[go: up one dir, main page]
Jump to content

MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist

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|1258763042#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}}



    [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]

    electronicbeats.net/from-the-vaults-aphex-twin

    [edit]

    (archived here) Specific article only. Appears to be blacklisted under Wikipedia:TESTING-DONT-USE-unreliable.json, for "Sources that traditionally fail WP:MEDRS, but which could be used for other more routine claims". Since this is being used for an album article it should be alright? Chchcheckit (talk) 12:05, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Please someone check this over, this is part of a GA review i'm doing. Chchcheckit (talk) 10:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This request has still not been handled. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:47, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Chchcheckit: Sorry for the extremely long delay in reviewing this. This URL was never on the spam blacklist, so there's nothing to whitelist here. It being reported by someone's unreliable source finder is not the same as blacklisting, you are free to disregard it if you wish.
    If it weren't blacklisted, I wouldn't be able to link to the page (admins are not exempt), but you can see here that I am able: https://electronicbeats.net/from-the-vaults-aphex-twin * Pppery * it has begun... 20:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    [edit]
    • Original deadlink: https :// www DOT fr24news DOT com/a/2020/09/netflix-teams-up-with-frenchman-xilam-in-animated-comedy-series-trico.html
    • Archive link: the Wayback Machine archive of the deadlink above with date code 20210305233333
    • I could not encapsulate the URL within a {{Link summary}} template call because the filter kept blocking it.
    • I wanted to add this deadlink & its last known Wayback archive to the article Hugo Gittard as it is the only reference I could find that confirms said French director created the Xilam cartoon Trico which would be streamed by Netflix in 2022, but the spam filter blocked me from adding the reference.

    ‐⁠‑🌀⁠SilSinnAL982100⁠💬 01:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    fr24news.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
    Link requested to be whitelisted: fr24news.com/a/2020/09/netflix-teams-up-with-frenchman-xilam-in-animated-comedy-series-trico.html
    I think these templates are what @SilSinn9821: asks for.
    --Error (talk) 10:09, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This request has still not been handled. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:51, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    At the moment I'm in a hurry to complete another task, so I haven't reviewed this. It would help speed things up, Pppery, if you would at least make a recommendation on these cases after you review them, saying what you would do if you were still an administrator. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:24, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I haven't looked at it closely myself. I just made that comment to stop this from being archived unanswered. And I've requested resysop anyway, so I'll handle that when the time comes. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:07, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined Sorry for the extremely long delay in reviewing this. Per the addition diff, this is a fraudulent synonym-replacement news site, flagged on RSN. See Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_357#Fr24_News,_and_synonym-spam_sites_in_general * Pppery * it has begun... 20:00, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    trackattic.xyz/MSAC-Relays/MSACresults-1994.pdf

    [edit]

    hi, this is a website archiving various track & field meet results, i want to add it to this article as a reference

    CybeR197 (talk) 03:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    This request has still not been handled. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:36, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @CybeR197: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. Apologies for the extremely long delay in reviewing this * Pppery * it has begun... 19:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    i forgot about this cuz it was taking so long but tysm CybeR197 (talk) 02:20, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    e621.net

    [edit]

