MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archives (current)→

The associated 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 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|991282338#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:
 Declined {{Declined}}
Not done {{Notdone}}
Information:
 Additional information needed {{MoreInfo}}
Note: {{TakeNote}}



Notice to everyone about our Reliable sources and External links noticeboards[edit]

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)[edit]


BiglyBT.com[edit]

The Bittorrent client is now officially released as a standalone software as it seams. Also press has already covered it. Therefore it should be added to the Comparison of Bittorrent Clients pages. As it seems there webpage was blocked last year because it was attempted to take over the former parent project page of the Vuze client. I don't think we need a global blacklist here. If that problem still exists, just blocking it locally on that page should be sufficient. News articles by TorrentFreak: https://torrentfreak.com/former-vuze-developers-launch-biglybt-a-new-open-source-torrent-client-170803/ https://torrentfreak.com/biglybt-is-the-first-torrent-client-to-support-the-bittorrent-v2-spec-201011/— Preceding unsigned comment added by Agowa (talkcontribs)

  • Object Article was created multiple times and seems part of a promotion effort. All earlier creations did not survive AfD. In the past there was also a CoI-issue, with the creator getting grumpy that his program did not survive AfD and therefore was not listed on related lists of notable programs. In fact, there is still no evidence that the program is now notable. The Banner talk 09:01, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
@Agowa:  Declined for now. If a subject article is stable we can talk about an about page. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:06, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
I created the first draft for BiglyBT on Wikipedia in Mid October of 2017 (over 3 years ago). I clearly stated my COI. The draft was rejected a few weeks later for lack of notability, and I have never created an article or edited one since then. I have participated in Talk pages related to the client, but have clearly stated my COI and made it clear that the decisions are for other people to make. Any new drafts or edits adding BiglyBT have not been done by me, any of the BiglyBT team, and have not been orchestrated by me. All edits I've seen have been by unique individuals with no association with BiglyBT (other than, editors probably being users of the software). Please stop using me as evidence for your ban, you already have two a valid reasons -- lack of notability and individual spammers. The Banner's name calling ("grumpy", and "demand"ing) are insulting, inaccurate, and I feel do not belong on Wikipedia. TuxPaper (talk) 07:46, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

dailymusicroll.com[edit]

I would like to have the URL dailymusicroll.com (with the article "‘Rule 1’ by Eminent Singer Radmila Lolly is an Electrifying Experience Generated by her Confident Singing") be whitelisted as it contains relevent information for Radmila Lolly and support/proof for her respective career notes. I have gone through all the painstaking research of securing more credible sources for her and have completely rewritten an article accordingly. Also, it seems as if the site was generally blacklisted for an unrelated article and subpage within the main domain. Thank you for considering. Carlden10 (talk) 01:22, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

@Carlden10:  Declined. Anyway we would need a full link to a specific document (which may pass in some cases), but seen MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/May_2020#More_blackhat_SEO_sources I doubt that even that will help. That thread, by different editors, mentions 'SEO is evil' and 'fake sites'. If this is the support/proof you need then it does not belong in Wikipedia. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:19, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Understood thanks, and yes it's a specific article I need (I don't know what else the whole site condones or purports): dailymusicroll.com/review/rule-1-by-eminent-singer-radmila-lolly-is-an-electrifying-experience-generated-by-her-confident-singing.html Carlden10 (talk) 16:41, 26 November 2020 (UTC)Carlden10

Pantheon.org[edit]

I found and read the discussion relating to the blocking of this site back in 2010, and the discussion recommends requesting whitelisting of specific pages. I have just been editing to add content to an article using this page, and it seems fairly legit. It says at the bottom: "This article incorporates text from Maori-Polynesian Comparative Dictionary (1891) by Edward Tregear, which is in the public domain" and states other sources. What was going to be a quick edit for me seems to have turned into a longer saga, and it would make life a lot easier if I could retain this link. I really don't have time to go down hunting other sources now and would just have to remove everything I've added from it, which would be a shame. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 02:22, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

@Laterthanyouthink: First, I do not understand why you think that you have to remove everything you added just because you cannot link to an online version of the document. 'Maori-Polynesian Comparative Dictionary (1891) by Edward Tregear' is more than enough identification for a source. Anyway, this is available in a plethora of places, e.g. https://archive.org/details/maoripolynesian01treggoog/mode/2up; https://books.google.com.sa/books?id=wvIlAAAAMAAJ&oe=UTF-8&redir_esc=y (free e-book that was the source for the archive.org I linked). Note, https://pantheon.org/articles/t/tama-te-kapua.html does not lead anywhere for me. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:13, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for your help, Beetstra. I did look before, but couldn't seem to find a readable copy. I've managed to locate the relevant sections (btw your Googlebooks link above is the Saudi Arabian one!) and have just cited them both for good measure. I don't see any ads on that pantheon site, incidentally, but it's no doubt due to my ad-blocker. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:00, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

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

General discussion[edit]

Blocking link[edit]

I want my article to publish without blocking google link how?? Sumaya farahath (talk) 08:42, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Sumaya farahath, Wikipedia is not for advertising. Guy (help! - typo?) 10:55, 20 November 2020 (UTC)