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 03:32, 9 May 2016 (→‎www.examiner.com/article/josh-robert-thompson-interview-craig-ferguson-s-sidekick-and-beyond: 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|719342855#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)


    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]
    Wow, is the backlog this bad? Time for some more RfA nominations?!?--Elvey(t•c) 17:52, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Elvey: People don't care about this, when I asked in about 10 RfAs about editing this corner of Wikipedia, I even got told off that I should be asking editors about corners of Wikipedia where they did not intend to edit. Others respectfully answered that they had no idea about this corner of Wikipedia and hence would refrain from editing even when they could. And that are then the RfAs that do run ... Editors who do edit in this corner and go for RFA generally are being told that they don't work in deletion or vandal fighting, so can not be trusted with the block tool.
    That being said, competent non-admins are also welcome to review the requests. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:20, 17 January 2016 (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]

    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]

    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] [1] 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]

    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 [2] for a selective whitelisting of URLs from this domain. Prioryman (talk) 23:32, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    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]
    • Will need an index or about page to be specified in order to progress this as entire domains are not whitelisted. Stifle (talk) 10:51, 21 March 2016 (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]

    • Will whitelist if an about or index page is specified. Cannot just whitelist the domain as that would allow unrestricted linking. Stifle (talk) 10:50, 21 March 2016 (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]

    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]

    www.defendo.guru

    This page will be uset for the wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavian_Defendo

    I would like to have this particular page whitelisted because it is information page of Scandinavian Defendo. The organization in question for the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JanneProeliator (talk • contribs) 07:17, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    •  Denied, article has been speedy-deleted. Stifle (talk) 14:13, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    www.guru-josh.com and www.guru-josh.com/biography.php

    I have checked the subsection on Common Requests regarding official pages and am happy to continue with this request. Both links have been globally blacklisted by regex on the artist page Guru Josh, as they include the word "guru", I assume as a result of some other site/domain causing issue in the past. I'm not affiliated with him, his label or anything else. I just visited today to find out more about him as it's just been announced that he died. A link to his official site would be, I'd have thought, normal for a Wikipedia page and the biography sub-page on that site is a relevant source of cited information.

    IainP (talk) 19:39, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm no admin, but I can see /biography.php going over better than just the top level /. --Damian Yerrick (talk) 04:34, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    www.freedommag.org/english/vol29i4/page16.htm


    To be used on Anson D. Shupe as a supporting link to the reference to the article identifying him as affiliated to the New Cult Awareness Network. This is a claim in a Scientology publication that identifies Dr. J. Gordon Melton, Dr. James Lewis, Dr. Newton Maloney and Dr. Anson Shupe as being affiliated to the NCAN. The publication is not a reliable source in general, but is a reliable source on that matter. --Slashme (talk) 11:05, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    iaemagazine.com/film-and-tv/film-producers-rocklin-faust/ and iaemagazine.com/film-and-tv/film-producers-rocklin-faust/2/

    • Explain why the site should be whitelisted.: The iaemagazine.com domain was blacklisted 6 years ago due to an SPA adding lots of links to the site. However, the above links will be useful for providing biographical information to the articles I am creating for Academy-Award-winning and BAFTA-Award-nominated producers Nicole Rocklin and Blye Pagon Faust.
    • Explain which articles would benefit from the addition of the link: Nicole Rocklin and Blye Pagon Faust
    • Provide the specific link to the page you're requesting be added:
      • iaemagazine.com/film-and-tv/film-producers-rocklin-faust/
      • iaemagazine.com/film-and-tv/film-producers-rocklin-faust/2/

    --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE    ) 16:17, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Stifle: This is the website of a magazine with an editorial policy about using reliable sources (see https://issuu.com/iamentertainment/docs/iaemag_iss33_smr15 for an example), and the pages in question are an interview with the subjects of the Wikipedia articles that they will be used in. --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE    ) 18:04, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    pv-magazine

    Needed for Activ Solar article as so far I was not able to find this information in other sources. These are original news stories and/or stories adopted from non-English sources, and not press releases what has been the main concern with PV-Magazine. There is no bases to doubt about the reliability of these news. Beagel (talk) 20:09, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Just for a clarification: author of all these three stories is Eugene Gerden who is a St. Petersburg based free-lance writer. These are original news stories and not rewritten stories. Beagel (talk) 18:18, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beagel: - You both say 'I was not able to find this information in other sources.' ánd 'These are ... stories adopted from non-English sources'. For these cases where they are adopted, can you use the original sources? AFAIK, pv-magazine was mainly scraping information with minimal rewriting. FYI, the problem with pv-magazine was the spamming. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:39, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I am not able to find the original source. Looking for the texts of these links, the original should be probably in Russian as I am not finding the same information in English sources. I am more than happy to use better source than pv-magazine.com if you could provide the link to better source. Thank you. Beagel (talk) 13:07, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    carpenters.co.nr

    I tried to reply at Talk:The Carpenters, but the blacklist system won't let me due to this link, which is dead. Is the dead link allowed? George Ho (talk) 19:07, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. It isn't dead, it's just reassigned to an advertising page, so there's no need to whitelist.
    On a talk page, you can always omit the "http" part of the link, and people who want to go there can paste it into their browser address bar. Also, this specific domain isn't blacklisted. All of *.co.nr is blacklisted globally on all Wiki projects, not just the English Wikipedia. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:04, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    ipmall.info

    Seems to be triggered by \b4[02]vipmalls\.com\b. Copyright status of work by the U.S. government is currently affected by this block. Thanks. Joshua Garner (talk) 03:21, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    britsolrebuiltbicycles.shutterfly.com/1220

    • britsolrebuiltbicycles.shutterfly.com/1220

    Was being used as an external link on Pedaling History Bicycle Museum until bot detected. Is a probably unique archive of photos showing many of the exhibits that were in this now defunct museum. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:01, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    cex.io

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

    cex.io: 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 is the official website of CEX.IO LTD company, registered in London, UK. The website has been blacklisted during the period when CEX.IO Bitcoin exchange wiki page was under submission. The article was not compliant with Wikipedia requirements, but now the page has been approved, you can see it here: CEX.IO Bitcoin exchange.

    Why it should not be blacklisted As said, this is a link to the official website of the company that has a Wikipedia article. It will be used only once in the article, in the company summary, without placing it anywhere else in the text.— Preceding unsigned comment added by LunaCydonia (talk • contribs)

    • Going to need an index or about page specified please. Stifle (talk) 09:45, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • cex.io/about (cannot post it otherwise, because the link itself is blacklisted) LunaCydonia (talk —Preceding undated comment added 12:46, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Approved Stifle (talk) 10:47, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is it possible to approve the index page? talk —Preceding undated comment added 09:26, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • This request has been completed. If you wish to add a new request, it must be created in a new section in the usual way and provide a full and complete URI (place it between nowiki tags if needed). Stifle (talk) 09:43, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

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

    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]

    @Stifle: The VP discussion has been archived - there wasn't a strong consensus either way but some positive comments. Could we go ahead and implement this and the other stalled requests? Nikkimaria (talk) 22:43, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • No consensus to add — no Declined Stifle (talk) 10:11, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Stifle: There was no consensus to blanket-deny all CSEs, there were positive comments about their use, and there's precedent for approving CSEs with rationale. Perhaps a second opinion here would be useful? I see Czar's request below was also denied, so the same would apply there. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:55, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        • Anyone wishing to provide such an opinion is welcome to do so. Stifle (talk) 12:32, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    2nd opinion requested

    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)

    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]

    ...more like there was no consensus against adding them? The only opposition seems to be coming from you. I'm a trusted user—what else can I do to allay your concerns? I would think that the use cases described above are completely innocuous. czar 15:07, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    2nd opinion requested

    [ANN] Nxt :: descendant of Bitcoin

    • Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=303898.0
    • Article: Nxt
    • Nxt, like a lot of blockchain projects, started on the bitcointalk forum. The link to the original thread which contains early history is needed for the articles' completeness. The thread, unlike a lot of bitcointalk material is not full of spam and trollery. Please whitelist.

