MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist

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:

The link that you want whitelisted in the section title, like === example.com/help/index.php === .
The Wikipedia page on which you want to use the link
An explanation why it would be useful to the encyclopedia article proper
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|289220975#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}}

Proposed additions to Whitelist (sites to unblock)

This section is for proposing that a website be whitelisted; add new entries at the bottom of this section. Please use the basic URL so that there is no link (google.ca, not http://www.google.ca). Completed requests will be marked with an appropriate Indicator then archived.

Instructions to requesters:

Explain why the site should be whitelisted.
Explain which articles would benefit from the addition of the link.
Provide the specific link to the page you're requesting be added.

If the above information is not provided expect your request to be declined.

Kippreport.com

Explain why the site should be whitelisted.

Kippreport is a daily news website based in the Middle east and provide interesting fact about this region. They are not using press release and are creating their own content. It's a platform were people are able to talk about the problem of the region. The website was block because somebody from the team make a mistake trying to add some of the page of Kippreport.com has reference and didn't follow the rules of Wikipedia. Now the content of this website is great an can really be taken as a reference in some way like the one listed in the link section. If I take this example kippreport.com/kipp/etisalat/, I think it's interesting to add has reference for the Etisalat page

Explain which articles would benefit from the addition of the link.

UAE, Flickr in this case, people from the middle east because there is study about them, company from the middle east like Rani, EPPCO, Etisalat, Du, Emirates,....

Provide the specific link to the page you're requesting be added.

1. kippreport.com/ 2. kippreport.com/kipp/2009/03/16/flickr-is-banned/ 3. kippreport.com/kipp/2008/11/23/dont-stop-the-press/ 4. kippreport.com/kipp/etisalat/

80.227.53.134 (talk) 07:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am inclined to remove this from the blacklist, as it seems like a reasonable source. I'd like another opinion first though, so can whoever sees this next chip in? Stifle (talk) 11:51, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

this provides further information on why it was blacklisted (last section). Stifle (talk) 11:52, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

vbs.tv

vbs.tv: 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 VBS.tv should be linking to the official site. The domain was spammed, but whitelisting for this use should be acceptable. Thanks — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 19:17, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be OK to whitelist \bwww\.vbs\.tv/\b ? Stifle (talk) 17:36, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I plan to (only) link http://www.vbs.tv from VBS.tv (& remove the misleading links). — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 21:37, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, does not work, this would enable everything after it, as the final \b is here the word boundary of a possible beginning further url (after the unescaped '/', which should be a '\/'). Is there an index.htm or an about.htm we can use? --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 11:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to escape /s, the system does that automatically. Awaiting further reply from Mike.lifeguard. Stifle (talk) 10:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.vbs.tv/about.php would be acceptable. — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 14:18, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that perhaps http://www.vbs.tv/about.php may apropriate considering the overwhelming evidence of abuse
:Accounts

Related

viceland.com: 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
vice-recordings.com: 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
vicerecords.com: 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
heavymetalinbaghdad.com: 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
theraveonettes.com: 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

redirect site

vice.tv: 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

--Hu12 (talk) 20:03, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did say it was spammed, didn't I? 9.9 Can we get this done one way or another please? — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 13:14, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fine,

Done. If you were that bothered you could have done it yourself :) (no need to reply) Stifle (talk) 15:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You know I'm not allowed to :D — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 00:31, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suite101.com "Safety - Is it more important than Authenticity?"

Explain why the site should be whitelisted. Safety is obviously an important consideration which often weighs agains authenticity in historical reenactment, but it is rarely discussed, and even less frequently written about.

Explain which articles would benefit from the addition of the link. Certainly Authenticity (reenactment), and possibly other articles dealing with historical reenactment.

Provide the specific link to the page you're requesting be added. Probbably the best is suite101.com/article.cfm/historical_reenactment/58426/1 Another option is suite101.com/print_article.cfm/historical_reenactment/58426 which displays the entire article in a single window.

Requested by cmadler (talk) 14:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done Stifle (talk) 08:26, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

lenr-canr.org

This site is globally blacklisted. This request is occasioned by a single page: http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Fleischmancalorimetr.pdf is hosted under plausible claim of permission from author and publisher (that issue has been thoroughly discussed at Talk:Martin Fleischmann and elsewhere). The purpose of linking to it is to provide a convenience link for readers of Cold fusion and for editors working on the article. The paper is very important in the history of Cold fusion, being a more thorough second report, published in 1990, than the original 1989 publication, which was famously sketchy. I am unaware of any other site hosting the paper for free access and under a plausible claim of permission.

