MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Beetstra (talk | contribs) at 05:25, 20 August 2020 (→‎neighborhoodarchive: Added using SWHandler). 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|973946132#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)


    petitions.whitehouse.gov (the new homepage)

    This is the homepage for We the People (petitioning system), but I can't make the url= link clickable. The whole site is blacklisted, to prevent every non-notable petition from being linked to. The whitelist re-allows petitions.whitehouse.gov/about, petitions.whitehouse.gov/responses, petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/*, and petitions.whitehouse.gov/homepage. (See? I added those links here.)

    petitions.whitehouse.gov/homepage used to be the site's homepage, but now it is 404, so you can delete that entry ("\bpetitions\.whitehouse\.gov\/homepage\b") from the whitelist.

    I hope you can add its new homepage, petitions.whitehouse.gov/, without adding the whole site. - A876 (talk • contribs)

    @A876: Per /Common requests, we generally don't whitelist top domains as they a) are often part of the original abuse, and b) can be abused for those who have the will and knowledge to abuse them, which is often true with links to sites where people have POV to push. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:33, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I thought I quite clearly requested that the site's homepage be whitelisted, and not the entire domain. (I don't know why someone would conflate the two.)
    For example, although adding new links to TinyURL.com/* is blocked, the TinyURL article has a link to https://www.tinyurl.com/, as it should. (In this case, the homepage is not whitelisted. If someone were to remove that old link, no one will be able to put it back.)
    I'm just asking for the same thing, that the We the People (petitioning system) article add or be allowed to add a working link to https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/ (homepage only). (Whether that is accomplished by a one-time override of the blacklist, or by adding petitions.whitehouse.gov/ to the whitelist, I don't care.)
    Also, petitions.whitehouse.gov/about is not the homepage. If it is reasonable or uncontroversial (a default "consensus") to list some other page instead of the site's homepage, then a comment is needed. This is a technical request; a work-around by substituting some convenient other-page that happens to already be whitelisted is not the expected solution. - A876 (talk) 20:13, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    A876, and I think that I was quite clearly pointing to /Common requests, and explained that we do not do that. No, we link to the website to show what a website has to tell about themselves (see WP:EL) an about page fulfills that by definition. I need to see the tinyurl situation. Dirk Beetstra T C 02:22, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Sorry, a link is not an explanation. /Common requests doesn't say what you think it says. (btw, you don't actually say what you think it says.)

    You said "we generally don't whitelist top domains". (I never suggested any such thing.) Now you have repeated the error saying "we do not do that" (as if you still don't understand).

    /Common requests does not say that every page on every petition site and URL-shortening site is anathema (and in fact they are not – do "see the TinyURL situation" and others that link to the site, namely Bitly, Change.org, and (formerly) We the People (petitioning system)). It says "These sites are blocked for blanket reasons and it is rare that any page from them is whitelisted. " Okay, it is rare. Petition sites are blacklisted overall, for good reason ("we don't allow users to add links to Wikipedia to get people to visit and perhaps sign their petition"). Obviously linking the homepage (and possibly other pages) is okay, because it is normal and because doing so does not link to any specific petition (which meets the purpose of the ban).

    Linking a website's homepage is the norm in a template in an article about that website. I'm sure "official website" was set to petitions.whitehouse.gov/homepage because that was the homepage. Now, the old homepage URL is a 404 and the homepage resides at https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/ (as it always should have). It follows that the whitelist entry should be changed to drop the former and add the latter. What could be simpler? I see no advice or consensus to list petitions.whitehouse.gov/about instead of the page that the site set as its homepage. I see no advice or consensus to list an about page instead of the homepage even if someone thinks it is "good enough" or even "better than" the homepage. - A876 (talk) 04:43, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    A876, A876, as is explained there, whitelisting the homepage 'petitions.whitehouse.gov' is negating the blacklist, abusable in itself, and abusable through other ways. As with spam, people have a reason to abuse it - they are actively searching for support. That is why we do not generally whitelist top domains. That explanation is in /Common requests at MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist/Common_requests#The_official_homepage_of_the_subject_of_a_page.
    Again, "Official links (if any) are provided to give the reader the opportunity to see what the subject says about itself" (my bolding). We link to a neutral landing page, an about-page does fulfill the function perfectly and avoid ALL possibilities of abuse.
    Just to summarize:
    • the top domain of bitly.org is NOT whitelisted - www.bitly.com/?main and bitly.com/pages/about where already whitelisted for this purpose (in fact, www.bitly.com/?main is the link used, bitly.com is displayed).
    • change.org is NOT whitelisted - it should go through a whitelist discussion as the current link will be resulting in breakage on the page.
    • tinyurl.com WAS requested and denied (twice; see also diff), but someone decided to override that decision (that decision was denied and overridden before /common requests was written; see also MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2007/09#tinyurl.com).
    I hope this explains. Dirk Beetstra T C 06:28, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra: My suggestion: Link requested to be whitelisted: petitions.whitehouse.gov/index.php which redirects to / and would serve the purpose. Jerod Lycett (talk) 19:13, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @A876 and Jerodlycett: Thanks, that is indeed better. plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:01, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Removed again. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:45, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    yourstory hifives

