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, it says that examiner.com is often denied, but I don't see any reason to doubt what it says about the house burning in 1987, which is why I wanted to use it as a reference. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 05:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    A Google search says that it is on page 124 of the book Antebellum Homes of Georgia, so I ordered the book. The link is not needed. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 17:24, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I just came here to make the same request. I did see the common requests. The reference to the date of the burning is definitely needed. I also put in a sentence about the movie that was filmed there. This article seems quite above-board, though I have seen some of the worst artivles possible at examiner.com. Smallbones(smalltalk) 02:32, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for that. I've ordered the book that the Google search found and I'll provide the reference when I get it. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:05, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    cityofmyrtlebeach.com

    The website cityofmyrtlebeach.com is specified as having been triggered by [a-z]myrtlebeach.com\b on the global blacklist. As the official website of the City of Myrtle Beach, it would appear to be an appropriate site to include, especially on the article for Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, where a number of links to the city's site are used as references. Alansohn (talk) 13:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


    www.travelsmart.net/article/10000281/

    This page will be used for the Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calatagan,_Batangas

    travelsmart.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

    I am only requesting for the said page to be whitelisted, not the whole site.

    Why would it be useful to the encyclopedia article proper? The page contains a very essential content that is crucial to the Wikipedia page's article. The said page contains latest events regarding the archaeological discoveries in Batangas, Philippines. And the source of the page is a newspaper based in the Philippines.

    Which articles would benefit from the addition of the link? One of the articles is the Excavated Treasures in Calatagan and the other one is the History. ArkiGroup5 (talk) 13:51, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    www.pantheon.org/articles/s/shahmeran.html

    This page will be used for the Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahmaran

    pantheon.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

    I am only requesting for the said page to be whitelisted, not the whole site. What is the reason that pantheon is blocked?

    Why would it be useful to the encyclopedia article proper? The page contains a very essential content that is crucial to the Wikipedia page's article including very detailed historical information.

    Which articles would benefit from the addition of the link? One of the articles is the Shahmaran.

    --Lrednuas Senoroc (talk) 12:48, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Lrednuas Senoroc: It was blacklisted per Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive214#Unreliable_source_alert:_.22Encyclopedia_Mythica.22_.28pantheon.org.29, deemed to be totally unreliable. Are you sure that there are no other documents elsewhere that you can use to verify the content? --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:05, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    dailyreckoning.com/5-cryptocurrencies-that-could-rival-bitcoin

    • "5 Cryptocurrencies that Could Rival Bitcoin"

    This is a good link on virtual currencies.
    I want to add this link as an 'External Link' on Alternative currency. VirtuOZ (talk) 19:26, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @VirtuOZ: Oi, an Agora publishing link. Anyway, Litecoin, Peercoin, Nxt, Namecoin, Dogecoin are the 5 that are mentioned, all have their own Wikipedia article (which are way larger and contain the same if not more information than what is provided by this article). That simply fails the core of our inclusion standards for external links, as all 5 were already included in Wikipedia. no Declined. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:26, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]


    www.whitchurchmethodistchurch-cardiff.co.uk/Belle-View-Methodist-URC-Church-Llandaff-North.php

    With reference to MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#Partial matches: <cardiff.co.uk> to <www.whitchurchmethodistchurch-cardiff.co.uk>, please add www.whitchurchmethodistchurch-cardiff.co.uk/Belle-View-Methodist-URC-Church-Llandaff-North.php to the whitelist. I want to cite this as a reference in List of places of worship in Cardiff. It appears to have been blocked as the result of a spurious match to cardiff.co.uk. If possible, please unblock the entire www.whitchurchmethodistchurch-cardiff.co.uk domain, as it contains other pages which might be useful, e.g. whitchurchmethodistchurch-cardiff.co.uk/History-of-WMC.php. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:17, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    This page is useful chiefly as confirmation of the existence, location, religious affiliation and current activity of several churches in north Cardiff. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:22, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    plus Added whole domain. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:37, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    www.examiner.com/article/forte-builds-on-agt-fan-base-with-new-cd-and-pcf-gig

