Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:07, 19 March 2007

snippet for logging: {{/request|116178224#section_name}}

Proposed additions to Whitelist (sites to unblock)

Please check the site before to say no.

hometown.aol.de/tmirabeau/TA_11C.html

hometown.aol.de is blocked. Could this particular personal site be unblocked as it's the only site I've come across that has info about rare Citroen cars, and I'd like to cite it as a source. Adrian Robson 17:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I can't read this page, but from the context and apearences it seems to be ok. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 16:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

 Not done - editor is inactive and request has gone stale. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 01:19, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

An ice hockey fan site

I wanted to edit the article on HC Pardubice, a Czech ice hockey team, but the spam filter denied me to do so, because somebody had included an external link www.mujweb.cz/Sport/hcpardubice/ . However, it links the article to a fan site of the team, which is relevant for the article and so I believe it should stay. Therefore I ask you to include this particular site in the whitelist. Jan.Kamenicek 01:14, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I can't evaluate this request at this time... company firewall blocks the page. I'll check it out latter when I get home. (mental note to self...) ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 16:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

 Not done - dead link. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 01:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

chernobrov. and torsionfraud.narod.ru

Appears that narod.ru is now blacklisted due to spamming. Article on Vadim Chernobrov points to external links, a few to his own website on chernobrov.narod.ru (albeit in Russian). The other points to criticisms of his work on torsionfraud.narod.ru. There is no spam evident there. Please investigate and add the domains. Chikinsawsage 04:18, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I can't really evaluate these pages. I don't speak Russian and neither would load for me just now. I'll try again latter. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 16:22, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure you are at the right wiki? —— Eagle101 17:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

 Not done - request is stale and editor is inactive. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 01:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

xoomer.alice.it/kxqjfe/dialetweb/main.htm

This links to an Italian-Bergamasque dictionary. It is a useful resource for Eastern Lombard dialect. There are not so many on-line resources for Bergamasque vocabularies and this is quite complete and interesting. It is also useful if one wants to compare Bergamasque with Brescian, this last being used as reference variety in the examples in the Eastern Lombard article. Ninonino 09:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

On what article would this link be of use on? —— Eagle101 03:19, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Northwestern State University

Entry for editing this site is blocked for some reason. Please remove the barrier.

Billy Hathorn 23:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Whats the URL for the page? ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 21:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

 Not done - Not enough information has been provided. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 01:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Yelena Zamolodchikova

I need to add the following link for the gymnast Elena Zamolodchikova: freehost26.websamba.com/Zamtastic

It contains many infos, news and results about this gymnast that I added in this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/Elena_Zamolodchikova

So I think it is correct to add this website to the sources for that wikipedia page. The main news are here: freehost26.websamba.com/Zamtastic/zamtastic.asp?go=2005 freehost26.websamba.com/Zamtastic/zamtastic.asp?go=2006 but there are usefull informations about this gymnast all over that website.

thanx Ale72 11:25, 12 January 2007 (UTC)Ale72

Can I have a reply? That website is still in the black list! Ale72 11:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)Ale72

I'm trying to clear the blacklist now... I'll get to it in the next few days. Sorry for the delay. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 16:34, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

A minor note, the site that is actually on the blacklist is websamba.com. So I'm assuming this is a subdomain of this. —— Eagle101 20:24, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that website is a subdomain of websamba.com. I hope this is not a problem. The best thing would be to clear the blacklist only for that subdomain (freehost26.websamba.com/Zamtastic) keeping banned the websamba server. I mean that on websamba there can be some websites that deserve to stay in the blacklist, but this subdomain is related to the wikipedia page so it should stay out of the blacklist. Ale72

Well I notice this is an "Unofficial website". Is there any relevent details here that we can use? Right now all I see is a home page saying that she was injured for 3 months, and that they wish her well... not exactly useful as a source or anything. I apologize for the delays in my replies, but we are slowly clearing this backlog... its down to 28 sections! —— Eagle101 03:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

It looks like there are some interviews and picture gallery's on the page that might be usable as a source. I'm inclined to add this one, but I'm not sure. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 12:31, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's an "Unofficial website" since she doesn't have any official website,but it's the best sourse available on the web. There are all the details available, that are picture galleries about all the competitions she goes, interviews, videos and detailed reports about all she does each year: see freehost26.websamba.com/Zamtastic/zamtastic.asp?go=2005 for the 2005 and freehost26.websamba.com/Zamtastic/zamtastic.asp?go=2005 for the 2006. The only thing is that there are no real news since christmas, but that only because the gymnastic season is stopped in january and february (major competitions will start in the middle of march). Anyway that website is weekly updated (you can see the updates here: freehost26.websamba.com/Zamtastic/zamtastic.asp?go=about&doc=upd) Ale72