    Don't understand why these pages are blocked - they contain media coverage of a new page that I am trying to publish. yourstory.com/2013/07/hifives-launches-revamped-cloud-based-solution-to-maximize-impact-of-employee-rewards-programs yourstory.com/2012/06/hifives-corporate-organization-gifting — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaudhurisagar (talk • contribs) 18:08, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Chaudhurisagar, please see MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/October_2015#YourStory.com Dirk Beetstra T C 20:17, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Keeping thread in one place, moved from here

    Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist?markasread=193006586&markasreadwiki=enwiki#yourstory_hifives

    I am still not sure as to why YourStory.com is blocked.

    1. Shraddha Sharma, the founder of YourStory is a renowned journalist in India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shradha_Sharma She has worked with CNBC and has won several awards and accolades and has been named as one of the top influencers on LinkedIn 2. YourStory is one of the top online publications for startups and entrepreneurs in India with high domain authority. 3. I don't know about the spam link incident that happened in 2015 but that was a long time back.

    I am unable to publish my first article on Wiki because it has 2 references to Your Story which were actually interviews of me and my co-founder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaudhurisagar (talk • contribs) 09:57, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Chaudhurisagar, can you expand on ‘me and my co-founder’? Are you related to the subject you are writing about?
    Regarding the subject, you should be able to write an article without references to yourstory but using independent, reliable sources instead. Then it can be judged whether additional sourcing is needed. Dirk Beetstra T C 12:11, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The article quotes independent sources - leading publications in India - Economic Times (2 reports) - Bangalore Mirror - a Times of India publication (1 report) - Your Story (2 interviews) - Hindu Businessline (1 report)

    The above websites are of high reputation in India and high domain authority. However, I am unable to publish the article as it has references to the YourStory website which seems to be blocked. So my request would be to unblock the pages which we want to link to. These are critical interviews. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaudhurisagar (talk • contribs) 17:09, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Chaudhurisagar, then publish it first without the yourstory references please. If the article has merit without the yourstory references it will stay and we will revisit this, if it doesn't this discussion is moot. Dirk Beetstra T C 18:11, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Beetstra, The requesting editor appears to be the owner of Draft:HiFives, and has not declared paid editing Fiddle Faddle 22:26, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Timtrent, I asked that above (though it is obvious ...) and a warning has already been issued. I hoped that the warnings for spamming were enough ... Dirk Beetstra T C 05:53, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Beetstra, It seems warnings to UPE editors are never enough 🤪 Fiddle Faddle 07:01, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Beetstra - published it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaudhurisagar (talk • contribs) 06:20, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Chaudhurisagar: seen the current developments and your failure to act on the requests (and you being blocked): no Declined. YourStory is anyway not truly independent (it is, after all, your story, not their story). --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:39, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Beetstra, I like it when they encircle themselves in their own mess, and then pull the net ever tighter Fiddle Faddle 15:40, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Fraud domains (counter-blacklist)

    the domain names (i.e. without TLD), which are blacklisted per WT:SBL discussion but where the official domains should be allowed through. Domains (and very similar terms) have been constantly abused, big hammer is unfortunately needed. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:16, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Beetstra: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:18, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    jealousmarkup.xyz

    Link requested to be whitelisted: jealousmarkup.xyz/texts/neural-mt-looking-for-a-business-model/