    I wish to unblock this individual page to use as a reference in Forte (vocal group) (the proposed addition can be seen here). Jim Bessman is an established author and writer who has written for Billboard magazine. Bessman conducted the interviews upon which his article was built, and it was recommended to FORTE fans by the trio's official twitter. —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 🖖 05:18, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @ATinySliver: Material on examiner.com can often (but not always) be found on other sources which are not blacklisted, and which are hence preferred (because of the pay-per-read nature of the site). Did you check whether the information is available from elsewhere? --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:07, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra:, first thing I did, having done exactly that before. Not elsewhere yet. —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 🖖 06:11, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    plus Added. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:15, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Approved requests

    Philosophy Talk home page (www.philosophytalk.org)

    philosophytalk.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

    The url in question is the home page for the Philosophy Talk radio show and so should be legit for use on the wikipedia article on the show. I'm also not sure why it was blacklisted in the first place and would be interested to know since the reason might involved ethical problems for the show's hosts (both of whom are Stanford Professors and the show is, I believe, partially supported by the university) that would need to be fixed. As far as I can see other references in wikipedia could just as well point to the radio show's wikipedia article; however, I could see some articles citing a particular show since most of the people interviewed are experts in their fields and could be reliable sources (though in most cases they've almost certainly published the same stuff in peer reviewed books or articles [though perhaps in a not so easily understood manner]). I will admit to knowing both hosts which is one reason I'm disinclined to do much editing on the article itself (though it definitely needs work). --Erp (talk) 04:42, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • Will need a specific site such as index.html or home.php before I can progress this. Stifle (talk) 16:49, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • www.philosophytalk.org/index.php would be sufficient though it will reset itself to www.philosophytalk.org. I did a check on what exactly the spamming was and apparently several accounts were adding links from some wiki articles about particular people to Philosophy Talk shows they had been interviewed on; inappropriate and probably a side effect of them interviewing too many people who have wikipedia articles about themselves. --Erp (talk) 17:15, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Done Stifle (talk) 08:44, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    lom.com/

    This site has a great resource - a glossary on investment terms, found here : www.lom.com/glossary. Shall we whitelist the site so that it can be used as a resource on wiki pages such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investment? It is also a far better example of an offshore investment company, and should definitely replace the two examples within the external links on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offshore_investment . They have been around for 22 years.

    For reference:
    (note, the two are not the same). Seems to be part of a large spam campaign, maybe User:Hu12 wants to have a second look at these. However, it is long time ago, it may be worth a try .. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:37, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    www.hoopsvibe.com/features/41797-joel-haywood-aka-king-handles

    hoopsvibe.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 article has a staggering amount of information on the professional basketball player Joey Haywood (currently writing this article), and if I cannot use this source, the amount of content on his Wikipedia page will probably be cut down by about 50%. This is a request for this specific article to be whitelisted, but I'm not sure why this website was blacklisted in the first place. Far too much information for me to miss out on. TempleM (talk) 20:49, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • Blocked for spamming quite some time back; therefore I would be minded to approve. Stifle (talk) 08:36, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Stifle: When will this page officially be whitelisted? I have been waiting all summer to expand this article. TempleM (talk) 19:11, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Stifle (talk) 10:23, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    en.vietnamitasenmadrid.com/2011/05/municipal-theatre-saigon.html

    en.vietnamitasenmadrid.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 this page to be white-listed in order to be used as a citation for the article Municipal Theatre, Ho Chi Minh City (current capacity and features) Clicklander (talk) 12:20, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    goodingcountyhistoricalsociety.shutterfly.com/obituariesforgoodingcounty

    shutterfly.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 specific page would be helpful on the Wikipedia:List of online newspaper archives page because it has an obituary index for Gooding County, Idaho for 1946-1947 and 1980-2011. The site belongs to the Gooding County Historical Society. JaniceMSJ (talk) 08:24, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • How is this a reliable source? Stifle (talk) 08:32, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not sure how to establish its reliability because that is generally not considered a problem in the genealogical community. It is common for genealogical societies to create indices of records such as deaths and obituaries to aid researchers in finding information about their relatives. The reliability of the indices is accepted. Based on my experience with using finding aids created by other societies, I see no reason to think that the index files are inaccurate or have any malware. I have tested some of the files and found no problems. The Web site of the Gooding County Historical Society is similar to those of other genealogical societies, except that it happens to be hosted on Shutterfly. JaniceMSJ (talk) 08:11, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Done Stifle (talk) 08:44, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Infibeam.com

