MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2014/02

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

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|1087967711#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}}


    Proposed additions to Whitelist (web pages to unblock)

    Approved requests

    Denied requests

    checkmarx.com

    OTRS received a query which turned out to be an edit refused because it was a link to a site on the blacklist.

    The site was added to the blacklist by WilliamH

    https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist&diff=prev&oldid=559707078

    which would obviously be my first point of contact, except he is retired. I know nothing about the site, so do not know whether it belongs on the list or not. I will invite the person who questioned it to add some comments here, but is there someone else who might know why it was added, and how to go about determining whether it should be removed?--S Philbrick (Talk) 15:53, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

    The log item was edit 2 edits later (diff), the inbetween edit closure of the sockpuppet investigation that precipitated the two edits surrounding the close: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Grenoble jojo. I also note that someone was trying to add this link very recently, I hope that edit did not attempt to do the same as this edit. Without asking who is asking about this, I would strongly suggest to decline any de-blacklisting, and also decline whitelisting of the whole domain - MAYBE a specific link for a specific target.
    For me: no Declined. This is plain spam. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:10, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
    The same user tried to add the link also last week, to no avail - maybe the editor was trying to do this. Note that also this is of interest (notice the locking of the page), as well as the three (!) AfDs regarding this page. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:19, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
    The decision becomes easier and easier: more. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
    @Sphilbrick: - do you mind logging the ticket number here? --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
    VRTS ticket # 2014011510010192 --S Philbrick (Talk) 16:58, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
    Thanks, I hope they now realise that this is not the place to promote their business. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
    I fully understand we need to ensure that people aren't using Wikipedia in an inappropriate way. However, I hope editors also realize that most readers are unfamiliar with our rules. If one of them sees an article listing several companies which so something, and they are in the same business, it is natural to think that it is entirely reasonable to add yourself to the list. I do not know the company, but if they are a notable company, and someone creates an article about them, I would think we would want to add them to the list of companies doing that sort of work (or remove the list, if we think the list is spamming).--S Philbrick (Talk) 17:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
    @Sphilbrick: - Yes, if someone creates an article for that reason, then that is certainly a thing to consider. But, likely, that person gets told at that point that their page is not suitable, and hopefully they are pointed to the appropriate pillar. Maybe a second time, sure. This is not such a case. The article was created 6 times (2 times speedy deleted, 3 times through AfD, and another one was speedy deleted and undeleted in a sandbox; I forgot to count the articles posted under alternative names like with all caps, or with '(company)' appended), their edits were reverted, and if they make numerous sockpuppets, then that is generally not because they forgot the password of the first account. That is plain and clear a campaign to game the system. This was not 'adding themselves to a list', these were numerous page-creations. I could agree on adding to a list, but also for that, maybe that is done 2 or 3 times, and then an editor should either understand that there is a reason their name gets removed, or should consider asking somewhere (they could have gone to OTRS at thát stage).
    If they are notable, then someone unrelated will at some point write an article about them - and maybe that is the reason why they feel they have to create the articles themselves (and if there are three AfD's, then it was asked to find independent references to show notablity, and the last one of those, was less than a year ago, as was the DR). --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:36, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

    Expired requests

    Withdrawn, malformed, invalid requests

    Discussion

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2014/02&oldid=1087967711"