    I wish to put it in the infobox and external links section of its article: e621 (website). Thank you and have a great day, ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 01:45, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. We consider requests to whitelist specific pages, not entire domains. If you want e621.net removed from the blacklist, see MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:56, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This isn't a request to whitelist the entire domain. It's a request to whitelist just the homepage of the domain. Normally we would point to /Common requests#The official homepage of the subject of a page in cases like that, but I think the link to e926 is sufficient as-is. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:47, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Uninvolved third party here: e621.net/index.html, e621.net/index.php, and e621.net/index give an error so I'm not sure there is a direct homepage link available that wouldn't involve whitelisting the whole domain.
    e621.net/static/site_map is a site map that might be an alternative option, I guess? RachelTensions (talk) 05:13, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeahhh, the thing about e621 is that it's primary function is as a, uhh... furry porn website. If we go directly by Wikipedia's policy, there's nothing that would violate that by adding the website's official link to the article about the website. The Wikipedia isn't censored policy subsection allows explicit or offensive material long as it is relevant and a constructive addition to the article, and the external links to the article's subject policy states that the official website of an article's subject is exempt from the types of links not normally allowed.
    @Pppery mentioned "e926", which is a direct mirror of the e621 website but restricts content visibility to the SFW filter. In my opinion, this is a suitable alternative. However, if a consensus regarding this is reached in the "allow" category, my personal recommendation would be to only whitelist the website for that article alone, otherwise we run the risk of giving vandals another potent tool. Sirocco745 (talk) 06:41, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We can't whitelist a website for use in a single article. Either we whitelist a specific page (not the "root" page with just the domain name in it) or we remove it from the blacklist. If no specific page is found that is suitable, then  Defer to Local blacklist to propose delisting, but personally I doubt that such a proposal would be taken seriously. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    FYI it is technically possible to whitelist just the root page and no other parts of the domain, and that has been done in a few cases, but I agree there isn't cause to do so here. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:38, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A workaround might be to whitelist e621.net (which would allow linking to the root) but and then blacklist e621.net/posts and static.e621.net which are where the site's content and images are hosted, which would effectively cut off the vandalism potential.
    Is it worth it to be able to add a link to a furry site article? That's not for me to decide, but the option is there. RachelTensions (talk) 18:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not how things work - one whitelist entry overrides all blacklist entries. You can use negative lookaheads to accomplish that goal in theory (a change which would have to be made to the global blacklist), but again is it really worth it? * Pppery * it has begun... 22:07, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    hangeul.or.kr/board/normal/article/60719

    [edit]

    For use on User:Seefooddiet/Romanization of Korean on Wikipedia (I plan to eventually move this essay to Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea/Romanization of Korean on Wikipedia, maybe need to whitelist its use there too?).

    It's a link to a post in a message board by the Korean Language Society. The post contains a file originally published by the National Institute of Korean Language (that is no longer on the NIKL website) that explains how the Revised Romanization of Korean works; my essay contains an explanation of that romanization system, and I'm trying to cite part of that file. I think this website and my essay are necessary evils to address the monster confusing mess that is the Romanization of Korean on Wikipedia (see both my essay and the romanization of Korean article to see what I mean). seefooddiet (talk) 09:27, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. First of all, this is the English Wikipedia, and a document in Korean would not be helpful to most readers. Second, it's a forum post (as far as I can tell), and we generally don't whitelist forums that have been blacklisted. Third, the post says who published it, so it would be better to cite the actual source than a forum. Finally, I am not seeing a rationale for poking a hole in the blacklist for the sake of an essay. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    wetransfer.com

    [edit]

    I was updating the english Wikipedia article about WeTransfer and it turned out that wetransfer.com itself is blocked as spam, meaning that it's impossible to set the `website` parameter on that page. Definitely makes sense to keep it blocked elsewhere, but I think it also makes sense to allow it on the page about the website/company itself. Thanks in advance!

    Smallangryplanet (talk) 17:06, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @Smallangryplanet: per MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Common_requests#The_official_homepage_of_the_subject_of_a_page, 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? --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:29, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    They seem to have taken down their about page and don't have an index page - there's a wetransfer dot com /explore page (can't link it directly without tripping the filter), would that work? Smallangryplanet (talk) 19:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    wetransfer.com/index would work RachelTensions (talk) 04:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    the URL https://wetransfer.com/index/ is already on the whitelist. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:45, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    A specific page of academicjournals.org

    [edit]

    Hi, I'm copy-pasting what follows from the July archive page, as there has been no answer to it. Using the occasion to recall that that page is innocuous / devoid of whatever got the site banned. Thanks for your attention. Pueblo89 (talk) 07:38, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    1. That is the only page I've found that gives the full article. The summary does not mention 'soda lake', my ref is for p. 78. + the only doi i've found (in the banned page) is wrong (try it below). The ref is: Fayissa, Zelalem Dessalegn (May 2015). "Photosynthetic productivity and biomass of phytoplankton, in Lake Kuriftu, Ormia Region, Ethiopia". International Journal of Fisheries and Aquaculture. 7 (5): 71-80 (see p. 78). doi:10.5897/IJFA14.0462.
    2. It would benefit the page on soda lake (work in progress in sandbox) (can also be used in Algaculture and a couple of other associated pages).