    infibeam.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 sites appears to have been blacklisted following the use of the site during a spam campaign, however, OTRS has received an email asking for the homepage to be added to Infibeam. Can the homepage only be added to the whitelist to allow use? Mdann52 (talk) 12:47, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Per /Common requests, we need an about-page (generally preferred) or an index.htm, we can not only whitelist the main domain as that would negate the blacklisting. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:02, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra: will www.infibeam.com/index.html be ok? Mdann52 (talk) 18:45, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    teeuwynnwoodruff.hubpages.com/hub/Rob-Cesternino-and-Rob-Has-a-Podcast

    I am trying to create a page about Rob Has a Podcast (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Cesternino) and would like to use this as a source, as it has a detailed history of the podcast. It would also be good to use on the Rob Has a Podcast section of the Rob Cesternino page. Hub Pages has been blacklisted. AlicePotter 16:03, 16 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alicepotter (talk • contribs)

    Information on the page is cited as being compiled from Cesternino's official webpage, robhasawebsite.com . I can't find any mistakes or inaccuracies when comparing the two websites. --AlicePotter 19:56, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


    avoiceformen.com Roosh V Interview

    Why it should be whitelisted

    For use per WP:BLPSELFPUB, on the Roosh V

    What articles should it be used on?

    Roosh V

    Just realised I forgot to sign this. Sorry. Brustopher (talk) 23:16, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Brustopher: One does not need something because a person published it himself, you need it to attribute something, because it is a good source for something that is in a Wikipedia article. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:37, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra: What are you talking about? Per WP:BLPSELFPUB this would be a perfectly legitimate use of such a source. It's worth noting that I brought it up on the article's talk page and no one objected.Brustopher (talk) 08:39, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Brustopher: We do only whitelist links because one can show a reason why they need to be used (generally, because they contain information that can not be found on other sources), we do not whitelist 'just' because it is a perfectly legitimate use of such a source. Moreover, although self published sources are fine, sources that contain the same information that are not self published are always better. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:51, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra: Apologies, I just realised I explained this really badly. I'm using this to source Roosh's ethnicity. No reliable sources cover his ethnicity, but people keep on adding ethnicity categories to the article. Easiest way to solve this problem would be to whitelist these articles. They could also be potentially used to source other personal information about Roosh should it be appropriate. Brustopher (talk) 22:39, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    plus Added to whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:32, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    www.examiner.com/About_Examiner

    Request whitelisting for use as official website on Examiner.com, per MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist/Common_requests#The_official_homepage_of_the_subject_of_a_page. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 23:10, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    www.sgs.com

    sgs.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 whitelisting of the home page of the SGS website. I'm from SGS and I noticed that this link is blacklisted on the Wikipedia page describing our company at SGS_S.A.. However, it's simply a link to our home page, which is a suitable reference for this Wikipedia page, which serves to provide a factual introduction to our website. Thanks - Andy 217.110.101.138 (talk) 15:53, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Happy to whitelist www.sgs.com/en/Our-Company/About-SGS/SGS-in-Brief.aspx if that's OK? I can't just whitelist sgs.com. Stifle (talk) 10:37, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    That would be great - thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.110.101.138 (talk) 07:14, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    hms-exeter.co.uk

    Appears to be official site for one article alone that satisfies WP:ELINKS - wrongly flagged as hotel spam site. -- Callinus (talk) 14:16, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • Please provide the full requested data, as per the instructions section, in order for your request to be processed, including:
      1. The Wikipedia page that you want to use the link on.
      2. An explanation why it would be useful to the encyclopedia article proper. Stifle (talk) 10:48, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Stifle: Should be used on page HMS Exeter (D89) - web page is about the ship - has some possibly useful information like a http://hms-exeter .co.uk/Passed_Over.html eulogy] of an officer. This could be used in an archival link if the site goes offline. The site exeter.co.uk is a hotel site that may have a past as a spam site. No indication that this warship enthusiast site is a spam domain. -- Callinus (talk) 17:05, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    louisvuittontrophy.com