I see no reason not to whitelist the entire site here on en.wikipedia, there was no linkspam here in the first place, but, short of such a whitelisting, please whitelist the single link (and this request may then be closed without further fuss from me, excepting other whitelist requests as the need arises). Thanks. --Abd (talk) 15:01, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whitelisting the entire site is most definitely

Declined (see WP:LINKVIO). Can you please give us a non-TLDR explanation of on what information the "plausible claim of permission from author and publisher" is based? If it's limited to "some WP editors think so", then I am afraid that will be declined too. Some offwiki proof would be necessary I think. Stifle (talk) 17:13, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tl:dr? Moi?

Oh, okay, if you insist: see the extensive discussion of the lenr-canr link at Talk:Martin Fleischmann, where copyvio was extensively considered. It's not just a few editors, it's consensus. You might also see the extensive discussion of blacklisting at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Abd and JzG/Workshop. Thanks again. --Abd (talk) 21:41, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stifle, what is the basis of your claim that WP:LINKVIO applies? This is the evidence that it doesn't, beside all the opinions that have been expressed: They explicitly claim permission from authors and publishers. They host only a fraction of the papers they would prefer to host. In the original delisting request here, closed only because of the meta blacklisting, evidence was presented that lenr-canr.org had permission for what they host, including an email from Rothwell, the site manager. They are highly visible and stable. Another site which hosts some important papers that they do not host (and which was just delisted here), newenergytimes.com, does so under claim of fair use, and I've interpreted this as disallowing links to that site (for those papers) because suspicion of copyvio is reasonable; they may be able to get away with a claim of fair use, but lenr-canr.org is claiming explicit permission, and they have been doing so for years, and they are widely publicized (in reliable source, in fact) as a library of documents on the topic of low energy nuclear reactions. Enough? --Abd (talk) 02:45, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One more point. I asked for a specific page whitelisting, or, in the alternative, the whole site. To what did your decline refer? --Abd (talk) 02:47, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I dispute the "plausible claim of permission from author and publisher", as it comes from lenr-canr.org and not either the author or publisher - the holders of the copyright. Of course the site itself would claim it isn't infringing copyright. Verbal chat 08:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I noted, this issue has been very extensively discussed and the conclusion has been that a claim of permission from a notable web site is adequate. It doesn't make sense that we have to run an off-wiki confirmation process for every convenience link; this idea would make adding convenience links so cumbersome that few would be added. It's simply not true that a violating site will claim permission as some sort of obvious move, and the case of NET was mentioned precisely for that reason. NET doesn't claim permission, probably because they can't get it. They claim fair use. Lenr-canr doesn't host those same papers and, in fact, when NET cites a paper as prominent, it typically links to lenr-canr.org instead of hosting it itself; it only hosts papers, we may readily conclude, when permission can't be obtained, either by them or in general. I'm willing to track down permission for a single paper, if needed, but I want an understanding that this isn't going to be demanded for each and every link. --Abd (talk) 11:26, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The decline relates to "I see no reason not to whitelist the entire site here on en.wikipedia" only. Stifle (talk) 09:35, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not convinced enough of the issue to approve this request, but also not convinced enough on the other side to decline it. I am deferring to another admin. Stifle (talk) 09:36, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Stifle. That avoids WP:BIGMESS, a guideline that's not even written. --Abd (talk) 11:21, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Fleischmancalorimetr.pdf is a copy of "Martin Fleischmann, Stanley Pons, Mark W. Anderson, Lian Jun Li and Marvin Hawkins, Calorimetry of the palladium-deuterium-heavy water system, Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, 1990, 287, 293-348, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-0728(90)80009-U. I am whitelisting this, consider

Added. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 11:22, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Beetstra, this time was a little bit easier. --Abd (talk) 01:48, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

lenr-canr.org (2)

