MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist

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 section title, like === example.com/help/index.php === .
  2. The Wikipedia page that you want to use the link on.
  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, confirmation that you have read the reason why requests regarding the site are commonly denied and that you are happy to proceed.

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 this page). Requests quoting only a domain (i.e. ending in .com or similar without anything after the / character) will be denied. If you wish to have a site fully unblocked it would need to be listed in the relevant section of MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist.

You will not be notified when your request has been responded to, even if you ask. You should 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 about the request, as failure to reply to these promptly will generally result in your request being summarily denied.

Completed requests are archived, additions and removal are logged. →snippet for logging: {{/request|942112743#section_name}}

Note that requests from new and 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 Request withdrawn {{withdrawn}}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]

boomerocity.com[edit]

boomerocity.com: Linksearch en (http) (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:frMER-C X-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: searchmeta • Yahoo: backlinks • Domain: domaintoolsAboutUs.comDomainsDB.netAlexaWhosOnMyServer.com

I don't really understand what this page (Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/boomerocity.com) is telling me when it says the site is not on the blacklist, but when I tried adding a boomerocity.com link to an existing reference to fix an error in this diff, it didn't let me. Nor would it accept an archiveurl containing the domain. Is it possible to add these specific links to the whitelist without opening up the entire site?

  1. Giulia Millanta would benefit from allowing: Link requested to be whitelisted: boomerocity.com/moonbeam-parade.html
  2. Little Immaculate White Fox would benefit from allowing: Link requested to be whitelisted: boomerocity.com/little-immaculate-white-fox.html

Thank you, 2pou (talk) 21:22, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

2pou the report is now updated. This was quite extensively spammed in 2010 and then blacklisted. I do not see spam over the last 6 years or so (but also very few attempts at genuine use, e.g. only one attempt over all of 2019). I'm intending to whitelist these two, but I'd like to see a bit more elaboration regarding use of these links. How do these pages benefit from these references. E.g. the quote from moonbeam-parade.html suggests that that in itself is a quote from an earlier remark, and skimming through the article suggests that it is all just a regurgitated and compiled from press releases (the quote e.g. also appears on Giulia Millanta's official website). It begs the question: where did Dave Marsh say that? Dirk Beetstra T C 08:05, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
Beetstra, thanks for the reply. Apologies for the delayed response; I was out of town. Thank you as well for pointing out that the quote on the Guilia Millanta article is actually not exclusive to the boomerocity piece. I had originally meant that the article can be improved mainly by not having a red error code in the references section, but given that this can also be attributed elsewhere, I no longer feel that it is necessary.
In a similar fashion, the benefit to Little Immaculate White Fox is only marginal. The article was unsourced when I cam across it, and the boomerocity article was the first that I came across to help establish a "Reception" section to the article. I have since found other material to use, so this blurb can be dropped from the "Reception" without any significant loss. However, of the sources I found, this boomerocity piece was the only one I was able to use in order to attribute the song "Rock Child" as an autobiographical piece to that article. -2pou (talk) 19:02, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Breitbart News (2)[edit]

I am requesting this specific article be whitelisted a) since it's purely an interview with the store owner and does not promote any unreliable news and, in particular, b) since it evidences the MAGA Store receiving national attention via Breitbart, which led to the store having to change its name shortly afterwards. To summarize, Breitbart coverage is materially relevant to the store's name change (and thus the article: http://en.turkcewiki.org/wiki/Make_America_Great_Again#Retail_usage) mostly due to its affects on naming, potentially due to trademark issues it brought up with the Trump campaign, which sources have yet to analyze.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kches16414 (talkcontribs)

 Declined, reliable sources already cover the existence of the store, nothing in the proposed addition supports the original research related to the rename. Kuru (talk) 13:12, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Fair enough regarding the name change, but I don't see the reasoning behind removing the Google Maps archives on the re-name. This is the only digital presence that the store maintains, and although the first Web Archived Google Maps listing could be redundant due to reliable media coverage confirming the name, the most recent Web Archive of Google Maps reliably notes the time period in which the store was re-named in absence of other data. Well, I have reached out to the reporter on the original story to see if they have any interest in digging into why this name change happened, so perhaps it will have a reliable source soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kches16414 (talkcontribs) 15:57, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Wait for a reliable source; if there are none, then it may be an indication that this is trivia. Kuru (talk) 18:35, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

hidemyass.com[edit]

hidemyass.com: Linksearch en (http) (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:frMER-C X-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: searchmeta • Yahoo: backlinks • Domain: domaintoolsAboutUs.comDomainsDB.netAlexaWhosOnMyServer.com

hidemyass.com should be unblock for HMA VPN (Hidemyass) Wikipedia airtcle page because it an official website. Editiorman (talk) 12:21, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