    Triggers blacklist because of louisvuitton - but louisvuittontrophy.com/ is not a spam domain. -- Callinus (talk) 21:35, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • Please provide the full requested data, as per the instructions section, in order for your request to be processed, including:
      1. The Wikipedia page that you want to use the link on.
      2. An explanation why it would be useful to the encyclopedia article proper. Stifle (talk) 10:48, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Stifle:
    How can the site be useful - includes historical information on the Louis Vuitton Trophy and Louis Vuitton Pacific Series - a boating event.
    Why it should be whitelisted The archive page http:// web.archive.org/web/20100219010026/http://www.louisvuitton trophy.com/home/ was the official page of the boat regatta when it was active and has merit in archival links being preserved - rather than blacklisted because the word "louisvuitton" is sometimes used in spam URLs that sell fake handbags. -- Callinus (talk) 16:48, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Done, whitelisted \bwww\.louisvuittontrophy\.com/home/\b so anything with that pattern will be OK. Stifle (talk) 08:44, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


    Denied requests

    BBC One: Reinstate Balloon Idents (www.change.org)

    change.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

    So ive created the petition about March and ive reference the source on the Change.org article but this url would not be blacklisted as I understand! But list this one once the request, for me, is to be done :-) TheRealCountDracula (talk) 14:55, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • no Declined for two reasons, primarily per /Common requests we don't link to petitions, and secondarily because you have attempted to skip the queue by posting at the top instead of at the end. Stifle (talk) 10:20, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    www.examiner.com/article/clark-s-trading-post-87-years-of-northeast-family-fun

    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 This article contains valuable, reliable, and secondary information for the article White Mountain Central Railroad. This encyclopedia article is in need of more tertiary sources. The author of the article has authored a number of similarly well-written and informative articles about other historic places, and shows no sign of a conflict of interest.--Hell on Wheels (talk) 09:27, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Hell on Wheels: - the main question with articles on examiner.com is however, is this the only source that states this, or are there other sources (even multiple) that can confirm the same statements (there is a reason why Examiner.com is on the blacklist, and that is in line with the reason why the author published his document on this server - we will hence only consider whitelisting examiner.com documents if the information is unique ánd necessary (as in: likely to be challenged)). --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:15, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    By the way, I don't think that ever an article is in 'need' of tertiary sources, our articles should mainly be based on secondary sources. Tertiary sources can help establish notability etc., but that can be perfectly done with secondary sources as well (per WP:TERTIARY). --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:20, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • no Declined, not reliable source. Stifle (talk) 10:23, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Mixcloud (Mixcloud.com/ne1fmharrysmith)

    mixcloud.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

    • mixcloud.com/ne1fmharrysmith

    Why it should be whitelisted This page should be whitelisted as it would be useful as a reference on two of my draft Wikipedia articles that are coming out soon, and as proof that the articles are genuine.

    What articles would it be useful on? Again, it would be useful on my upcoming articles about Harry Smith (Radio Presenter), and an article about his show on the radio. The only issue is, that his show is soon changing name, and this link will also change as well, so if it gets whitelisted now, the link will change soon and be blacklisted again. Hazzyjam (talk) 12:49, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I've taken a look at both Draft:Harry Smith (Radio Presenter) and The James Cowen Radio Show, the two articles created by you (because this edit makes me believe you're both Hazzyjam and Hazzy6000), and neither of them passes the threshold of notability here on Wikipedia, i.e. neither of the subjects qualifies for having an article here (see Wikipedia's general notability guideline). And being able to add the link on mixcloud to the article isn't going to change that, since it's not a reliable source by Wikipedia's standards. And neither are the links to Facebook, Twitter and the local radiostation itself that are the only sources in your draft/article. Thomas.W talk 13:28, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    nashvillesounds.shutterfly.com

    nashvillesounds.shutterfly.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 whitelisting for use at Herschel Greer Stadium. This is a Shutterfly account belonging the MFP Baseball LLC, which owns the Nashville Sounds minor league baseball team that played Herschel Greer Stadium. The photographs show what the stadium looked like before and after the group bought the team and made major improvements to the ballpark. These images help convey the rundown state of the stadium. They also illustrate parts of the closed stadium for which free images are not available. NatureBoyMD (talk) 17:52, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • My first inclination is that this doesn't meet WP:ELNO item 1, but I'm open to refutation. Stifle (talk) 10:48, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • no Declined due to lack of further reply. Stifle (talk) 10:24, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    alfredgescheidt.shutterfly.com

    shutterfly.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 whitelisting for use on Alfred Gescheidt. This Shutterfly account appears to belong to Gescheidt's son. Gescheidt was a professional photographer and most if not all of these photographs are not available elsewhere online. The page is cited twice in the article. HazelAB (talk) 19:09, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • The main issue with Shutterfly is around linking to potential copyvios. How confident are we that this is a genuine account? Stifle (talk) 10:48, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Not done due to lack of reply. Stifle (talk) 10:24, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    rtnda gwen ifill