    I'd like to have this site added to the whitelist because I think it's a reliable website about linguistics and translation studies that cites lots of reliable sources on its articles and I think it would be very useful on the article 'DeepL Translator'. -- PK2 (talk) 02:45, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @PK2: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. Link is already in use on other wikis for this page. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:13, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    PK2, it's a blog by Gábor Ugray (note redlink). Why do you think it's reliable? Guy (help! - typo?) 14:07, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    JzG, someone can be a specialist in the field even if they are not notable for their own Wikipedia article. It is one of the guys behind memoQ. That being said, if user:PK2 wants to reference the same material as on it.wikipedia then I would say that that is better served by the primary reference of the domain registrations than by a blog. Dirk Beetstra T C 17:27, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Beetstra, for some reason, this link still triggers a protection filter even after you added it to the whitelist, unless I add the forward slash /. -- PK2 (talk) 07:29, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    PK2, you requested it with the forward slash at the end: 'jealousmarkup.xyz/texts/neural-mt-looking-for-a-business-model/', so that is what gets whitelisted. Dirk Beetstra T C 08:42, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Beetstra, yes they can, but the chances of a self-published source by a non-notable individual being an RS are low, and normally I'd want some kind of evidence. Guy (help! - typo?) 09:46, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    JzG, yeah, but I am afraid that the opposite is more often true (after all, Gwyneth Paltrow is notable, but I would not trust her blogs even if they describe that water is suitable to wash your hands). Dirk Beetstra T C 10:01, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Beetstra, agree - a blog is presumptively unreliable. Guy (help! - typo?) 09:45, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    second batch

    Beetstra, can you please add the following links to the whitelist?

    • Link requested to be whitelisted: jealousmarkup.xyz/texts/neural-mt-looking-for-a-business-model (without the forward slash /)
    • Link requested to be whitelisted: jealousmarkup.xyz (the whole domain)

    -- PK2 (talk) 00:07, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    PK2, what you basically request is the change of the first one - I will do that manually.
    The whole domain .. I am not sure. It is a blog, are you sure this is going to be 'of general use'? Whitelisting the whole domain is resulting in that this can be used everywhere. Dirk Beetstra T C 05:17, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    PK2 I have adapted the first rule. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:20, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Beetstra thank you, and why shouldn't whole domains of blogs be whitelisted? -- PK2 (talk) 07:28, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @PK2: No, the question is, are you sure this is going to be 'of general use'? I expressed concerns, user:JzG expressed concerns (already for the specific link ..). It is your task to convince admins that this action is needed, I do not need to defend why I did not perform an action (well, I did: I have concerns / there are concerns - and, implicitly, the .xyz TLD was blacklisted because it was spammed massively and contains a lot of useless crap). Dirk Beetstra T C 08:00, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra: this won't be 'of general use', and thank you for adding the above link to the whitelist. -- PK2 (talk) 10:37, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]


    Request to unblock creative-biolabs

    A specific page should be whitelisted:

    • Link requested to be whitelisted: www.creative-biolabs.com/aboutus.html

    Article it would benefit: Creative Biolabs

    Why it should be whitelisted:

    • Standard use of company url in the infobox about the company. MB 17:08, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @MB: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:47, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    neighborhoodarchive

    I would like to use the links for Draft:Old Friends ... New Friends, an article about a television series that Fred Rogers created and hosted.

    The links would only be used for the "Episodes" section. The links provide information for the "No." and "Awards" columns of the tables, which cannot, or is too difficult to, be obtained solely through newspaper clippings.

    I have read the two requests for delisting the site from the blacklist: [1], [2]. I understand that the link was spammed by person(s) related to the neighborhoodarchive.com site.

    FunnyMath (talk) 20:28, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The first link is to direct readers to the entire catalog. The second and third links are used to show the specific pages of the catalog that would be cited. The fourth link provides a correction to the numbering of the episodes. The catalog erroneously numbers the last episode as 212. FunnyMath (talk) 21:31, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    The first link contains the entire catalog. It provides the numberings and awards for the episodes. The second link corrects the numbering of the last episode as 213. The catalog erroneously numbers the final episode as 212. FunnyMath (talk) 04:52, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @FunnyMath: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:25, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals from Whitelist (web pages or link patterns to re-block)

    census2011.co.in

    I want you to remove www.census2011.co.in from ur blacklist. I want to add a referral link from this site to you page about jamsher khas population, because previous link is incorrect. Previous link is for a different village from different tehsil with same name. So please check my query for population of jamsher khas village. Which is actually 8437 according to census 2011 india Karanvirdi (talk) 20:07, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined - @Karanvirdi: for future requests to un-blacklist whole domains, please use MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#Proposed_removals (see the info on top of this section). Anyway, for Indian census information please use the official .gov websites rather than anonymous data aggregators. Such aggregator sites generally do not meet Wikipedia's reliability criteria (and have been heavily spammed in the past). But I have removed the likely incorrect information from the article, thank you for pointing this out. GermanJoe (talk) 20:39, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist&oldid=973946132"