    DamelonNxt (talk) 15:07, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    • no Declined. Forums are not a reliable source. Stifle (talk) 10:44, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • I am sorry, but in context this is just a strange decision, and shows you are not aware of the method most blockchain platforms have been and are launched. In the time period covered, these were mainly launched via the bitcointalk forum. Regardless of current content, this thread is sensible material to include. I ask you what other method of documenting early history of this project would be acceptable. This thread is the only direct source available for this projects first months of existence, so rather than make some other second hand source, this should be included. DamelonNxt (talk) 02:10, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    [ANN] Nxt :: descendant of Bitcoin: fundraising end post

    • Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=303898.msg3620732#msg3620732
    • Article: Nxt
    • This is a link to a post on the thread I asked to be whitelisten above. The link is relevant to the article as it shows proof of a claimed fact in the article.

    DamelonNxt (talk) 15:07, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    • no Declined. Forums are by definition not a reliable source. Stifle (talk) 10:43, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    gcaptain.com on HMS Bronington (M1115)

    HMS Bronington is a UK preserved warship. For very loose values of "preservation" in recent years. She has now unfortunately sunk at her moorings.

    As is usual in maritime circles, the first report of this, and what will probably remain the most detailed and well photographed report, is that at gCaptain.com. This content stands up: it is objective, factual and mostly about the photos. gcaptain.com/former-hms-bronington-last-of-the-royal-navys-ton-class-sinks-next-to-dock-in-england/ Andy Dingley (talk) 22:38, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    cex.io

    How can the site be useful This is the official website of CEX.IO LTD company, registered in London, UK. The website has been blacklisted during the period when CEX.IO Bitcoin exchange wiki page was under submission. The article was not compliant with Wikipedia requirements, but now the page has been approved, you can see it here: CEX.IO Bitcoin exchange. Our cex.io/about page has already been removed, but we need our index page to be whitelisted, namely https://cex.io

    Why it should not be blacklisted As said, this is a link to the official website of the company that has a Wikipedia article. It will be used only once in the article, in the company summary, without placing it anywhere else in the text.— Preceding unsigned comment added by LunaCydonia (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 09:40, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    dzone.com/articles/era-object-document-mapping

    This link has enough information explaining what an ODM is and compares/contrasts it with an ORM.

    This link will be used to create the Object Document Mapper which is empty at the moment. This site is reliable, at least the URL linked above. Please consider. Asgowrisankar (talk) 19:41, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    archive.is/bjXKk

    This link is relevant to the Melinda Haag article. It provides background on her time as US Attorney for the Northern District of California by capturing the Department of Justice's website at the time she was in office. This site should be whitelisted because it is simply an archival snapshot of the DOJ site. There is no other link to this material since it would have been removed by the DOJ once Haag resigned. Since her time as a US Attorney is a major part of the entry/article, it should include a link to this DOJ page. ndenise (talk) 14:31, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    \barchive\.is\b

    Which article? The bot tagged Palm Springs Walk of Stars. Why? The triggered link is an archived page from The Desert Sun, a legitimate publication. Specific tagged link: [archive.is/20130620232544/http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:80tHVm-OzxkJ:www.mydesert.com/viewart/J1/20130424/NEWS01/304240001/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us this one]. – S. Rich (talk) 15:39, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    archive.today/jt83s

    This link has been placed on the blacklist in the article about the Bruno Mars' song Gorilla. The triggered link is an archived page from the BBC Radio 1Xtra, which is updated every month, and therefore no longer exists, though the original page would have been at http://www.bbc.co.uk/1xtra/playlist/, on October 21, 2013. Despite search on webarchive.com and waybackmachine no similar result has been found, being this the only proof of a release date of the song in the UK. It's not the first article that I had to change the archive.is or archive.today, however the other always had their page archived somewhere else. Therefore, I believe blacklisting such link should be white-listed since it was used in good faith and it's quite legitimate and has the date of the release of the song on the UK radio. I have not hidden the blacklist notice, so anyone could see for their own eyes. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 20:55, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    archive.today/5wrP (and archive.is/5wrP)

    1. The original source is a reliable source: Nation's Restaurants News
    2. This is an archived copy of a cited reference taken when it was available online.
    3. Important source material is difficult to find or access re Big Boy Restaurants, and this important cited article should be available to motivated readers.
    4. Nowhere else on the web, or to my knowledge elsewhere, is such an overall exposed history of Big Boy given as in our Wikipedia Big Boy article.
    5. There is no good reason to blacklist this archived cited article.

    Background: The Big Boy Restaurants article is primarily historic of the chain and this blacklisted source article documents a major event: when Shoney's withdrew from the Big Boy system. This removed over 1/3rd of the Big Boys causing other regional franchisees to follow, decimating the system.
    I am ignorant regarding the reason for the blacklisting. Please whitelist this URL. (The alternative is to re-archive this archived copy elsewhere.) Since this matter is now reported, I may hide the notice pending your action.
    Cheers to Cyberbot II. Good boy. Maybe someone shouldn't let the little guy out without supervision. — Box73 (talk) 04:58, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    conjoint.guru/what-is-conjoint-analysis

    This site provides reference material directly related to the topic Conjoint analysis is a complicated set of techniques and this site is informative for beginners or college students studying marketing.

    It has just been swept in the bulk addition of *.guru to the blacklist . Please consider. Indyarockshd (talk) 07:18, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    archive.is/jhqK

    Valuable archive of a defunct news site. This particular article contains quotes from a press conference by SpaceX COO after their first commercial mission to the International Space Station in 2012. Used as a citation in List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches. — JFG talk 10:39, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    youtube San Fransisco State University

    This youtube channel [5] is the San Francisco State University video archive. There is a rare footage of Marlon Brando speaking in public about civil rights[6]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chandboju (talk • contribs) 17:05, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Chandboju:  Not done - youtube is, as obvious from this remark, not blacklisted. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:30, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    archive.is/1aTaF

    (Remove underscores if you'd like to check above link) This particular link documents a minor detail of the writer J.M. Coetzee's work. It seems appropriate and benign in this instance, though I can well understand that all content hosted at archive.is may not be so. Your bot's brash warning at the head of the page, however, is visually distracting, disproportionately so in this instance, given that it seeks human verification of the 50th reference in a 78-strong list. I don't particularly see why repairing links by reference to archive.org is OK while archive.is has a blanket ban as evidenced above. As I understand it, archive.is is NOT merely a URL-shortener; its URLs are short, yes, but the material at that URL is actually hosted at their site (cf. archive.org), in contrast to bit.ly/is.gd and their ilk, who merely host the complete original URL, relying on the host at the original site to actually serve the material.