    @Duckduckstop: - I don't know where you want to go, but that does not go to a speech archive, rather a 404. The mainpage of rtnda.org is selling something drug-like. Maybe it was a good site, it appears is now not anymore. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:45, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    i was trying to link to an internet archive of an old page with a dead link. (which you will not let me) which is now a spam site. if you would unblock the site then maybe people could clean up the link rot mess. or perhaps you would prefer to delete old references since they are worse than none? see also paul white case above. Duckduckstop (talk) 17:10, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry to butt in here, but I'm unable to edit my own requests on this page because they contain the url sequence that is being blocked—it is within the Internet Archive's url.
    Please see the two requests I made in the sections above for similar blacklisted links that have been flagged on the articles Paul White (journalist) and Ed Bliss. Those articles have legitimate and still-functioning links to Radio Television Digital News Association web pages that are archived at the Internet Archive. (RTDNA is still a live, legitimate site, but these old pages are gone.) Cyberbot II has placed duplicate and sometimes triplicate alerts for the same link on the two articles and talk pages where I've requested the Internet Archive links be whitelisted. The full url is fine, but the segment following "web.archive.org/web/20070806181331" contains the url that was later hijacked by the drug-selling site. That is the site that is being blocked. The full Internet Archive link to the original content works, though. The case is the same with the link for Gwen Ifill's RTDNA speech: put it into the Wayback Machine and there it is. — WFinch (talk) 13:36, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Opposing views

    Hello, I'm writing to request that www.Opposingviews.com be added to the whitelist and removed from the blacklist. The website is an exceptionally high-trafficked political news site, and it is impossible to link to the website from a Wikipedia article because the website is currently on the blacklist.

    Specifically, the article en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposing_Views would be greatly enhanced through the addition of www.opposingviews.com to the white list.

    Again, to be clear, I am requesting www.opposingviews.com be added to the whitelist and removed from the blacklist.

    I am currently confused as to what to include for the "link summary" section. The website is a political news site. Please contact me with any additional requests for information, or simply visit the website.

    Waltersjoe86 (talk) 21:41, 17 August 2015 (UTC) Joe Walters Waltersjoe86 (talk) 21:41, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Waltersjoe86: It was blacklisted because it was spammed. As for the link on Opposing Views, we need a about.htm or an index.htm or something similar to link to, whitelisting/de-blacklisting the whole domain is  Not done. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:27, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Beetstra @Dirk Beetstra :@Beetstra: :{{rtoDirk Beetstra} I must admit I do not understand what an about.htm or an index.htm is. I included the link to aboutus.org and Alexa Page Rank information for the website. Please let me know the next steps I should take.

    http://www.aboutus.org/OpposingViews.com http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/opposingviews.com

    @Waltersjoe86: .. please see /Common requests. We can not whitelist the main page, we generally prefer therefore to whitelist a page like their about-page - for wikipedia that is the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About, for this site it may be something like 'opposingviews.com/about.htm', for Wikipedia, one could also consider https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page, a complete link to the specific document that is their homepage (it might be 'opposingviews.com/index.htm') .. in some cases however the about-page is more informative and less problematic than the main page. We need that full link here (you can save it here if you remove the 'http://' from the front of the link). --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:25, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Not done due to non-provision of requested information. Stifle (talk) 10:25, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    typemock.com

    How can the site be useful Typemock innovates in the Unit_testing field. Among other things, Typemock's University portal constantly updated with educational content.