    Hello. I opened quite a few of these "linksummary" links. Can't make head or tails from these. So i just googled " what's the problem with academicjournals.org " (because i like it simple, tyvm). Got this: "Academicjournals.org – Academic Review Spam?" (by Henry Farrell on August 9, 2011). Now that raises suspicion - enough so that I don't care what date it is, some stains don't wash up; so definitely not want the whole site to be whitelisted and much regret that i can't find a more honest site giving the full article for free. I just need that one article to be available in full. If someone finds it elsewhere, all the better. (And maybe a doi that works, while i'm at it - don't ask, don't get.) Thank you for your attention. Pueblo89 (talk) 21:49, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    The reason for the blacklisting is MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/February_2019#Predatory_journals, calling the site a Nigerian mill churning out climate change denialism and other crap. And it's on Special:AbuseFilter/891/MediaWiki:abusefilter-warning-predatory. Make of that what you will. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi * Pppery *, well, this here article doesn't even mention the word "climate". Not at all a denial of what you said, which only serves to reinforce my view that the ban is a good thing on a general point of view. But no rule is good if it does not make room for exceptions, to be looked at on a case by case basis. So the question remains. Pueblo89 (talk) 10:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined. You can always use the DOI parameter in the citation without any other links, and the DOI is given at the top of that article in the teal box: 10.5897/IJFA14.0462 ~Anachronist (talk) 19:15, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    www.mediapartrvj4bsgolbxixw57ru7fh4jqckparke4vs365guu6ho64yd.onion

    [edit]

    I think that there is a blanket ban for .onion sites \b[_\-0-9a-z]+\.onion\b # was \bsilkroad.*\.onion\b in MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. I tried to add the official onion service for the French newspaper Mediapart to its article and the antispam filter won't let me. May you unblock this specific site? It is as reliable as the .fr version, I think. --Error (talk) 18:21, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't see a reason to whitelist a link that you need special software to access. Anyone who wants it can find the link on the .fr site, no? ~Anachronist (talk) 05:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We have whitelisted onion sites a few times before, and there's even a template for it ({{Onion URL}}). Not an opinion on the merits of this request. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:04, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined Per Anachronist and you can mention the onion URL without linking to it which should suffice since the number of users with TOR-enabled browsers is low. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    hypercubing.xyz

    [edit]

    I'd like to include the link hypercubing.xyz/software/hyperspeedcube/ on List of four-dimensional games since it includes more details about the history of the program, including the date of its initial release. The entire website includes lots of information that would be good to cite for n-dimensional sequential move puzzle, which is out-of-date in some respects. This site is reputable, and is controlled by the GitHub repository https://github.com/Hypercubers/hypercubing.xyz/. It is maintained by several active members of the hypercubing community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HactarCE (talk • contribs) 06:04, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. I'm whitelisting this because it colatteral from .xyz and vaguely reasonable. This does not constitute any kind of official endorsement of hypercubing.xyz or it being added to the list. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:53, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    fatbearweek.org

    [edit]

    explore.org: 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: fatbearweek.org Page is a redirect. I would be fine with either being whitelisted. Currently the Fat Bear Week article has a broken link, and it was outdated even before it went dead. --Cmrc23 (talk) 00:45, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @Cmrc23: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. I'm whitelisting only the specific URL https://explore.org/fat-bear-week, since it's our practice not to whitelist entire domains or domain root pages. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:50, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    vanityteen.com

    [edit]