    Ha ha! And if you try to report a particular __archive.is__ link as appropriate you get the error "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."

    The words Catch22, rotten, and Denmark come swiftly to mind. Gor, I remember the good old days when wikipedia was edited by humans.

    Well, let's try the underscores trick first. LaFolleCycliste 21:15, 16 April 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaFolleCycliste (talk • contribs)

    I have repaired the heading of this section and added a tracking. When you were adding this section, you got a box above which clearly (in bold) states "leave out the http:// part, otherwise you will not be able to save this page".
    It is funny that you remember the good old days when wikipedia was edited by humans ... because non-human editing is exactly what precipitated the community RfCs that decided that this should be blacklisted.
    Regarding the archive.is itself - maybe there are alternative archives which feature the same material? --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:54, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Forgot to ping requester: LaFolleCycliste. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:55, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    backpage.com

    backpage.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

    Not really a request, just a question. Is there a way to list "backpage.com" (only that specific web address, no subdomains) for the Backpage article? Thank you. epicgenius: unlimited epicness (talk) 03:17, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Per /Common requests, yes, but we tend to prefer an 'about' page, or the full title of the main page. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:19, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra: Thank you for the quick response. [www.backpage.com/classifieds/PrivacyPolicy Privacy Policy] and [www.backpage.com/classifieds/TermsOfUse Terms of Use] seem to be the closest things it has to an "About" page. On the bottom, it says "www.backpage.com is an interactive computer service that enables access by multiple users and should not be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider. © 2016 backpage.com" (arobably an about disclaimer). epicgenius: unlimited epicness (talk) 03:24, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I have added '\bbackpage\.com\/classifieds\/TermsOfUse\b (for 'backpage.com/classifieds/TermsOfUse') per your suggestions. I hope this helps. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:03, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra: Thank you for adding the specific URL. Regards, epicgenius: unlimited epicness (talk) 15:33, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Forbes

    Why: The site in question is an article regarding American prep schools. Forbes is a reputable source.
    Which articles: Hopkins School
    Specific link: archive.is/20130124053419/http://www.forbes.com/2010/04/29/best-prep-schools-2010-opinions-hopkins-school.html
    — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.52.13.132 (talk) 17:35, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @199.52.13.132: this is not about forbes, you could and can properly link to that: http://www.forbes.com/2010/04/29/best-prep-schools-2010-opinions-hopkins-school.html. This is about archive.is. Any other archiving sites available that can be used as an alternative? --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:40, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    archive.is/20130116071350/http://www.afterellen.com/blwe/12-3-10?page=0,2

    Requesting the link archive.is/20130116071350/http://www.afterellen.com/blwe/12-3-10?page=0,2 to be added to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tammy_Stoner

    I think the format of THEIR link (AfterEllen) is triggering this since it starts with "archive". Please removed from the blacklist entirely.This is a highly reliable source that supports claim made in the Wikipedia page. Thank you very much! Trixi245 (talk) 16:35, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Trixi245: this is about the archiving site, not about the actual reference http://www.afterellen.com/blwe/12-3-10?page=0,2 - are there any alternative archives that can be used? --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:43, 21 April 2016 (UTC) (reping: @Trixi245: --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:44, 21 April 2016 (UTC))[reply]
    Any reason it cannot be whitelisted? Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:38, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Hawkeye7: Yes, in general whitelist requests are not executed if there is a functional alternative, and it is in line with the RfCs regarding the (stare decisis) removal of archive.is. I think that whitelisting the links when there is no alternative is already a softer approach than what is suggested by the RfCs, and maybe even against the no consensus on 'Require that another archive alternative exists before removing links'. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:50, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Let me clarify this: The first RfC found a consensus to remove all the links. That consensus was not overthrown in the second (well, third) RfC, meaning that there was still a consensus to remove the links to archive.is. In the second (third) RfC there was a question whether removal should be prohibited if there was no functional alternative, but that did not find any consensus - which means that removal should continue also if there is no alternative. On the basis of that RfC, additions were prohibited and removal should have started (2.5 years ago). On the same basis, we should deny every single whitelist request, as, simply put, the links should be removed. Taking a stance to whitelist if there is no alternative is a milder stance than what is suggested in the RfCs. I will now word this into /Common requests. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:11, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    See /Common requests#archive.is. Please edit if further clarification is needed. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:22, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Still ambiguous to me. Here is yet another case where there is no alternative. /Common requests says that it can then be whitelisted; but your reading (and mine) of the RfC is that says that it will not be whitelisted. Which completely discredits the whole whitelisting process, which is based upon our WP:IAR pillar. Do you want to co-sponsor another RfC? Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:36, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Hawkeye7: 'Here is yet another case where there is no alternative'. Wrong. Rejected, alternatives exist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:20, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Now further to your comment, the RfC indeed reads that links should be removed, even if alternatives exist. I put myself more lenient than what is given in the RfC - I could have plainly rejected this. Nonetheless I ask for alternatives, showing trust to the members of the community that I will be fairly informed, and even when knowing that alternatives exist for by far most of the archive.is archives. It is the task of the requester to show that, and here you plainly say, answering for the requester, 'there is no alternative', showing that you did not even care to look for it. I hope that you understand what impression you leave. I will not co-sponsor any RfC regarding this subject on the basis of that misplaced trust I placed in those members of the community. Maybe I should consider to just plainly reject these from now on, in line with the RfC. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:55, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    What was the alternative link that you added? I went looking for it myself and couldn't find it. I am always looking for alternatives to combat link rot. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:47, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Hawkeye7: I did not add an alternative link. I am not the person who is requesting whitelisting, I am here acting in the administrative capacity to judge whether the conditions are met for whitelisting. I ask a question that I know the answer to in many cases (question: "are there any alternative archives that can be used?" - general answer: "yes, I found the material also archived here!") and you are just telling me it is 'yet another case where there is no alternative' (where this page already shows three or four cases where the requester finds replacements themselves and withdraws the request - so the 'yet' seemed out of place). I am sorry, I did not trust that answer from you (and from now on, I will not trust the answer from anyone in the community, good job), and hence I do one attempt and I see the same page - what, with a bit of effort I can even find the original and hence would be able to archive it elsewhere. Does that mean that this link is replaceable .. yes, it is. Should it hence be whitelisted: no (and you are technically right, we maybe should not even whitelist it when these alternatives do not exist, but I am giving in to the described numerical support for that point, even though that support was not deemed strong enough for consensus).
    By the way, the request is misleading, we are not talking about a source here, but about an external link, and I doubt that an interview with the subject fulfills our inclusion standards (it may however be a good reference elsewhere in the document, I am not making that editorial judgement now). I will also mention that the rest of the BLP article is similarly totally out of line with our standards (but that is out of scope of this discussion). --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:39, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I am thinking that http://www.afterellen.com/columns/81828-best-lesbian-week-ever-december-3-2010-lining-dotties-magic-pockets-and-making-lesbian-history-in-botswana/3 may serve as an alternative link. In many cases just dropping an external link may be the easiest alternative. But that may make it much harder to improve the article. Hawkeye7 (talk) 06:33, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Hawkeye7: .. and the original afterellen.com link (http://www.afterellen.com/blwe/12-3-10?page=0,2) now results in a non-existing page, but is archived (twice) on archive.org. Likely, the page that you now found (and which I was alluding to) is also archived on archive.org. When I ask 'are there any alternative archives that can be used?' the former where the alternative archives I was alluding to.
    Regarding 'much harder to improve the article' - talkpages are the place to talk/discuss/suggest about improving the article, or to suggest material to improve the article. Not external links sections. Moreover, the link is there since 2012 (updated to archive.is before it was blocked in 2013) and no-one used the information to improve the article (the article is basically in this state since 2012). That shows, again, how effective linkfarming is to improve the article - just about as effective as putting the links on the talkpages and wait for someone to use the information that is posted there. I am curious to see how much of the information from that interview will be used in the article. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Try writing some articles for a change. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:27, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    That is exactly the utterly non-constructive discussion closing remark that I expected from you now, User:Hawkeye7. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:13, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    explorenorthmyrtlebeach.com