    Why it should be Whitelisted Main page of company listed on wikipedia Typemock. According to WP:ELOFFICIAL each company is allowed to add its homepage its infobox. --Gikipedian (talk) 09:36, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • We will need an index.html or about.php to link as we are not whitelisting the full site. Stifle (talk) 10:48, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Not done due to non-provision of requested information. Stifle (talk) 10:25, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    www.alpinerecoverylodge.com/our-programs/lds-rehab/

    The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

    1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_rehabilitation 2. provides additional insight to faith based rehab facilities — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sodomojo20 (talk • contribs) 01:03, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I do not understand the 'does not appear to be a reliable source'. They are one of the most recognized Mormon Drug rehab centers in the United States. If you visit their website or visit the page that is referenced, you won't see anything there that says otherwise. To say they are an unreliable source is simply 100% false. If there's another reason you are denying this, please shed some insight on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sodomojo20 (talk • contribs) 02:49, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

    Withdrawn and stale requests, or requests otherwise past relevance

    palace.com

    For reference: m:Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archive/Ukrainian_paper-writing_spam. That rule may indeed be too broad, maybe the two requests below should go on meta for an exclusion onto the rule. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:04, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Reporting this section to m:Talk:Spam blacklist#palace.com for adaptation of the rule. Here  On hold until replied there. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:08, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • @Beetstra:: Is there any further action possible on this request? Stifle (talk) 08:47, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    This seems to have been de-coupled from the original requests .. so maybe this part is now moot? --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:57, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    www.robertankony.com/publications/perspectives/

    Was apparently blacklisted recently due to the addition of many spam links, but a link to this domain existed before on Vietnam_War which was now flagged by bot. It looks like this link was added long ago, and looking at it casually it seems legitimate (relevant article which is an online copy of an article in a specialized paper magazine. I'm not sure what's the correct course of action here, but it seems to me the link should be whitelisted. (Otherwise, could someone remove it, so that the warning on Vietnam War goes away?) Thanks! --a3nm (talk) 14:44, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @A3nm: This was blacklisted due to an editor who has been using this site continuously and whereever suitable and unsuitable. There are some strings of edits to Vietnam war by this editor, e.g. here, here, and here which are quite examplary of the behaviour (note that the revision before the (in time) first of these strings of edits, revid, does not contain any links to this site). This link was recently blacklisted, and the editor in question has been strongly advocating himself to get it removed and/pr get links allowed on Wikipedia.
    That being said, you say here that 'it seems legitimate (relevant article which is an online copy of an article in a specialized paper magazine)' . It might be a relevant link to keep, keeping in mind whether the site is allowed to host that online copy, and whether linking to an online copy is necessary, and whether there might be other sources that are a proper reference for the statements they are on. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:01, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra: Yes, I had understood the context. I do not know whether this is the best source, whether it is allowed to host a copy, etc. However, I am not sure why this is relevant. The link was there before the blacklisting of www.robertankony.com, and the intention of that blacklisting wasn't to affect existing links to that domain, I suppose, just preventing the excessive addition of new links. So I still think that the page I mentioned should be whitelisted, so the warning on Vietnam War can be removed. --a3nm (talk) 19:56, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Dirk Beetstra I just noticed this posting and would like to thank you very much. I am the editor in question and I acknowledge that I linked too many pages in the past, though it was with the intent to get information out. But I acknowledge, too, that some links were not adding much and were thus inappropriate. Again thank you, and perhaps if I link something in future I can do it on a page by page basis to verify its relevance, All the best Icemanwcs (talk) 19:24, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @A3nm: - the link was there before the blacklisting, and maybe it should have been removed when the link got blacklisted - blacklisting generally means that most of the links that were added were added in a spammy way, and should therefore be removed, as you can see the backlog of this page is huge, and the few volunteers that are active here sometimes don't get to it. It then relies on the bot and on volunteers that have the pages where those links are on on their watchlist. They will need to make the call whether the link can be removed without too much damage, can be replaced, or, ultimately, should be whitelisted. But there is no blanket 'it was not removed when the link was blacklisted, so it is probably good and should be whitelisted'. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:38, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra: OK, someone just removed the link [6] so my request is moot. I still find it a bit silly, because the link could be a reasonable source, and it was possibly added long ago and in good faith, but I don't think it's important enough to argue about. You can close my request. Thanks! --a3nm (talk) 11:15, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    User:Mztourist I believe you mistakenly removed the edits I made yesterday to the Vietnam War Wikipedia page. The issue in question was the link to www.robertankony.com/publications/perspectives/ and not the reference Lurps: A Ranger's Dairy of Tet, Khe Sanh, A Shau, and Quang Tri which is scholarly and reliable and is recognized by the U.S. Army Center of Military History and Vietnam magazine among others. The Tet Offensive was essentially a two day battle other than most notably in Hue and some of the data reflected causalities for two months of the Vietnam War instead of confining it to the Tet Offensive. Please see the tread above by Dirk Beetstra, respectfully, Icemanwcs (talk) 05:49, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @A3nm: - yes, they were added a long time ago, but by the same editor who precipitated the final blacklisting. They may also have been added in good faith (the editor may not have been pointed to our policies and guidelines yet, though "By clicking the "Save page" button, you agree to the Terms of Use and ..."), but doing an edit in good faith does not necessarily make it right, correct, or appropriate, and hence such material is still subject to removal if it is deemed inappropriate. "could be a reasonable source"/"looking at it casually it seems legitimate" is not enough for that, our pillars set higher standards than that. As far as I can see, the material is in a journal, so we can mention that, this link is just a convenience link, hosted on a server that was spammed.
    @Icemanwcs: As shown in the diffs above, you included information, whole references, and links. Although the blacklist only blocks the addition of the links, I do think that the rest of the edit should also be properly checked - I know there were instances where the inserted information was good faith and appropriate, but there were also edits where the information that was inserted is not suitable for Wikipedia, too much detail in places where that detail is not needed, detracting from the original subject of the page. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:42, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @A3nm: and Dirk Beetstra I would like to thank you both for acknowledging that my work on Wikipedia over the years was done in good faith. It has been a learning experience and I have made mistakes. Many pages were calling for citations so I plugged in what I thought was the best source as a starting point hoping others would pile in and add or correct detail. I worked on numerous pages and created several that were successful except at times I relied too much on my primary sources. It will not be repeated but I do hope www.robertankony can be whitelisted as the sources are scholarly and would be very informative to readers on certain selective pages, e.g., Social alienation, Proactive policing, and military sites as U.S. Army Rangers and Long-range reconnaissance patrol. Respectfully, Icemanwcs (talk) 19:50, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Beetstra:: Is there any further action possible on this request? Stifle (talk) 08:47, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    If I read it correctly, the link has been removed. Not sure if it is still needed. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:55, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    robertankony.com