    Trying to cite this interview in Draft:Talk Saxy but site is blocked for some reason. I searched but don't see it explicitly listed in either the local or global blocklist so maybe an error? In any event I'd like this specific page unblocked so I can cite information from the interview: vanityteen.com/riize-interview/ RachelTensions (talk) 22:50, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Just following up on this - I've cited the page at Talk Saxy for the blockquote from the interview but I had to intentionally break the link in the reference so I could save the page. RachelTensions (talk) 20:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: this hasn't been done yet, but it seems that when Citation Bot came through the article and tried to fix the intentionally broken URL in the ref, it allowed it. So, the blacklisted URL is now in the article.
    Maybe the bots user group can avoid the URL blacklist? RachelTensions (talk) 14:56, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Indeed, bots can override the blacklist. Citation bot specifically shouldn't be able to. Nice workaround ...
    Still, someone should handle this request. The fact that in the two months since I resigned adminship so many requests have been ignored is predictable but nevertheless horrifying. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:23, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Any idea as to the history behind why this magazine’s domain is on the list? Doesn’t seem to be anything nefarious or disruptive there RachelTensions (talk) 17:33, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It was added to the global blacklist in 2022 by TheresNoTime citing m:User:COIBot/XWiki/vanityteen.com: Addition diff. Oddly since that's on a different wiki with a different permissions structure I do have the technical ability to remove it from the global blacklist entirely. But I'm not comfortable doing that (whereas I would be willing to whitelist this one specific site if I were still an admin). * Pppery * it has begun... 17:39, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    information Note: @RachelTensions: It appears this got blocked in response to aggressive ref spamming by confirmed socks. Adding a few {{user}}s below:
    Additionally in year 2021:
    XXBlackburnXx (talk) 22:13, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have plus Added the specific URL to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. I still think the entire site should be deblacklisted but I'll leave that for another time. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:49, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    themoviedb.org

    [edit]

    I need the link and site unblocked so I can cite Scott Chambers a.k.a. Scott Jeffrey as the director of the upcoming Alice & The Mad Hatter movie from The Twisted Childhood Universe.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:401:4300:3720:e340:9a41:dcb7:623b (talk • contribs)

     Not done I'm sure you can find a better reliable source than that. OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    rugbydatabase.co.nz

    [edit]

    rugbydatabase.co.nz: 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

    Requesting the addition of rugbydatabase.co.nz to the whitelist, as no admin has provided any resolution when requested for removal from the blacklist. It was originally blacklisted due to being spammed by unregistered users based in Australia.
    This site is the biggest, most reliable, accurate and up to date source of all international & domestic rugby game, player & team stats and data available online, after ESPN's Statsguru (espnscrum.com/statsguru/rugby/stats/) database was shut down at the end of 2020. It's therefore an essential source in keeping (essentially all) rugby team's and player's pages up to date (caps, tries, game starts, points breakdown, etc, etc), as well as rugby records pages. There's simply no other reliable and accurate alternative.
    Blacklisting Rugby Database means needing to find articles online to source all the different information for each player & team, instead of simply using those sources supplementally, secondary to RD. It's a lot more work to maintain all of these pages if there isn't a database available to cite that has all the info reliably in one place. If Rugby Database isn't removed from the blacklist, and the page isn't added to the whitelist, I believe every single player, stadium & team page on the website would need to be requested for addition to the whitelist individually, to be used in Wikipedia - I think this is ridiculous. I can't say that the spamming by unregistered users will completely stop, as I simply don't know, but the spamming that occurred last year by a few unregistered editors no longer justifies the website being blacklisted now. Please help me and the rugby community in maintaining rugby pages by adding rugbydatabase.co.nz to the whitelist. TazMcPunty (talk) 01:30, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (no longer an admin so not an official reply) The blacklist talk page was the correct venue for this request - the whitelist is for allowing usage of individual URLs that would otherwise match a blacklisted domain, not for overriding entire blacklist entries. And this page is even more understaffed than the blacklist talk page is so reposting it here won't help. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:37, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Personally, I think your prior admin status, which you voluntarily resigned, grandfathers you in to qualifying for declining requests. Feel free to do so, I doubt anyone would complain. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:52, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Defer to Local blacklist per my previous comment. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    About.com