    This is the official travel website of the North Myrtle Beach Chamber of Commerce. I didn't see it blacklisted anywhere on the blacklist log, but Wikipedia threw up a blacklist error when I tried to add it as an external resource to the North Myrtle Beach wikipage. The existing North Myrtle Beach Chamber of Commerce link in the Resources section of the North Myrtle Beach wikipage is broken. The Chamber moved visitor information to their new ExploreNorthMyrtleBeach.com website. I was trying to fix the broken link and link to the Chamber's new official travel website.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.159.134.226 (talk • contribs)

    Note: Filter reports a hit for "hmyrtlebeach.com", however I've been unable to find out where this comes from. Mdann52 (talk) 17:10, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mdann52: - It is in the Global Blacklist - as a regex: [a-z]myrtlebeach.com\b (Side note: I think there is an error, the . should probably be escaped). – JonathanCross (talk) 14:46, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: Just following up on this. Thank you for looking into it so quickly! Is it possible to whitelist explorenorthmyrtlebeach.com as an exception and circumvent the spam filter? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.159.134.226 (talk) 19:48, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @24.159.134.226: I have asked for clarification on the meta spam blacklist from the admin who added the wide filter for anything ending in myrtlebeach.com. I'd like to know what was supposed to be excluded and why. Depending on that information I would also suggest to handle 'whitelisting' there (which there means excluding from blacklisting) as this seems to affect multiple wikis. Therefore  Not done and  Defer to Global blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:09, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @24.159.134.226: removed on meta. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:53, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Quote by Andreas Antonopoulos on Bitcoin Talk

    Requesting the URL bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=172991.msg1801451#msg1801451 be whitelisted in article Andreas Antonopoulos.

    The URL is currently blacklisted because bitcointalk.org is a forum. I am interested in getting this particular link whitelisted so it can be used as a source.

    Why this forum link should be whitelisted:

    Although "forum links" are generally not considered reliable sources, in this case, the direct quote by Antonopoulos was a PSA which warned users and businesses of the significant threat posed by Mt. Gox while it was still the largest bitcoin trading platform (and prior to its collapse a year later). The forum in question (bitcointalk.org) has served as the hub of news and discussion - aka de facto website for any official announcement in the Bitcoin community. Because it is a forum, it also contains spam, but this doesn't negate the central role it has played in helping the Bitcoin community to develop and grow. This forum is the primary source for many important technical discussions and documentation.

    Why the quote is valuable:

    The quote helps establish the subject as a knowledgeable and outspoken authority in the Bitcoin community.

    JonathanCross (talk) 16:49, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Time_series_database Example TSDB Systems - TimeSeries.Guru

    A Proprietary Example of a TSDB Systems for Time_series_database.

    • www.timeseries.guru

    timeseries.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

    The link points to a Time series database product that should be listed as one of the solutions on the Time_series_database article where all Proprietary examples of TSDBs are listed.

    19:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ynusis (talk • contribs)

    @Ynusis: Thank you for your request. I have cleared out the whole list that was on that page, as that directory of software as it stood is inappropriate for Wikipedia. Most of the software the software there is not notable enough for an own Wikipedia article, and were not independently referenced as to show any form of notability. Mere existence is not enough.
    As to your request, unless you can show that this example is independently notable and this link is needed for an own article on the subject, this request is  Denied. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Examiner.com

    I was surprised that I was unable to add www.examiner.com/review/marvel-s-jessica-jones-review as a source to the article Jessica Jones (season 1). This is a professional review of the television series Jessica Jones, which includes helpful information about some recurring cast members which we have been trying to source for a long time, and for which an alternate, reliable source does not seem to exist. This source would also be used to source the same information at other articles, such as List of Marvel Cinematic Universe television series actors. I cannot speak for examiner.com as a whole, but I believe that allowing the use of this specific article can do no harm, and in fact only improve some articles that are in need of sourcing. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:08, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Have you read /Common requests - examiner.com references very often contain information that is also available elsewhere. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:36, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for the reply. Like I said, I can't speak for examiner.com in general, and I'm sure there is often other, better sources that can be used. But in this case there just doesn't seem to be, which is why I have made this specific request. - adamstom97 (talk) 19:56, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree and support Adam's request to whitelist this url. As they said, I can't speak for examiner.com as a whole, but this url does provide good third-party support to source actors playing characters on Jessica Jones. To Beetstra's point about finding info elsewhere, many possibly more reputable sources either haven't mentioned many of these characters we are trying to source, or only mention the character in passing, without giving the actor's name. Yes, the show itself could source these characters as there are end credits, but per WP:PRIMARY, we would like to avoid using the primary source as much as possible. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:48, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

     Done. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:31, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you. - adamstom97 (talk) 03:39, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Infobarrel Reference

    Requested Link: www.infobarrel.com/Sundown_Slaying_of_Carol_Jenkins

    Requested Wiki Entry: Murder of Carol Jenkins

    Reason for Request: The link provides solid information into a historically noted event. The information also corroborates with other well known sources (e.g. The New York Times, New Yorker, Indianapolis Star), but goes a little more in depth with the event. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justbean (talk • contribs) 19:53, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Justbean: I see this page is blacklisted on similar grounds as examiner.com (write your article, get paid for incoming traffic), is the extra information really needed for the article? --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:37, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    kifdatabase.no-ip.org

    Requested Link: 
     http://kifdatabase.no-ip.org/shogi/index.php?lan=en&page=senkei_index

    Requested Wiki Entry: Shogi strategy and tactics (and possibly others if en.wikipedia editors become motivated enough to increase the shogi strategy coverage to the level of western chess or ja.wikipedia's shogi articles...)