Are the other editors of the article ok with adding this link? —— Eagle101 23:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Me of course... :-p Ale72

hometown.aol.de/Stojanaurel/bluemoon.htm

This link should be Whitelisted: hometown.aol.de/Stojanaurel/bluemoon.htm —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.19.221.74 (talk • contribs) 07:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

FYI: see User:Naconkantari/sbl. The m:Spam blacklist listing that includes the hometown.aol.de domain notes:

• ##The reasons for adding the links below are located at http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Naconkantari/sbl
• ##When disabling anything in this section, *please* leave me a note on my talk page so I can update my version.
  • That page, User:Naconkantari/sbl, points to a diff that shows spamming from this subdomain: hometown.aol.de/insuransse/

--A. B. 13:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

What article do you intend to use the link in? —— Eagle101 03:13, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

http://www . w9rh . org/Documents/MRACHistory2006.pdf

Unblock this please it is legitimately listed in a citeweb. It worked fine earlier today, but when editing the page later the block comes up. I don't understand why the page is listed at all, but since Dealing with the block list page requires a series of steps includign singing up with a username and password, I am asking this file be whitelisted. Anonym1ty 22:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you please tell me on what article this is for? —— Eagle101 03:12, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

This was fixed already thank you. Just FYI the article was South Jersey Radio Association. This can be closed out. But thanks for the follow up Anonym1ty 22:19, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, this is  Not done as it was fixed by other means other then this list. Cheers! —— Eagle101 05:11, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

blog.myspace.com/101566922

This page, created and maintained by Peter Christopherson, was previously used as a source for that article. Not having the ability to use this as a source hurts the strength of the article as it is written, and I wouldn't be surprised if it would be useful for future edits. --Jackhorkheimer 01:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Because of the funny way myspace does things we will need the specific links your planning on using as sources so we can whitelist them. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

You also might want to consider using proper citations, for instructions on how to get started with that see WP:CITE. Do try to make sure that you use reliable sources. —— Eagle101 21:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

When you say "specific link" do you mean the specific blog post or a different link to the blog? I was hoping to be able to use the entire blog, since I imagine there might be other useful information for primary source citations, but I guess it won't be too bad doing one request for each link (so long as this page doesn't get backlogged again). --notJackhorkheimer 03:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I let jack know we were talking about his request. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 14:11, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Sloche Brand Candy Site

I propose that the following site should be allowed on the Whitelist: bonbonsloche.awardspace.com (preceded by http://). I believe that visitors to the related Misplaced Pages article might benefit from and enjoy seeing actual examples of the candies. The site includes actual pictures of the candy packages - this is useful as merely stating in the Misplaced Pages article that the candy packaging is weird and was actually in one case banned, piques curiosity and visitors might like to see what the actual packages look like. These packages are no longer available for sale in Quebec so the bonbonsloche.awardspace.com website is the only place they can now be seen. Signed: 66.36.128.112 03:18, 28 January 2007 (UTC) (4 tildes)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.36.128.112 (talk) 03:15, 28 January 2007 (UTC).

So perhaps upload a few of the images as free images (if possible) or if not, upload them as fairuse, for articles that need the images. What articles is this needed in anyway? —— Eagle101 03:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm inclined to grant this request. Even if we get permission to upload the photos to wikipedia we would needed to get it white listed to add source information to the picture pages. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 12:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, consider this  Done. —— Eagle101 23:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Just a note, when you do add the link, please use the version without frames, the frames really mucked up my browser (FF2). Thanks —— Eagle101 23:29, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Ency. Drama.

I attempted to post a link to this site in the Culture jamming article. I thought that it seemed a very good example of the subject, as it provided satire and opposing views using the same format as that of the things being jammed. I was directed to a spam policy statement that had a links to further information. I read through a great deal of the material that related to the site in question, and see that there is great controversy with links to the site. Controversy is the purpose of cultural jamming. The article on cultural jamming will never be considered comprehensive as long as prime examples are prohibited from being discussed. Partial comphrensiveness does not exist, a body of work IS comprehensive or it IS NOT. Attacks are to be expected whenever a person or organization maintains a public profile, especially when that organization is widely known for urging participation from anyone who is able to access the internets. People who partake of public activities should expect that satire is part of public life, especially those who have accepted the public domain contribution policy. Surely there is a better way to deal with the problem than pretending that it does not exist. Sweeping a problem under the rug, especially a problem as hot as this one, will usually result with your house burning down.