http://www.lenr-canr.org/Collections/KUERinterview.htm

(totally unrelated to request above) A transcript of a radio interview, for Michael McKubre. It can be used to source his postdoctoral research fellowship under mentoring of Martin Fleischmann. Also has some info of his funding, which is a relevant matter due to the funding problems in his field of expertise (cold fusion). --Enric Naval (talk) 19:23, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It would seem better to cite the original recording, no? Stifle (talk) 17:14, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I will link both the audio recording and its transcript. The text transcript is much better for people who is not proficient in English language, and it can be verified more easily. (I'll also listen to the recording to cite the time when the declarations are done) --Enric Naval (talk) 17:42, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This seems a much more reasonable request than that above, and barring a better source I would support this individual whitelisiting. Verbal chat 08:52, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since Stifle has deferred to other admins in the "lenr-canr.org" section above, can some other admin take a look and do the whitelisting or deny it? --Enric Naval (talk) 17:52, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am inclined to whitelist this one as well. Could we have a link to the radio interview as well (if there is an online version of that available), just for future reference. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 11:10, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://audio.kuer.org:8000/file/rw112702.mp3 P.D.: Argh, it's broken, and the archive.org copy is also broken >.< --Enric Naval (talk) 14:54, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have already

Added this, could an admin add a permanent link to this entry when the radio interview link is presented, just to have the log complete? Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 11:13, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now that is funny, how do we check if the audio recording is the same as the original? --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 19:33, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, since the charge of alteration was made against lenr-canr.org in the past, I need to take this question seriously. Unless there is a reason to think that a site is altering documents, i.e., taking original text and changing it in some significant way, we routinely accept copies as accurate, just as we accept edits citing obscure and unobtainable books on the word of an editor that the source contains what the editor claims it contains, and until and unless that editor is impeached for misrepresenting sources, we assume good faith and even allow, normally, for some level of error. Lenr-canr.org has built a reputation as a library of documents on cold fusion. If they were found to be altering documents, it would be devastating to that reputation. The previous charges of alteration were not alteration, they involved a case (unusual, actually, for lenr-canr.org) where Rothwell had prepended an editorial comment on the document, a U.S. government report, the 1989 DoE review of cold fusion. There was no alteration, there was framing, a totally different matter. I've cited text to an organization that prepended comment when there was no other source for the text; in the particular case, lenr-canr.org had provided a link to their source, and that other source didn't have editorial comment, but only the name of the web site (which was apparently hosting the document because of their skeptical POV). Editorial consensus was to use the less editorialized copy, which was a proper decision, and it wasn't controversial. But the "alters documents" charge was then repeated over and over, was still being raised this year. What could be done if someone really wants to check is to ask McKubre. Is it worth it? I doubt it. By the way, Dirk, thanks for this one also. --Abd (talk) 01:16, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. It is not that I am afraid of editorialised interviews, wrong interpretations etc., it would be good to be able to check. Linking to mp3's is not the best practice (bandwidth, availability of codecs etc., unsuitable for deaf people), though here it is the proper source and it certainly should be mentioned in the reference. Adding the transcipt would make the availability wider (also suitable for deaf people, etc.) and I would encourage that. It is just too bad the original seems to be gone, and written transcriptions might be less informative than the original (loss of intonations e.g.). I think it is fine this way. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 09:07, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

filmtaka.com

Site should be whitelisted because.

Filmtaka.com is a daily based news website, who inform you celebrity gossip, latest movie news, upcoming casting calls details. the site is very helpful for those who want to start career or just start there career on Hollywood movies. we provide direct contact details of casting calls agents, directors, artist so strugglers can contact them directly.

site is blacklisted because one of my administrator try to add external links in wikipedia pages. My administrator is new for wikipedia who did not aware the wikipedia rule and unable to follow the rules. Filmtaka.com is blacklisted for last 3 - 4 months, i hope the punishment of the site will be over. --122.163.42.91 (talk) 19:30, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Provide the specific link to the page you're requesting be added.

1. filmtaka.com/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.40.240 (talk) 13:18, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for requesting one or two links from a blacklisted site to be permitted. If you want to remove a site from the blacklist entirely, you need MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#Proposed_removals. However, the request is unlikely to be approved if it does not come from an established user. Stifle (talk) 14:07, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TourMyCountry.com

Hello, I'd like to be able to include:

http://www.tourXXXmyXXXcountry.com/austria/theresianum-diplomatic-academy.htm

(remove XXX's to read; I put them because otherwise I can't even post this!)

Reason: the article Gottfried van Swieten mentions the Theresianum as where van Swieten was schooled. The web page cited gives a pretty good history of the school, not otherwise available AFAIK.

Note: I don't know why TourMyCountry.com was blacklisted, so if you need to turn down this request I will understand.