    Reason for Request: Contains hundreds of recorded shogi games by professional players that are grouped into 16 opening classifications. It's useful for folks studying opening strategies. There's nothing else like it. (The no-ip.org is globally blacklisted.) – ishwar  (speak) 15:25, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. There was nothing else quite like my statistical markets analysis blog either, while it existed. A self-hosted site on a dynamic IP address? And the root domain name kifdatabase.no-ip.org going to a Linux test page? Is the person who maintains it and comes up with these categories a notable expert on Shogi, with significant coverage?
    If such a reference gets a more permanent home (like one of the many free blog sites available), we can revisit this. And, I'm skeptical that the information on that isn't already available elsewhere. ~Amatulić (talk) 04:15, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Amatulic:, so what exactly is the objection? Are you worried about spam? Rejecting my rationale? You don't actually say.
    The person who maintains it doesn't need to be an expert or notable. The classification of opening moves is traditional and they are indicated in newspapers or by TV announcer/analysts when televised.
    To be more specific by my 'There's nothing else like it' comment, I meant that there isn't a database as large as this one that has the game records categorized by traditional openings. I'm sure that there are other collections of game records online and that game records are kept by the Japan Shogi Association in print form. So, I'm skeptical that another website that does exactly what this site does is already available elsewhere. The site was brought to my attention by someone who promote shogi outside of Japan. He said that the site is currently popular with amateur shogi players in Japan. – ishwar  (speak) 06:52, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm open to being convinced to change my mind, and I welcome other admins to chime in.
    My objection is mainly grounded in WP:ELNO. It's a self-hosted, self-published site, and there are alternatives to get the information on it. Mere convenience isn't a sufficient reason to whitelist. On top of that, it isn't even on an established IP address to host a real domain name on — and this databse doesn't even have a website; it's on a sub-page of a sub-domain that doesn't even have its own landing page! This just screams 'some guy's personal hobby site maintained on a home server' to me. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:04, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    archive.is/WXVf9

    Archive of http://www.world-gazetteer.com/wg.php?x=&men=gcis&lng=en&des=wg&geo=-202&srt=pnan&col=adhoq&msz=1500&va=&pt=a used on Latakia to address a link rot issue. The link stopped working and something about the way the site is constructed apparently makes archive.org not work properly on its pages. Since there is at present no other archive of this link, and I've personally checked the link and found it to be neither spam nor otherwise problematic, I think allowing it in this instance is okay. I have read the archive.is RFCs and apparently archive.is is banned because the archive.is links were added by an unauthorised bot; I'm willing to remove the link and manually re-add it to address that issue. 80.114.146.117 (talk) 00:50, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    www.examiner.com/article/josh-robert-thompson-interview-craig-ferguson-s-sidekick-and-beyond

    Requested link: www.examiner.com/article/josh-robert-thompson-interview-craig-ferguson-s-sidekick-and-beyond

    Requested Wiki entry: Josh Robert Thompson (diff)

    Reason for request: Examiner.com is still blacklisted for some reason, despite a clear move toward reliability. This specific page is an interview by Joyce Picker of comic Josh Robert Thompson in which Thompson mentions some of his original characters. The specific article will be used to source the edit linked above. It is not re-published anywhere.

    🖖ATinySliver/ATalkPage 02:17, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @ATinySliver: Examiner.com is not blacklisted due to reliability issues, it is blacklisted due to spam issues. The question is also not whether the material that is in the specific examiner.com article is re-published elsewhere. The question is whether the information can be sourced elsewhere, as examiner.com articles are often a re-publication of information that is also available elsewhere. You consider that examiner.com is moving toward reliability - how do you know that the information in the article is reliable, examiner.com does not have a reliability review system. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:12, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra: I've run across more than one similar situation where an identified writer with verifiable experience conducted the review that led to the article. This is one. (Another recent example, whitelisted for the same reason, is here.) 🖖ATinySliver/ATalkPage 03:20, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @ATinySliver: plus Added. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:32, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Approved requests

    nextiva.com

    nextiva.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 the link to be whitelisted so that I can add it to the article about the organization hereKagunduWanna Chat? 12:18, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Stephenwanjau: Please see /Common requests - we need to have an about.com or index.htm or similar for this. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:58, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I have read the /Common requests page @Dirk Beetstra. What exactly do you mean by saying you would need an an about.com or index.htm? Is it a page on the website say nextiva.com/index.htm? Thanks in advance. KagunduWanna Chat? 13:27, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Stephenwanjau: Yes, that is what we mean: 'www.example.com' is a domainname - when you go to that address, there is actually a file that gets loaded, generally an 'index.htm', or 'index.php' (like here on Wikipedia, 'en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist' does not actually exist, the actual file you are opening in 'index.php', with as a parameter the pagename, and the page is generated in situ). Whitelisting 'www.example.com' would simply negate the blacklisting of 'www.example.com' (and sometimes the abuse is simply the homepage .. which makes things more complicated) - we need hence to specify a suitable actual page. It is however sometimes difficult to find which 'filename' is the main page. We therefore often prefer the 'about' page of the organisation. We would need to have the address of such a page on the site. I hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:22, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand your explanation @Dirk Beetstra that you would only allow only a certain page under the domain name. However, I wanted to insert the URL nextiva.com to the organizations URL section in the infobox whose parameters are defined by Wikipedia as {{url|abc.com}}. Unless there is evidence about the domain (nextiva.com) itself was the reason for the current blacklist. KagunduWanna Chat? 13:04, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Stephenwanjau: The report suggests just that, cross wiki spamming (a quick check shows that the editors were also active on en.wikidia). We can not whitelist just 'nextiva.com' as that would allow 'nextiva.com/<document>' as well as 'nextiva.com'. For the parameter, that template can also be {{url|abc.com/def}}. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:36, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra:Well in that case then, I think https://www.nextiva.com/index.html should serve the purpose. Thank you in anticipation. KagunduWanna Chat? 12:45, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    https://www.nextiva.com/index.html  Done. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:03, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you @Beetstra:. I think this discussion can now be archived. KagunduWanna Chat? 17:32, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    www.world-architects.com

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

    I'd like to properly source this page under references for the new Wikipedia page listed above. I'm not 100% sure why this site has been blacklisted. I ran it through Moz.com's "Open Site Explorer" and it has a high trust rating and a very low spam score.

    My article would really benefit from this source as it's the most detailed review available regarding the construction of the non-profit child care facility that was built on Harvard University's Cambridge campus. White-listing just this article alone would be very helpful to my cause (www.world-architects.com/en/projects/project-review-detail/28972_harvard_yard_child_care_center)

    Thank you! -- Tnetrpm (talk) 09:58, 22 December 2015(UTC)

    @Tnetrpm: It was cross-wiki spammed way back in 2008, see e.g. Special:Contributions/85.28.68.253. It may be worth to try and remove this. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:00, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I have removed it from meta, see m:Talk:Spam_blacklist#world-architects.com, so in a way  Done. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:07, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Just as an additional remark, it is not necessarily what is on the site, it may very well be about how the site was used (or ab/misused) on Wikipedia. Promotion and advertising work just as well for taladafil as for non-profit organisations, musea and news sites. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:12, 23 December 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]

    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]
    Thank you. I have added citations to List of places of worship in Cardiff. Verbcatcher (talk) 19:58, 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]
    Much obliged. —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 🖖 06:16, 8 December 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 [7] 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]

    Denied requests

    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]

    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]
    Seriously? NAMBLA as a source? Riiiiight. Guy (Help!) 19:31, 3 January 2016 (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]
    A specific link whitelist was requested. Dirk Beetstra? Url, req.Bolded. --Elvey(t•c) 17:56, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • no Declined for now, come back when there is clear consensus on Talk, in the form of an RfC, supporting inclusion. This is too problematic to simply take it on trust. Guy (Help!) 13:55, 2 February 2016 (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]
    •  Denied Stifle (talk) 10:11, 29 February 2016 (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]
    • No mention or return from the requester – therefore  Not done Stifle (talk) 13:36, 2 February 2016 (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]

    • no Declined due to lack of further reply. Stifle (talk) 10:11, 29 February 2016 (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]
    • no Declined, then, as lacking evidence of importance. Guy (Help!) 13:57, 2 February 2016 (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]

    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

    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]
    • no Declined, rationale given was insufficient to overcome WP:ELNO items 7 and 8. Stifle (talk) 13:35, 2 February 2016 (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]
    •  Not done owing to lack of reply. Stifle (talk) 09:59, 29 February 2016 (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]
    Yes, but this is a legit summery of them, and being used as a source for a general article, where I want to include it. Plus, for some reason, my attempt to link to these articles was reverted. Help/cooperation needed. VirtuOZ (talk) 15:33, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Can I get the reexamination I ask for? Your decision was hasty and generalized, not considering how well it fits in the case in matter. VirtuOZ (talk) 18:09, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hi there. Admin decisions on this page are final. Stifle (talk) 09:58, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Yourstory.com

    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

    why the site should be whitelisted This is a site in India that angel investors refer to for the latest news on tech and ecommerce startups

    which articles would benefit from the addition of the link All articles related to angel investing in India particularly the ecommerce, mcommerce and mobile apps business

    specific link to the page you're requesting be added.