    [edit]

    about.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 Old, archived versions of their music coverage is now blocked per this blacklist. Many of the music critics are reliable sources, and a table was compiled of which journalists have reliable coverage and which do not: WP:ALBUM/ABOUT.COM. I'm not sure how to white-list these specific articles apart from individually white-listing hundreds of urls, but it's created a problem for articles that used some of the reputable journalists' work as a source. Even with archived urls that are no longer active will trigger the blog. Maybe there can be a way to exempt the wayback links, and no longer link to the original dead url?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:57, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. We consider requests to whitelist specific pages, not entire domains.  Defer to Local blacklist. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:21, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    heavymetal.about.com/od/death/p/pro_death.htm

    [edit]

    heavymetal.about.com/od/death/p/pro_death.htm: 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 I tried to use this url in an article (archived version), but the blacklist means it won't go through. Chad Bowar is a reliable source per WP:ALBUM/ABOUT.COM.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 12:07, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    You can link to the archived version directly. If you're using a cite template, pass |url-status=unfit to it so it doesn't try to link to the unarchived version * Pppery * it has begun... 16:45, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you!--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 20:00, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    secure.smore.com/n/hvre9

    [edit]

    I wanted to cite this on the campus section for Independence High School (San Jose, California). The newsletters aren't hosted anywhere else, and there isn't another source talking about the addition of the new building (apart from the school newspaper possibly? But that's only construction). Based5290 :3 (talk) 06:14, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. With the same caveat as below. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:47, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    secure.smore.com/n/k4rnw

    [edit]

    Same reasoning as last request. I wanted to cite this on the campus section for Independence High School (San Jose, California). The newsletters aren't hosted anywhere else, and there isn't another source talking about the addition of the new building (apart from the school newspaper?). Based5290 :3 (talk) 06:14, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @Based5290: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. But do note that this is a primary source, and it's best to rely on secondary sources where possible - we care more about what others have to say about the school than what it has to say about itself. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:47, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    dyingscene.com/ds-staff-picks-dylans-top-10-punk-rock-albums-of-all-time/

    [edit]

    The page for the album Fast Forward Eats the Tape (by Belvedere) has been a stub for a while; I'm trying to build upon it. Prior to editing it, there was a claim in the lead about the album being critically acclaimed and influential, so I am attempting to find sources to uphold those claims; the page I'm requesting here was written by editor from Dying Scene, who called the album the 4th greatest punk rock album of all time. I've had a link from Dying Scene (a review on the album Peace in Our Time) whitelisted before, and this one is rather similar and for a similar use, discussing/demonstrating the critical reception/reputation of an album. (Also, for the record, I do not know why Dying Scene is blacklisted; I also did not see it listed on the Common Requests page.) There isn't a ton of reputable information I can find about the album. I've been scouring reviews, interviews, etc. for information to build the article; if this link is not OK, I can probably find something, but I do think it might be helpful :) Afddiary (talk) 23:11, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @Ohnoitsjamie: You blacklisted dyingscene in November 2009 according to the logfile, but no discussion is linked. Do you recall if there was one? ~Anachronist (talk) 22:09, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There wasn't a discussion; it was one that I'd noticed myself and added to the list after multiple accounts canvassed it. Shortly after, the owner of the site complained here, which further convinced me at the time that the owners of the site were trying to use Wikipedia for SEO. I'm fine with whitelisting when no other sources are available. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:55, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    plus Added to the whitelist, based on the discussion Ohnoitsjamie linked, and the fact that I couldn't find a similar source myself. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:41, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    www.themoviedb.org/person/551566

    [edit]

    I wish to add an image of Toshiharu Ikeda under fair use rationale. I will need to link to where I found the image, and tmdb has the best resolution of it, not too big mind you, that will be later downsized appropriatelly.

    Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 11:22, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. If it's just for describing the source in the image file page, there's no reason to whitelist, just put in the link without the "https" prefix. Also, I don't see any copyright information whatsoever on that site. We cannot assume the images there are reusable here. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:57, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, I didn't know the link would be accepted without the https.
    Just to be clear, you can upload copyrighted material under fair use policy as a mean of identification for a dead person, when there are no other options and such. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 13:40, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Cinemaandpolitics sure, but you should link that to the copyright holder, not to a page that carries the same material under a similar fair use rationale. Dirk Beetstra T C 15:18, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    copyright holder is not known, very very often happens with these kind of photos. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 18:23, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, in this case the original was posted on X .. Dirk Beetstra T C 05:36, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Really? I can't seem to find that. And I've looked! Do you have a link? Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 14:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    https://twitter.com/shinichiwakasa/status/945068053234032645?lang=en. Dirk Beetstra T C 06:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    neat, I've update the description. This didn't show up for me in either a reverse image search, or by looking for "池田敏春" on X. thank you for chipping in. Cinemaandpolitics (talk) 19:46, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    www.kickstarter.com/projects/723609774/hawk-the-hunter

    [edit]

    I am adding text to Hawk the Slayer about the failure of a Kickstarter fundraiser for a sequel to the movie. The only place that I can find the relevant information is on the page for the fundraiser itself. I can infer the reasons for prohibiting links to active Kickstarter fundraisers, but this particular one ended years ago. The Wayback Machine has an archived version of the fundraiser page that would work too, but the format of a Wayback Machine URL includes the address of the original page, so Wikipedia blocks me from including the archived page’s URL here.—Quick and Dirty User Account (talk) 14:43, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined. I am not seeing a reason to whitelist this when other websites exist that reference the kickstarter campaign: this, this, this, and this, for example. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:04, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    blog.naver.com/PostView.nhn?blogId=gcu2010&logNo=221618013170

    [edit]

    This is a blog post confirming that Hwang Hyunjin from Stray Kids attended a Korean private University called global Cyber University. The blog post was made by the verified Naver page of the university therefore I'd like it to be whitelisted to allow me add it as an external link on this Wikipedia page Hwang Hyunjin Fanmadehenecia (talk) 09:17, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    There are alternate sources confirming he attended Cyber University, such as this one as well as his own Facebook page, which is no better than a blog post. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined per Anachronist. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:45, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    kickstarter.com/profile/shem/created

    [edit]

    Draft:Garphill Games talks about the company's success on Kickstarter. This profile page shows all the successfully run campaigns by the company so would be a helpful source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilneozelandese (talk • contribs) 14:42, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Ideally there would be secondary sources discussing those kickstarters and you would use those instead. I see that draft has already been challenged for primary source use, so I won't add this until it's accepted. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:45, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined for now. Feel free to re-request if the draft is approved, and you really can't find secondary sources covering that info. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:03, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    www.onefivenine.com/india/villages/Jodhpur/Bhopalgarh/Devnagar

    [edit]

    I was trying to add a reference to the Wikipedia article: Devnagar. I found a source that contained all the information mentioned in the article, it was a onefivenine.com link. Still, when I tried to add it to the Wikipedia article, they were unable to save the edit because the URL was blacklisted from referencing, which was a problem. After all, that article does not cite any sources and I can't find any perfect sources that support it online, which means we need that source because it's information supports all of that article's information. NicePrettyFlower (talk) 03:57, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @NicePrettyFlower: no Declined. This is not a reliable source, see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive 236#onefivenine.com - broad consensus sought * Pppery * it has begun... 04:02, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes @Pppery, I understand about the information mentioned in the project you mentioned, but the only issue is that I can't any reliable sources out there with the same information, which means this article needs to be nominated for deletion until a reliable source is found. NicePrettyFlower (talk) 04:17, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If you wish to nominate it for deletion then go ahead. Normally WP:GEOLAND says villages are notable, though.
    In any event, citing a blacklisted unreliable source does not help. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But how about I can try to find a reliable source for the article first. If I can find one, it will be added to the article and the article will stay active. If I can't find any reliable sources out there, then I will nominate the article for deletion, until a source is added, the message will be removed. NicePrettyFlower (talk) 04:27, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am trying to find another source to add to the article, but I don't know if it's blacklisted, so how do I check if it's blacklisted? NicePrettyFlower (talk) 04:40, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Probably the easiest way is just to try to add the URL and see if it works. The list of blacklisted domains is publicly available, but it's split across three places (MediaWiki:spam-blacklit, m:Spam blacklist, Special:BlockedExternalDomains) and very large. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:59, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Pppery the 1st link you mentioned about list of blacklisted URLs appears to be misspelled because when I clicked on it, it said that Wikipedia does not have a page with the exact name. NicePrettyFlower (talk) 01:30, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry. I meant to link to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:33, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for adding the correct link. I will try to find the right source to add to that article. If I look for a source, check if it's on the blacklist, but it does not appear on the page, then I will have to try to add that source to see if it's blacklisted. NicePrettyFlower (talk) 01:36, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    www.infowars.com/about