Thanks for your help, Opus33 (talk) 18:44, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This report explains why it was blacklisted. I am inclined to whitelist the requested link unless I hear a reason not to in the next day or two. Stifle (talk) 14:04, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Specific page of ezinearticles.com

I would like to request a whitelist of http:// ezinearticles.com/?PSP-Blue-Screen-of-Death---Simple-Way-to-Banish-it-For-Good&id=2152154 (remove space after http://) — Supuhstar * § 14:54, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

www.whale.to

This site seems to collect information and interviews from around the internet and as such should not be blacklisted itself. Whether one disagrees with the opinions or not on the site is not relevant imo since it is basically a news service and would be similar to blacklisting a newspaper that reported topics that some found uninteresting or even included bad reports about oneself (there is a page critiquing wikipedia on the general site).

With this in mind I thought it would be a good idea to have a basic external link to a short bio page with an interview (video) with the person associated with a wiki page. The link I'd like to add is www.whale.to/vaccines/scheibner.html for including in the associated article Viera Scheibner. The link is both brief and informative about the subject person, and appears fair and respectful reporting. thanks. sunja (talk) 05:36, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Approved Requests

losethegame.com

Explain why the site should be whitelisted.

Site is obviously relevant to an article on The Game (mind game), and is the most popular website about The Game. In fact, it's the first relevant result on a Google search for "the game". Because of this, I think it should be added to the article's External Links section.

Explain which articles would benefit from the addition of the link.

The Game (mind game), Jonty Haywood

Provide the specific link to the page you're requesting be added.

losethegame.com/

--Zarel (talk) 07:51, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whitelisting the whole domain would again give people the possibility to make others lose the game by including the link in questionable places (as the abuse that was done before the blacklisting to e.g. school pages and George Bush), a practice that is (was?) encouraged by the site. Please find a suitable, specific page on the site (e.g. an about.htm), which is suitable for whitelisting. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 10:40, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm only asking for it to be whitelisted on the The Game (mind game) and Jonty Haywood - I thought it was possible to whitelist the domain on some specific articles, while still keeping it blacklisted on other articles? Or do I request that kind of exception somewhere else? I mean, whitelisting the domain everywhere would just be removing it from the blacklist, and I'm not proposing that at all.

Furthermore, is it possible to whitelist only the home page at losethegame.com/ ? Alternatively, losethegame.com/index.htm should work. Their closest thing to an "About" page is losethegame.com/faq.htm , if you feel that's a better choice. --Zarel (talk) 21:33, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I like the plan of whitelisting the /index.htm. That should still hamper the general trick of replacing a school-page with the main domain. XLinkBot can keep an eye on it for some time, if this re-enables abuse, maybe the abusefilter will have to do something (actually, I'll do that as well).

OK, I am going to add \blosethegame\.com\/index\.htm\b, only for use on The Game (mind game) and Jonty Haywood (other pages should be impossible now anyway). --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 09:36, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

meenaonthenet.com

This is the (apparently) official site of the Indian actress Meena, aka Meena Durairaj. It is hosted on galatta.com, which is blacklisted. Can meenaonthenet.com be whitelisted for her article? Fences and windows (talk) 22:20, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That site is blacklisted at meta. If you want it removed, you'll have to ask there.

Defer to Global blacklist Stifle (talk) 17:08, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(And bearing in mind the reasons for the blacklisting, if you want to request a single page be whitelisted here, that would be OK, but you'll need to nominate a page.) Stifle (talk) 17:08, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deciphering the reasons for blacklisting from the report on meta is beyond the capacity of ordinary mortals; the blacklisting was a mass blacklisting of alleged clients of the host, gallata.com, apparently. A specific page for Meena is http://www.galatta.com/actress/meena/main.html. Even though this is meta blacklisted, that's no reason for denying whitelisting here, by itself. We do not have authority over meta and they do not have authority over us. --Abd (talk) 00:18, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If we can whitelist the link Abd mentions for this one article without bothering meta, that'd be good. I have got used to the arcane workings of Wikipedia, but meta is an unknown to me. Fences and windows (talk) 04:01, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problems with whitelisting that page, as I said. But I couldn't whitelist without knowing which page to permit.

Done

On a side note, the statement that "[meta does] not have authority over us" may be debatable. Stifle (talk) 09:40, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let's not debate it here. Thanks, Stifle. --Abd (talk) 11:19, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Fences and windows (talk) 21:27, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

eu-football.info

Please, remove this site from blacklist, because it has useful and detailed information. You may delete all earlier submited links, although all them were added to related pages... User, who submited them, didn`t know that it is not good. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pleaser09 (talk • contribs) 13:51, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This was blacklisted at meta due to spamming (see m:User:COIBot/XWiki/eu-football.info). How can we be sure it won't be spammed again, and also what Wikipedia article would benefit from links to this site? Stifle (talk) 15:14, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That user who spammed will not spam again. I hope others too.