    • www.yourstory.com

    AkhilShah316 (talk) 07:40, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @AkhilShah316: After Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_93#YourStory.com, which includes a huge number of spamming sockpuppets, we are not going to blanket whitelist this site. You will have to make your case for specific links which are to be used on a specific page. no Declined --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:49, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    Sydney.com.au

    I'm trying to add a section to this page, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_in_Sydney, which updates the page to include New Media, as in websites. The section currently refers to only newspapers and radio stations. Sydney.com.au is the first website devoted to Sydney, Australia on the World Wide Web and dates back to 1994. A historical reference of it in 1996 can be found on the Archive.org website - there is no earlier reference because Archive.org was only launched in 1996. There is historical significance in the fact Sydney.com.au was the first website devoted to Sydney, Australia. It was also the first Australian tourism website and among the earliest tourism websites world-wide. I've edited an entry for that page but the system tells me the URL (sydney.com.au) is blacklisted. I've gone to both the local and global blacklist pages and searched the full logs, but there is no mention to Sydney.com.au. I can only assume that this is because a Wikipedia editor removed a link to Sydney.com.au in 2005 (and he also removed the link to the City of Sydney website) because they clashed with the official Australian tourism website, Sydney.com (which, incidentally) was set up four years after Sydney.com.au. I suspect the editor blacklisted Sydney.com.au so a link could not be reinstated on Wikipedia, which I find extraordinary and not in the interests of establishing a historical and factual record. This website has a special historical significance, and that historical significance is a matter of fact, and the website should be listed on Wikipedia otherwise in 10 years from now, when people look back on the history of the web, no-one will know what the first Sydney tourism was. The people of Sydney and Australia have a right to know what happened historically, and when. Can you please help with having this site removed from this blacklist. The website is a significant one: if you go to Google.com.au and do a search on "sydney", Sydney.com.au comes up as the No.1 search result, which shows how significant it is. Sydney web (talk) 08:30, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    • no Declined – please gather a consensus at WP:RSN that this is a reliable source. Stifle (talk) 12:09, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    youtu.be/BgKxQqDGrrA

    The article on Estes Industries (history) is scant (and was suggested for deletion). I've started working on it, and part of one article makes reference to a machine that was used to make early hobby rocket motors (The machine was named "Mabel"). This whitelist request is for a video of that machine in operation to be made available in the article. The entire video is an excellent historical reference for the article, showing several difference aspects of early Estes. Though the web page (video) being requested is specifically for the "Estes" article, as more rocket people become involved with improving hobby rocket articles, other hobby rocket related articles could benefit from this (same) video (web page). Both links reference the same video; It is unclear which (both?) would be needed for whitelist.

    Bomarc (talk) 03:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    @Bomarc: Youtu.be is blacklisted because it is a redirect site (per Wikipedia:External_links#Redirection_sites). You can use http://youtube.com/watch?v=BgKxQqDGrrA&feature=youtu.be&t=36s, which is not blacklisted.  Not done. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:59, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    www.gnaa.eu

    I attempted to create a hyperlink in the GNAA article, but it is blacklisted there. Will this URL be whitelisted for this particular article? Jarble (talk) 19:10, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    No. A specific page may be whitelisted if there's a good case for it. Guy (Help!) 19:39, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    www.mixcloud.com/davecharleshfm/the-dave-charles-show-sunday-re-run-first-broadcast-january-3rd-2016/

    To be used as a source on the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_(band) to have an external source for recent information. One of the remarks is that there is too much own information sources.84.197.251.71 (talk) 20:21, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    This appears to be a broadcast on local radio. What is the relevance, please? Guy (Help!) 00:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Not done owing to lack of reply. Stifle (talk) 09:57, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    pv-magazine.com links

    • www.pv-magazine.com/news/details/beitrag/nextracker-doubles-manufacturing-capacity--raises-25m-%20in-financing_100018082/#axzz3wJ1q24jh
    • www.pv-magazine.com/news/details/beitrag/sunedison-signs-185-gw-purchase-agreement-for-nextracker-trackers_100015410/#axzz3wJ1q24jh
    • www.pv-magazine.com/news/details/beitrag/nextracker-makes-full-bos-play-with-product-bundle_100022366/#axzz3wJ1q24jh
    • www.pv-magazine.com/news/details/beitrag/nextracker-hits-100-mw-weekly-shipments-for-advanced-solar-trackers_100021806/#ixzz3wJ8MLtE
    • www.pv-magazine.com/news/details/beitrag/nextracker-finalizes-82-mw-tracker-commission-for-sunedison-in-honduras_100019689/#axzz3wbZIj3pr
    • www.pv-magazine.com/news/details/beitrag/nextracker-signs-1-gw-supply-agreement-with-blattner-energy_100019979/#ixzz3wbahY6oY
    • www.pv-magazine.com/news/details/beitrag/nextracker-completes-110-mw-shipment-to-sunedison-chile-solar-farm_100021304/#ixzz3wbyp5ZPT

    These links will be used on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEXTracker,_Inc.?veaction=edit. PV Magazine is a solar power industry publication. PV stands for photovoltaic. It is a source where news in this still relatively young industry is published. I have 20 sources for this particular wikipedia page, and 7 of them come from this magazine. I'm not sure why it is blacklisted, but this information is necessary to document the growth that the solar industry is currently experiencing around the world. I've noticed that there are a lot of big holes in wikipedia's coverage of solar power, and I would like to help fill them. But you need sources like PV Magazine to do that. For now, I respectfully request that you whitelist these 7 articles to be cited as references for the information in the yet-to-be published NEXTracker article. Mary Bufe (talk) 02:14, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry -- I thought I had responded to this question, but apparently it didn't "take." PV magazine, (pv-magazine.com online) is well-regarded in the solar industry. I t has been a monthly publication since 2008, has multiple international editions and qualified circulation of 25,000. The publisher, Karl-Heinz Remmers, has been active in the solar industry for around 20 years. It has its own independent editorial staff. Is there something missing? I see lots of comparable publications that aren't banned, so I'm not sure what the issue is with this one. Thanks for considering it.Mary Bufe (talk) 14:23, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    You "forgot" to mention that you're being paid to write this article by the subject of those links. You also "forgot" to mention that it's a trade rag and all of those are basically churnalism. Oh, and you "forgot" that this was already declined. Guy (Help!) 23:37, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • no Declined. Press releases are not reliable sources, especially on an article written for pay. Guy (Help!) 23:41, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    My profile indicates that I am being paid, and I did not see here that this request had been declined. The last correspondence above was when you asked about the publication's reliability. I understand your position on the quality of the journalism in PV Magazine, even if I don't necessarily agree. I am admittedly new to Wikipedia and I'm learning as I go. I do, however, try to conduct myself professionally and appreciate it when others do similarly. I appreciate it when others point out errors, because I want to play by the book and accomplish my goals. So I honestly didn't "forget" anything, but I did learn something. Thank you.Mary Bufe (talk) 00:39, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    blockchainbdgpzk.onion