 Declined, whitelisted link already on the page. The root domain can't be whitelisted.Kuru (talk) 12:46, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

OneFiveNine.com[edit]

Hello everyone. I am creating an article named Hunderman Village, related to Ladakh, India. I request you to consider white-listing of this website as this is the only website which gives information about the population of Hunderman Village. I'm removing the ref on the article as of now. Regards--- FlyJet777 (talk}} 07:11, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

@FlyJet777:  Declined, we are not going to whitelist the whole site (that would be a delisting request on the WP:SBL). We need a specific link (you can post it here when cutting off the http://). Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:59, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

BitcoinTalk: /index.php?topic=1219264.msg12775845[edit]

BitcoinTalk.org: Linksearch en (http) (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:frMER-C X-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: searchmeta • Yahoo: backlinks • Domain: domaintoolsAboutUs.comDomainsDB.netAlexaWhosOnMyServer.com

Link requested to be whitelisted: bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1219264.msg12775845

Wikipedia page that you want to use the link on: http://en.turkcewiki.org/wiki/Nano_(cryptocurrency)

An explanation why it would be useful to the encyclopedia article proper:

Someone has added a non-academic/non-notable source that incorrectly states that Bitcoin core developer Gregory Maxwell's criticism of Nano is due to its zero-fee structure: http://coinrivet.com/what-is-nano-an-introduction-to-the-zero-fee-cryptocurrency/. That article in-turn links to a 1st-party source from Gregory himself, where he states that his criticism of Nano is about its Sybil attack protection, not its zero-fee structure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwahzi‎ (talkcontribs)

Qwahzi‎},  Declined. BitcoinTalk is not a reliable source for this content. Guy (help!) 12:31, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

www.pro-gorod.ru/maps/?z={osmzoom}&lon={londegdec}&lat={latdegdec}[edit]

I would like to use this link at Template:GeoTemplate/sandbox to sync it with Template:GeoTemplate for testing.BrandonXLF (talk) 02:59, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Breitbart News (3)[edit]

An earlier mention of Doug TenNapel's writing stint with Breitbart was removed for lack of evidence, and I'd like to put it back with a citation of his author page to show his activity and tenure there. Mockingbus (talk) 06:54, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Mockingbus, if it's not covered in an independent source then it's probably WP:UNDUE. Guy (help!) 07:09, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
There is independent coverage, mostly brought up with relation to his conservative views (generally) and anti-LGBTQ positions (in specific), which also keep getting removed (it seems like other editors can't agree whether bringing them up is a smear campaign or ignoring them is a whitewash). It's not great, I admit, but in the interests of fairness I wanted to provide the primary source and note that his column also included some movie reviews and commentary on the general state of the comics entertainment industry at the time. What do you think? Mockingbus (talk) 16:41, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
Mockingbus, if there are reliable independent secondary sources then we don't need to cite Breitbart as a primary source. Guy (help!) 19:35, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
JzG, fair enough! I've made a best-effort attempt at restoring the information with appropriate citations - if you have a moment to take a look, I'd appreciate any suggestions you have. It's been back and forth a few times and I'm hoping a factual, well-cited explanation will be least disliked by everyone. Mockingbus (talk) 08:56, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Mockingbus, there's an ABOUTSELF, which is acceptable, I'm not sure about the third ref. Guy (help!) 09:35, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

112.ua[edit]

For the article on 112.ua. Guy (help!) 00:49, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

@JzG: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:57, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

99Acres.com[edit]

For the article on 99Acres.com. MB 14:25, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

@MB:, we usually do not whitelist an entire domain (the domain was extensively spammed in 2016). Could you suggest a specific about page or a similar subpage to be whitelisted please? Also, the site seems to be inactive atm, but that may be a temporary or local problem. GermanJoe (talk) 16:32, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
OK, Link requested to be whitelisted: http://www.99acres.com/do/Company/aboutUs is general info about the company and would be a good link for the infobox. MB 17:34, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
@MB: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. --GermanJoe (talk) 17:43, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

ipcc.ch[edit]

Official website of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a top-quality source for hundreds of articles on climate change. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 15:44, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

@Clayoquot:, the domain doesn't seem to be blacklisted (neither local nor global), and I just tested a successful link addition in my userspace. Could you provide a specific link that has been rejected please (without active http if necessary)? Also, this section here is generally only for the whitelisting of specific web pages, not for entire domains. GermanJoe (talk) 16:43, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks GermanJoe. I just realized I put my request in the wrong place - I meant to ask at the MediaWiki talk:Captcha-addurl-whitelist. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 16:56, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Proposed removals from Whitelist (web pages or link patterns to reblock)[edit]