This site may be useful for that users who want to get additional detailed information about played matches of the national football team. This unique detailed information contains line-ups with full names of players and their clubs. Users will be thankful to Wikipedia for this link to additional statistics.

Please, unlist at least one link eu-football.info/_list.php?id=123 at the page en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estonia_national_football_team,

although there is detailed info about all european national football teams on this site.

Pleaser09 (talk) 07:31, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK,

Done. Stifle (talk) 13:32, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Pleaser09 (talk) 15:42, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Requests

kinbacon.org

KinbaCon is the first European Convention dedicated exclusively to the Japanese art of erotic bondage. There are similar Conventions such ShibariCon and BoundCon, but their sites are not blacklisted. This year KinbaCon will be at the first time, in Lviv (Ukraine), on 23-24 May. Official KinbaCon website fully translated into 7 different languages (English, German, French, Spanish, Polish, Russian, Ukrainian), that more visitors can read the info about Convention and can visit it. That's why we've created KinbaCon page on Wikipedia also on 7 different languages and for what have been blacklisted as spammers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OpenBDSM (talk • contribs) 20:42, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find any page called KinbaCon here, so

Not done as there is no indication as to what page you plan to use the image on. Stifle (talk) 13:13, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up: this domain was blacklisted on Meta-Wiki and its removal was discussed today at:

meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#kinbacon.org (permanent link)

Here's the original Meta report:

meta:User:COIBot/XWiki/kinbacon.org

I declined to delist the domain based on OpenBDSM's request but left open the possibility if our regular editors subsequently see a need for it.^[1][2][3]

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 03:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn or Otherwise Past Relevance

Proposed removals from whitelist (sites to reblock)

This section is for requests to remove sites from the whitelist. Removed sites will be blocked again (unless they have also been removed from the blacklist). Completed requests will be archived

Troubleshooting and problems

This section is for comments related to problems with the whitelist (such as incorrect syntax or entries not being allowed). This is not the section to request that an entry be listed or unlisted (see above). Completed requests will be archived

Not sure if this is the right place, but I tried tagging an article with being a copyvio of http://entertainment-indianetzone-com/... using subst:copyvio, and got a rejection. This seems like a bug. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 07:56, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The spam filter blocked a link I was adding in a discussion page. Fair enough, but in doing so destroyed an hours worth of edits, which I could not reload or go back to as they had "timed out". Bad show. Wiredrabbit (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:07, 29 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]

I agree with Wiredrabbit's comment above. Isn't there some way to accept Talk Page edits but just break the link? cmadler (talk) 16:01, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not at the moment. I agree that presenting the text submitted (same way as an edit conflict) would help, though. I'll see about raising a bugzilla. Most decent browsers will keep the text in the textarea as edited if you hit the back button, though. Stifle (talk) 08:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bugzilla:9416 deals with this. Stifle (talk) 08:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

This section is for discussion about this talk page itself. Requests should not be added here.

This is a very low-traffic page, perhaps we should open a process for it in the Wikipedia namespace. Stifle (talk) 14:54, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other projects with active whitelists

I was unable to format this so as to fit in the left column where x-wiki links normally go. This, as well as a similar list for other local blacklists (on our blacklist's talk page) may be useful information. --A. B. ^(talk) 14:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

v t e Noticeboards
Wikipedia's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General	Administrators Main Incidents Bots Bureaucrats Centralized discussion Closure requests Education Interface admins Main Page errors Open proxies VRT Oversight User permissions
Articles and content	Biographies of living persons Copyrights Questions on media Problems Dispute resolution External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view Original research Pending changes Reliable sources Resource requests Scalable vector graphics Spam Blacklist Whitelist Style Titleblacklist Translation
Page handling	History merges Mergers Splits Moves Protection Importation XfD Articles Redirects Categories Templates Files Miscellany Undeletion
User conduct	Conflict of interest Contributor copyright Edit warring and 3RR Sanctions Personal restrictions General sanctions Contentious topics Sockpuppets Usernames (Requests for comment) Vandalism
Other	Arbitration Committee noticeboard Requests Enforcement Edit filters Requested False positives Questions Help desk Teahouse Reference desk New articles Requests for comment Village pump Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous WikiProject proposals Discussions for discussion
Category:Wikipedia noticeboards