    blockchainbdgpzk.onion: 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

    There is a blanket blacklist on all Tor .onion addresses, the expectation being that legitimate URLs should be whitelisted. I am requesting that this particular url be whitelisted because it is the official URL for Blockchain.info and would be helpfull if included in that article. Specifically, the section about the Tor hidden service does not list the actual hidden service URL and therefore leave readers in a situation where they must look through linked articles to find the correct .onion address. Because imposters have tried to create fake .onion addresses in the past, it would be helpful to list the correct address here on Wikipedia to assist in identification of fakes posted on the interwebs.

    -- JonathanCross (talk) 15:11, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    • no Declined per WP:ELNO items 1 and 7. The non-onion address is perfectly fine. Wikipedia is not a web directory and people shouldn't be relying on it to identify fake addresses. Stifle (talk) 12:10, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    www.wikigrain.org/?req=List+of+2002+FIFA+World+Cup+controversies

    wikigrain.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

    Hello, I am trying to reboot an article, and the above is a link to a copy of same article (previously deleted). Permission to use, please? Thanks! Asoccer maniac (talk) 23:49, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    • no Declined, you do not need to link the article on a mirror site. Instead request undeletion of the article at WP:REFUND. Stifle (talk) 12:12, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=http%3a%2f%2fwww.oocities.org%2fnobby66%2fjuly4.html&d=4542290234711547&mkt=en-ww&setlang=en-GB&w=t2oAJmZOGYkRmFG8OsS6v36TBZB_LKV_

    (Saved as https://web.archive.org/web/20160114022303/.... see header above) Hi there, I tried to save this page on the Internet archive, here. It originally checked it out on the Bing cache, and the webpage no longer seems to be live.

    Could I have an exception with this? Asoccer maniac (talk) 03:02, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Asoccer maniac: Hmm, this looks like an oocities.org link .. are you trying to link to the archive of an archive? --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:41, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I am. Is there another way around this (e.g. another way to recover the dead webpage)? Asoccer maniac (talk) 04:06, 15 January 2016 (UTC) PS Never mind - found a workaround. Bye! Asoccer maniac (talk) 04:22, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • no Declined, malformed/cache link. Please provide a proper link. Stifle (talk) 12:11, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Lulu.com listing for "Offending Women"

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

    • lulu.com/shop/anu-singh/offending-women/ebook/product-22523089.html

    This is the self-published eBook version of the Author's PhD, for use on her Biography article - Anu Singh. The thesis is highly relevant to the article as it germane to her notability. This ebook is the only "publication" of the subject of the WP article and it is currently not included in any other library/ISBN search catalogue. Therefore this is the only place that can be linked to. Wittylama 13:32, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. That would be a WP:PRIMARY source, we need secondary sources. If none exist then that would indicate that the book is not significant (unsurprising as it is self-published). Guy (Help!) 23:40, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Ping JzG As you can see at the history-page of the article itself, I've been regularly removing a sentence added by an IP about this publication that is, effectively, just an add for lulu.com. However, as per the description at this most-recent of the reliable sources cited, this lulu.com publication is the closest thing to a published version of the book. As stated in the original request (and in the article itself) the PhD thesis upon which this book is based is a very important component of this person's ongoing notability (as opposed to it being a single-event notability). The fact that she has now [self-]published it is a reasonable thing to include the sentence, especially given that the original version is only available to the students of that university. My intention is to adjust the relevant sentence - the last one in the "After release" section of the article, to simply say "Singh adapted the thesis and self-published as an eBook in 2015.<ref>" Wittylama 20:47, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Nonetheless, it is not about the book, it is a sales page for the book. It is not independent, and if there are no reliable independent sources then the book is not notable and we should simply not mention it. Guy (Help!) 23:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • no Declined, self-published. Stifle (talk) 10:11, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    DZone.com articles as sources

    • Explain why the site should be whitelisted.: DZone is one of the largest software developer sites on the web and is a good source for many computer science articles, especially in the java field.
    • Explain which articles would benefit from the addition of the link: Abstract_Document_Pattern
    • Provide the specific link to the page you're requesting be added:
      • dzone.com/articles/create-type-safe-views-of-data-using-abstract-docu

    --Emifors (TALK
    PAGE    ) 05:37, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    • no Declined for various reasons: Dzone appears to consist of user-generated content (and we also don't reference Wikipedia or StackOverflow for that reason), the article appears to be a blog from an non-authoritative source, Wikipedia is not a "how to" guide, the corresponding Wikipedia article is not Java-centric and needs no instructions specific to Java. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:51, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    hubpages.com/politics/Twentieth-Century-Ranter

    hubpages.com/politics/twentieth-century-ranter: 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

    For use in Ubi Dwyer a fairly rare subject in web articles. Article by C.J. Stone (author of 4 books on UK Counterculture) not found elsewhere on web. BorisAndDoris (talk) 19:05, 28 February 2016 (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]
    • no Declined, consensus is that this is spammy and fails WP:RS. Stifle (talk) 10:11, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Stifle There are these -
    I confirm that generally "yourstory.com" as a website publishes a lot of spammy content. In this case, it is also the publication platform for someone purporting to have standing in their field. I can accept that the domain is spammy, but I dispute that this particular piece has consensus to fail as WP:RS. I accept your close though. Perhaps this can wait ~2 years then if someone wants to reconsider yourstory.com then it can have another look. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:59, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Bluerasberry:: I'm only one person; you can refer to WP:RSN if you wish and gather a consensus for inclusion. With such a consensus a fresh request here would be likely to succeed. Stifle (talk) 09:47, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I posted a request at RSN - [8]. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:11, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    archive.is

    archive.is: 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 Re this edit to William Froude: I can't find anything wrong with this and was not one of the people who supported putting archive.is on the blacklist, which has screwed up many good faith citations like this one.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:13, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    I would urge the editors to look at this please, as the bot it making a large number of black listed edits to pages at the moment. Karst (talk) 15:24, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I've reverted many of these edits with the following edit summary: "rv, the attention seeking antics of this bot shouting "look at me" as the first thing in an article are tiresome. Many archive.is links are not problematic and the issue should be raised on the talk page." Cyberbot has done this sort of thing before and it gets tiring very quickly. As I've said, I didn't support putting archive.is on the blacklist because it could screw up citations that were added to it in good faith. Please can someone look into this and stop the attention seeking antics of this bot.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 17:35, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Reverting singular bot attacks is not an option, when an avalanche of serious encyclopedic articles is being defaced as we speak with an aggressive, uninformative, and irrelevant flag which has nothing to do with the article content or its quality and reliability. The flag is a tiny little piece of crap but the people in charge of it refuse to take responsibility for the outcome. Please stop this nonsense. Poeticbent talk 17:13, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    A community decision has judged that this site was to be blacklisted 18 months ago. In those 18 months, no efforts were taken to solve the problem or to overturn the decision. You are right, people in charge of it refuse to take responsibility for hte outocme. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:38, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Whitelist Request

