Jump to content

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 06:04, 28 September 2018 (→infowars.com: 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|861543442#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}}



    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)


    Grabify is a URL shortner which is quickly coming up the ranks. There is currently a detailed Wikipedia page been written for Grabify, but requires the root URL to be whitelisted so it can be referenced. All others can stay blacklisted.

    Joel61 (talk) 03:32, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Joel61: per /Common requests#About, we would need an about-page or a full url (including an index.htm) of the index page. Can you please provide a suitable link? The root will not work, as it would typically negate the blacklisting or not additions sufficiently. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:47, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra: I have updated the request with grabify.link/index.php --Joel61 (talk) 05:54, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Joel61: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:48, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    meettheartist.site

    This is a link to an interview with a composer about whom little is known. Therefore it contains key information and quotations from this composer. AESlater (talk) 15:04, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Adding TLD, need to see what and why here to decide proper action. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:08, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    aliexpress.com

    Homepage URL to be added into the infobox of AliExpress. –Wefk423 (talk) 14:13, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Wefk423: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:15, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    bitcointalk.org

    bitcointalk is a renowned and authoritative forum on cryptocurrency. The forum has got information on lot of cryptocurrency and sites dealing on cryptocurrency.bitcointalk itself has a page dedicated in wiki.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Panbalan (talk • contribs) 15:43, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Panbalan: no Declined. It is a forum, the only use is on Bitcointalk, and for the rest we would only entertain specific links for specific sourcing (like cases of new announcements for use on articles that turn out to be deemed notable in the end). --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:24, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    memari.online

    memari.online: 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

    • Link requested to be whitelisted: http://memari.online/28612/1396/10/05/ساختمان-بانک-مرکزی-چه-چیز-را-نشان-می‌د/

    I am not sure why the website was blacklisted but I need the link to cite a critique of architecture of the Bank Markazi Tower. Trustbanker (talk) 15:48, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    spine-health.com

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piriformis_syndrome spine-health.com features articles written by doctors that are peer reviewed by a medical advisory board, similar to a medical journal. The information contained on spine-health.com/conditions/lower-back-pain/pulled-back-muscle-and-lower-back-strain supports missing diagnosis information included in the Wikipedia page "Piriformis Syndrome", Lumbar Muscle Strain, which is currently missing a link to more information.

    www.army-guide.com

    Hello. Could this site be removed from the blacklist? It has a very useful list of military hardware and weapons. Some of which aren't described on any other site. Oranjelo100 (talk) 16:02, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Oranjelo100: no Declined,  Defer to Local blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:15, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    One page on change dot org

    Please cancel this request, as I have found a more reliable source. deisenbe (talk) 15:15, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    This is NOT a request to unblock the whole site, I have read the reasons why this site is generally not used. It is a request for one page to be unblocked.

    I want to cite this page in Silent Sam#2000–2017, because it includes a reference to a 2015 incident of defacement of the Silent Sam monument, which I feel is important and should be mentioned. I am unable to find another source for it. It you look at the history of Silent Sam you will see that I have put in a lot of work on finding sources. deisenbe (talk) 14:09, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Deisenbe: no Declined. What about this or this? --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:35, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    kink.com/page/about-us

    Permanent solution after User:Billinghurst. Official website alternative for Kink.com. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:40, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Billinghurst: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:40, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
     Comment: I wasn't fussed about permanent addition. The pre-existing url was spammed replaced with a redirecting variation, so I temp added it, returned the article to the status quo url, then removed the whitelist, and blacklisted the new spam. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:00, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Billinghurst: It is always better to have these 'approved', I've seen too many cases where blacklisted links are annoying reverts, and there is a bot on en.wikipedia that tags articles when there are blacklisted links on the page. I know it is not really needed, but this is the path of least disruption to good faith edits. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:05, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    lawyers.com

    Simple listing of lawyers, contact info, and profiles.

    On this page lawyers.com is incorrectly associated with something else called \blawyers\.com\b

    Dana_L._Christensen wiki page

    MusicManJezza (talk) 18:53, 25 September 2018 (UTC) Jeremy Borum[reply]

    @MusicManJezza: Can you indicate which exact page on lawyers.com you want to add, and does that comply with either our sourcing guidelines (WP:RS) or external links guidelines (WP:EL). --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:24, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    infowars.com

    • Link requested to be whitelisted: www.infowars.com/protesters-have-the-right-to-protest-%E2%80%A6-and-to-resist-unlawful-arrest/

    Exception only needed on...

    Plummer v. State

    ...and on...

    Bad Elk v. United States

    See discussion at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist#Troubleshooting and problems.

    --Guy Macon (talk) 05:56, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Guy Macon: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:04, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals from whitelist (sites to reblock)

    Troubleshooting and problems

    I wish to restore a couple of paragraphs from the 20:29, 19 April 2017 version of Plummer v. State, but an edit filter is stopping me.

    This version was discussed extensively in two RfCs and a consensus was arrived at (See Talk:Plummer v. State#Request for Comment - Internet meme section and Talk:Plummer v. State#Request for Comment - Internet meme section - 1st revision)

    In that version, the article said

    "Plummer v. State' is cited in Internet blogs and discussion groups but often misquoted:"

    This was followed by a copy of the misquote with citations to the the two major unreliable websites that pretty much all of the other unreliable websites cite when they misquote the law.

    After that came the actual text of Plummer v. State from reliable sources.

    One of the two sources we used as citation for what the sources themselves said was infowars.com (spit!).

    During the discussion that led to this version, the consensus was that we should cite where the misquotes are found, under the rule at WP:SELFSOURCE that questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves -- in other words infowars.com is reliable for establishing that infowars.com said something.

    Since then an edit filter was added disallowing infowars.com which prevents me from restoring the version we discussed and agreed upon.

    Because of this, I am asking that an exception be made allowing infowars.com to be cited on Plummer v. State and on Bad Elk v. United States, for the sole purpose of using it as a source for certain very widely believed pieces of false information that infowars.com claims to be true.

    Before doing the actual restore, I plan on posting another RfC to make sure we still have consensus for this. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:21, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    The only page from infowars that we need to be able to cite is www.infowars.com/protesters-have-the-right-to-protest-%E2%80%A6-and-to-resist-unlawful-arrest/, The rest of infowars should remain blocked if at all possible.
    When I just tried to post the above, the edit filter stopped me, so I munged the URL. This means that I cannot post the RFC on the Plummer v. State talk page without hitting the filter. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:29, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Guy Macon: please file a request for whitelisting above (for the record, and then I can use my whitelisting script). Mention the link there without prepended http://, it will not be a link, but one can always copy-paste it into their address bar. (this should be made clearer in the instructions). --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:11, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Done. Feel free to delete this section after deciding one way or the other whether to whitelist. --Guy Macon (talk) 05:58, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Discussion

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist&oldid=861543442"