    Wikipedia "Social alienation" reference #16 has the link to the article "The Impact of Perceived Alienation on Police Officer's Sense of Mastery and Subsequent Motivation for Proactive Enforcement," Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, vol. 22, no.2 (1999): 120-32. The article is published in an international scientific journal and is the lead definition on this page (please see reference #1). I removed the link in the interim but believe the information is directly relevant to this page (especially with all controversial, highly publicized police use of force incidents). Please consider whitelisting the link. Sorry for the abbreviated link in the heading but the page wouldn't save with it being complete, Thank you, Icemanwcs (talk) 03:13, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • Please provide the precise link you want whitelisted; omit the http and it will save just fine. If you still have problems put spaces after the dots. Stifle (talk) 10:39, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • [User:Stifle|Stifle]] (talk) Sorry for my late response but I've been working on other projects and then couldn't find my way back to this page. Here's the link I think should be attached to the Social alienation page as it was published in an academic journal and would provide much more detailed information to readers ://www.robertankony.com/publications/impact-perceived Thank you,Icemanwcs (talk) 08:56, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think this is best considered in the round with the above request. Stifle (talk) 08:19, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]


    Proposed removals from whitelist (sites to reblock)

    Troubleshooting and problems

    Discussion


    Other projects with active whitelists

    www.travelsmart.net/article/10000281/

    This page will be used for the Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calatagan,_Batangas

    travelsmart.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

    I would like to request the site to be whitelisted for the following reasons:

    Why would it be useful to the encyclopedia article proper? The page contains a very essential content that is crucial to the Wikipedia page's article. The said page contains latest events regarding the archaeological discoveries in Batangas, Philippines. And the source of the page is a newspaper based in the Philippines.

    Which articles would benefit from the addition of the link? One of the articles is the Excavated Treasures in Calatagan and the other one is the History. ArkiGroup5 (talk) 13:38, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist&oldid=694278565"