    [edit]

    The link in the Official website template at the bottom of the InfoWars article contains a link to infowars/contributors, which currently does not exist. I'd appreciate it if someone replaces that link with /about, which does exist. While the /about page isn't exactly the most neutral thing out there, it's definitely more neutral than most of the content on that website and isn't unnaceptably problematic in my view. Nythar (💬-🍀) 06:14, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined for now. I'd say let's hold off for a few months. The site is in flux since theonion.com acquired it, and it is going to be shut down and resurrected in 2025. Let's see what they do with it first. In the meantime, we could probably whitelist an archived page, like the contributors page that no longer exists. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:26, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The existing whitelisting of the /contributors already covers archived versions: https://web.archive.org/web/20200831191205/https://www.infowars.com/contributors/ * Pppery * it has begun... 06:31, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've replaced the dead link with that archive link. Side note: a judge has paused the purchase and it is currently under review, so Alex Jones is still the website's operator at the moment. We'll see what happens in the future. Nythar (💬-🍀) 06:38, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    www.change.org/p/a-call-for-justin-welby-to-resign

    [edit]

    Hi, I would like to request the petition on change.org for the resignation of Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury, to be whitelisted. I'd like to use the link on Makin Review which I have just created, and add it to Archbishop of Canterbury and Justin Welby. The creation of a petition calling for an archbishop's resignation was extremely notable, especially as (1) it was started by three clergymen in his province, (2) it received widespread coverage in many reputable media outlets, and (3) he did resign just a few days later. Being able to reference it directly will (in my view) improve Wikipedia. I am aware that change.org is listed under common requests to be denied, but in this instance, I believe it is an exceptional situation. This petition was closely associated with a significant event that was without precedent and will be studied for many years to come. The page on change.org includes the creators' reasons why they felt Welby should resign and so it is highly relevant to understanding this historic event. Hence I believe it should be allowed. If the link is whitelisted, I will also add some secondary sources about the petition to confirm its notability. SmilingFace (talk) 20:31, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @SmilingFace: no Declined Wikipedia is not an advocacy venue, as linking to an active petition would inevitably be (I'm not claiming that's what you're trying to do, I'm claiming it's what the effect would be). If you have secondary sources describing the petition's significance, you can just link to those instead. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:55, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, This is not about advocacy. Whilst the petition is technically still active, it is no longer relevant as Welby has said he will resign. This news is so notable that it is still on the front page of Wikipedia, despite it being 5 days old now! I have added some secondary sources referencing the petition, but none contain the text of what the petition's creators actually wrote, which is historically significant in a digital age. So being able to link it will improve our articles about this important event. It's a bit like linking to one of Donald Trump's tweets, which are similarly of historic significance and allowed. Please can you reconsider. SmilingFace (talk) 21:42, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Again, no Declined. If none of the sources referencing the petition found the actual text in it important enough to quote, why should Wikipedia make the opposite editorial judgment? We shouldn't need to link to Trump's tweets either, especially when they are widely quoted. The fact that we do link to them is a reason to remove them, not a reason to compound the problem with similar links to petition. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:28, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    [edit]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist&oldid=1258763042"