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 Newslinger (talk | contribs) at 10:08, 28 October 2020 (→‎Alexandra Elbakyan's Website: Done). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives (current)→

    Spam blacklists
    Shortcuts

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

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

    Also in your request, please include the following:

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

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

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

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

    Completed requests are archived, additions and removal are logged. →snippet for logging: {{/request|985853669#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)


    Statements from Facebook to Breitbart

    You can find the original analysis on Talk:Kenosha unrest. To summarize, editor posts an article on the talk page, I read it. I later include a claim based on that article. The article's too general so I follow the source chain, and it turns out the claim is based on a statement given by Facebook to Breitbart. I consider the claim by itself to be reliable, it's made by a named journalist who published a book on the subject, it includes precise citations from the facebook spokesman but doesn't reveal their name. Furthermore, the statement is itself cited by at least 3 outlets, at least one of which is reliable (Buzzfeed) Please add this article as an exception to the breitbart.com blacklist, alternatively, please let me know of a scenario where a Breitbart correspondent falsified a statement by an informant. Thanks --TZubiri (talk) 01:17, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Oppose – At Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Breitbart_News you will find links to numerous discussions which concluded that Breitbart "has published a number of falsehoods, conspiracy theories, and intentionally misleading stories". Smyth (talk) 15:26, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Oppose - The article text in question is "Facebook labelled the incident as a "mass murder" and banned all expressions of support for Rittenhouse." I see no reason to cite the Breitbart article, "Facebook Declares Kyle Rittenhouse’s Actions ‘Mass Murder,’ Won’t Allow Posts in Support", since the fact has been very widely reported by reliable sources including ABC News and The Guradian which are currently cited. –dlthewave ☎ 17:08, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. Breitbart News (RSP entry) is not considered a reliable source on Wikipedia, according to a 2018 request for comment. — Newslinger talk 08:20, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Online version of book on econlib

    As used at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joy%27s_law_(management)#cite_ref-7

    Not entirely sure why econlib is blocked in the first place (Can't find the discussion referred to in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki%3ASpam-blacklist&diff=prev&oldid=769671539), though that particular link seems sane enough. martin sandsmark (talk) 17:34, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    About pages of crowdfunders

    Neutral landing pages for crowdfunders, to be linked as the official websites in the GoFundMe, Indiegogo, and Kickstarter articles. — Newslinger talk 11:57, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. — Newslinger talk 11:58, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Single YouTube video for Brown Grand Theatre

    No doubt that YouTube has a lot of "junk" on it, but this video in particular would be an excellent addition to the "External Links" section of the article Brown Grand Theatre. It is (I presume) copyrighted material, so it isn't well-suited for a conversion to a Wikipedia file. I believe that including this link would help make Wikipedia better by making the article better. Readers could get a much better understanding of the building and its unique design.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulmcdonald (talk • contribs)

    @Paulmcdonald: no Declined, the redirect site is blocked due to extensive and massive spamming, that one can avoid to use the redirect in favour of the full link, and that there is specific material on YouTube that is blocked through blacklisting. You can use https://youtube.com/watch/?v=YW1-qBx7bfc (note, this is explicitly explained for youtu.be in the spam-block-message that you received). --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:59, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Seems like a good alternative. I'll have to re-check the details, thank you!--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:07, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Xeno Crisis Kickstarter campaign page / updates

    Unfortunately some details of the game Xeno Crisis are contained on kickstarter.com, and I'd like to include these links as references to help round out the remaining parts of this page. The game's developers used the backer updates feature as the "development blog", and a lot of first party information about the game is contained on this blog.

    The URLs I'd like unblocked include the main campaign page (contains details of the game's story and the individuals involved in the project), a link to the entire backer updates as it contains additional information of development with the project, and a specific post on the development blog that mentions when the project became fully funded. If it's possible to do a regex for any page under the project's url like hxxps://www.kickstarter[.]com/projects/1676714319/xeno-crisis-a-new-game-for-the-sega-genesis-mega-d/* it should cover each of the urls I requested.

    As the project has been funded, and the game has been released, linking to these pages will not be seen as an ad for the crowdfunding campaign Cmahns (talk) 04:51, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    @Cmahns: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist (I'll adapt to the top path). --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:29, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! Cmahns (talk) 14:30, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Alexandra Elbakyan's Website

    The webpage link from Alexandra Elbakyan's infobox currently points to an old (and no longer functioning) Sci-Hub domain. This URL should be unblocked as it does not contain any pirated papers (as other pages in Sci-Hub do), and so that the infobox can be updated with a working link to her "about" page. A smart kitten (talk) 08:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

     Done. I've used \bsci-hub\.\w+\/alexandra\b, instead, which covers all top-level domains in case Sci-Hub changes domains again. Thanks for submitting this.​ — Newslinger talk 10:08, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

    General discussion


    How link shortening is disallowed in discussion pages

    At ITN/C discussion I wanted to link to google result and used link shortener to make the post reasonable and the resulting wikitext more cleaner, to my surprise short urls were blocked by "spamblacklist"? This does not make sense completely. Please where is the community discussion that disallowed short links in discussion pages? – Ammarpad (talk) 08:26, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Ammarpad, The spam blacklist is black-and-white. Links are blacklisted everywhere without any possibilities inbetween. Though there are reasons why some blacklisted links can be used on talkpages, there are also blacklisted links that should not be used on talkpages either. This is not a community decision, this is the WMF developers who programmed this. Dirk Beetstra T C 08:35, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Beetstra Yes, I understand why they're disallowed on content pages, that's why I am specifically asking for "discussion pages". I have no desire to use short links in articles, so that will never bother me. Even on discussion pages I don't use them often, that's why I am only surprised now. I however understand the root cause now since you said the blacklisting is sitewide, I will probably find time to take a look at the extension code myself, as I am sure there must be old requests for granular blacklisting on phabricator (at the very least per namespace). Thanks. – Ammarpad (talk) 08:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Ammarpad, url shorteners are typically globally blacklisted, because they can be used to link to other blacklisted sites. Link aliasing is a thing, so it's unclear why you would need a shortener. Guy (help! - typo?) 09:06, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    JzG, Link aliasing only affects the visual output, in my post I said I want make the "wikitext cleaner". I always edit using source editor and it's really distracting having to write and navigate around lengthy meaningless strings of url. – Ammarpad (talk) 11:46, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Ammarpad, that is the design of the MediaWiki software (or better, the spam-blacklist extension). Anything that is blacklisted is blacklisted literally everywhere with no-one (including admins) being able to circumvent.
    Please see m:Community_Wishlist_Survey_2019/Admins_and_patrollers/Overhaul_spam-blacklist and m:Community_Wishlist_Survey_2017/Miscellaneous/Overhaul_spam-blacklist. T6459 is one, T16719 is another. The latter is >12 years old. (Now I need my anti-frust-medication, I am getting really pissed of with WMF again :-) ). Dirk Beetstra T C 10:43, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Note that it anyway is better to use the real link, it shows you were you go when you hover over it, with a shortener you always have to have the faith that it was added in good faith (and no-one checks who added the link). The link-aliasing takes away the ugly in normal view, it is just ugly in edit mode. Dirk Beetstra T C 10:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for this context. No wonder the problem has been this old. The extension essentially has no maintainer: phab:T224921. – Ammarpad (talk) 11:46, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist&oldid=985853669"