    A bot has tagged the top of a biographical page Lotti Golden. There is nothing nefarious regarding the alleged blacklisted link:chartstats.com/albuminfo.php?id=6712, triggered by \barchive\.is\b on the local blacklist. The tag detracts from the page, appearing as spam on the biography of an artist listed on Wikipedia for over five years. I would simply remove it for convenience, but it will cause problems with other links. Moreover, there is nothing wrong with the link/reference that was cited by the bot. Therefore I would appreciate it, if the tag were removed from the page. Magdalamar (talk) 18:27, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Why not just switch from the blacklisted archive.is to the non-blacklisted and preferred archive.org? That will solve everything. --FeldBum (talk) 18:52, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Cyberbot made an astonishing number of these edits on 5 April 2016. It would take a human a month of Sundays to change all of the archive.is links to archive.org. Many of these tags are likely to languish at the top of the page indefinitely. It's stupid, because the archive.is links are not affecting the quality of the article in an immediate or harmful way. Cyberbot is a bigger spammer than archive.is ever was.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 03:46, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Editors had an astonishing 18 months of Sundays after the last advice to make sure that that happened. The decision to blacklist this site has not changed (in the 18 months since the last RfC), and editors have found alternatives while the additions of this site were blocked as well. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:35, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    archive.is

    archive.is: 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

    • archive.is/YTVNM

    This has to be whitelisted on the PlayStation 4 article. Alternative source not available. Huzeifajs (talk) 08:27, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done. If this is the only source, the content is clearly not significant. Guy (Help!) 09:52, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    requested whitelistings for archive.is

    archive.is: 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

    • archive.is/20120905204332/ www.nytimes.com/2000/12/31/sports/champions-2000-from-sydney-to-the-bronx-the-winners.html?pagewanted=2
    • archive.is/20120919150239/ www.nytimes.com/1996/12/29/sports/from-atlanta-to-wembley-winners-all.html

    Both of these are from the New York Times' annual listing of sports champions, one for the year 1996 and one for the year 2000. These are significant sources for many of the champions listed for those years within the list, Intercollegiate sports team champions. Jeff in CA (talk) 03:35, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Jeff in CA: are there any alternative archive sites that could be used? --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:59, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Significant sources for insignificant information :-) Regardless, just cite the publication directly, we don't need to post a link to an archive. Guy (Help!) 10:18, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Why, yes, indeed there are. I'll substitute those instead. Sorry to have bothered you. Jeff in CA (talk) 14:53, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    requested whitelistings for archive.is

    archive.is: 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

    • archive.is/VpRv6
    • archive.is/p0K79

    Trying to redress the link rot in Melissa Tapper. I've removed, corrected, added links to other archive. I'm left with these two. Can we whitelist them? Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:30, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Withdrawn and stale requests, or requests otherwise past relevance

    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]

    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]

    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]

    archive.is/20120912043209/http://www.hollywood.com/celebrity/Dennis_Potter/190846

    This link has been blacklisted where it has been used on the Sarah Potter article. The page is an archived copy of a piece about Denis Potter that contains useful information about his daughter, Sarah. I notice that this is the second page archived at archive.is to recently have been blacklisted, though I don't know what the reason might be. A blacklist of the whole archive.is site seems rather extreme. JH (talk page) 15:32, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    I have now found a replacement for the link in question. JH (talk page) 07:19, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    archive.is/J982N

    This link has been placed on the blacklist in the article about Canadian poet Richard Outram. The triggered link is an archived page from the old ComicsComics Magazine website which no longer exists, though the original page would have been at http://comicscomicsmag.com/2010/10/a-poem-for-popeye.html. It is a legitimate review of one of Richard Outram's poems. According to the notice posted on the Richard Outram article, this action was triggered by the link's similarity to \barchive\.is\b on the local blacklist. I can't help noticing that there has been a spate of concerns today about the blacklisting of anything on archive.is whether legitimate or not. Hopefully, Cyberbot ll can be fine-tuned! I should perhaps mention that I have temporarily hidden the blacklist notice on the Richard Outram article by changing invisible=false to invisible =true. Wardsislander (talk) 17:57, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    I have now found a replacement for the link in question at archive.org Wardsislander (talk) 15:29, 12 April 2016 (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]

    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]

    Do there exist one or more specific "about" page that can be whitelisted, rather than the root of the entire site? --Damian Yerrick (talk) 04:32, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Not done due to lack of reply. Stifle (talk) 10:21, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Alansohn: removed on meta. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:53, 1 May 2016 (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]

    Proposed removals from whitelist (sites to reblock)

    Troubleshooting and problems

    Discussion

    Common requests : archive.is

    I added a section to /Common requests about archive.is at /Common requests#archive.is, trying to explain what the consensus of the two RfCs means in terms of whitelisting the now blacklisted links. Please adapt if further clarification or interpretation is needed. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:23, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    In /Common_requests#URL_shorteners there is a factual error about archive.is (aka archive.today). It is not a URL shortener. A URL obtained from archive.is does not redirect to the original longer URL. For a description of what archive.is actually does, please read on.
    In /Common requests#archive.is it says "pages on archive.is will not be whitelisted, unless one can show that there is no functional alternative". In specific cases, there may be an alternative place to find content archived on archive.is. But there is no alternative for the functionality provided by archive.is in a general sense. The function that archive.is provides, which I cannot find anywhere else on the Internet, is this: One can give archive.is a URL for any web page, and it will create a very close replica of that web page, complete with styles and images, and will archive it indefinitely. Now that archive page becomes a backup for the original page, should the original ever go offline. So, when one sees a web page that is one of its kind, and likely to have no substitute, one can cite that web page in Wikipedia, but also go to archive.is and archive that web page. In the future, if the original goes offline, the archived version can be consulted.
    The usual place where we find archived content is archive.org. But archive.org does not immediately archive web pages on demand, and it does a very poor job in any case of preserving images and styles. It's not a good replacement for archive.is.
    I understand the spam issue -- anybody can go to archive.is and archive a spam page and cite that in Wikipedia. We should think about a better solution than simply blacklisting archive.is, otherwise we are throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
    Rahul (talk) 08:12, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Dhesi: - archive.is was blacklisted as a result of a community RfC. It is not blacklisted because of the spam issue that you describe. I understand what you mean (that you can go there now to archive something that may need a copy in the future), but a same copy may (and often does) already exist on other sites. Again, if such a copy (of sufficient quality) does not exist on another site, then archive.is for that specific case can be whitelisted (which is already a very loose interpretation of the RfC, which even calls for removal even if no alternatives exist). The handful of requests that where posted here show that in several cases good alternatives do exist.
    The spam issue that you do describe is true for all archives. If someone would apply an archive to evade the blacklist, then that specific case would go up for immediate blacklisting and likely the editor in question would run a significant risk to be blocked.
    You are right, archive.is is not an URL shortener, that text will need adaptation. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:34, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Regarding the last point, archive.is was already removed from the list of redirect services. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:46, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Other projects with active whitelists
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist&oldid=719342855"