My specific request is that the link, or some type of reference to the site in question, be allowed specifically for the culture jamming article. I do not care about the other articles and am not asking that the blacklist be completely listed. Fastplanet 07:50, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

As a source Encyclopedia Dramatica does not qualify as reliable. As an example of "cultural jamming" the site is non-notable. As a link the website fails our external link guidelines in five or six different ways.

Comprehensiveness? Perhapses I should refer you to the policy on what wikipedia is not.

I'm not even going to get into the ArbCom ban on any external link to the site...

For now, consider this request  Not done. This is not the venue to accomplish what your looking to accomplish. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 16:34, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Neosmut.com

Trying to add link to www.neosmut.com - it is a paintball team and I am trying to add it to the Scenario Paintball Team post. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.51.14.44 (talk • contribs) 01:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

(moved) Why would the article benefit from this link? Or is this a case that the linked-to website will benefit more then wikipedia? ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 12:35, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

•  Not done due to lack of information. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 16:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

www.xs4all.nl/~wichm/cinelist.html

Trying to make an unrelated edit to Movie projector, this page hits the spam blacklist because xs4all\.nl\/\~wichm was added to the blacklist on 12 Jan, apparently because wichm was guilty of wikispam. This link does look related to the topic to me, it seems to be a fairly comprehensive list of film projector types, and there are no similar links to comprehensive lists. Jhawkinson 10:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 Done on my next update. I don't think the list would really be a reliable source, but it seems to be a useful external link. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 16:58, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

oseculoprodigioso.blogspot.com

This site seems harmless, is not selling anything, has a very rich collection of artwork examples for famous and respected artists; the fact that the text is Portugese seems immaterial since all that viewers will want to do is look at the artworks. Additional comments from editors favoring unblocking can be found in the blacklist Talk]. Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't understand why the site should not be available in all languages. Please unblock from all languages. --CliffC 17:05, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to edit Keith Haring, but am holding off because I'd have to drop this link to an extensive collection of his works to save the article – a net loss. --05:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I have been blocked from editing 2 pages in the last 2 days on this - whats the problem. Illustrations are good. Johnbod 08:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the language of the site is immaterial. No-one was using that as an argument for blacklisting.

I'm looking into this further... It looks like the sites creator spammed the link across multiple language wikis using multiple IP addresses. Blacklisting was the only way to get it to stop.

I'd be willing to add a particular deeplink to the whitelist if you want, but I don't see any reason to white-list the entire page given it's history. For now I'm going to decline this request untill further information is provided.

CliffC, if you wish for it to be unblocked wikipedia-wide, please request that at meta, not here. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 15:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

He already did, see this. —— Eagle101 18:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I have been wondering how to request something at meta, and now I find I've done so already. But my main and perhaps selfish concern is to get this site off the blacklist for the English Misplaced Pages, whatever that takes.

When I noticed these links being added I issued a friendly warning here, but later that day it had grown to this collection, several more of which I believe were reverted by another editor, but I'm guessing he then went to the user page to issue a warning,saw mine and left the rest alone.

I don't follow every artist, only about 20 or so, so I'm not aware of any user beyond the one listed above adding such links. I haven't the tools to look for others.

If you look at my past edits, you will see that I am an unlikely person to plead for the life of a spammer; however I am asking that the site be spared the blacklist, in at least the English Misplaced Pages, because of its exceptional value as an art resource. If you surveyed a few of the regular contributors to the art articles this link was added to, I believe they also would wish the links to remain. Take a look at oseculoprodigioso.blogspot.com/search?q=matisse&x=76&y=7 as an example; there are several Matisse works shown there I have never seen before.

His links point to a different page for each artist, on the same site. Annoying as it might be to see so many links added pointing to one site, I'm hoping we can WP:AGF, this is an enthusiastic art lover who is justifiably proud of his site. Thanks for considering this. --CliffC 19:43, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Do keep in mind adding links to a site that you own or are affiliated with can be seen as a conflict of interest. —— Eagle101 20:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

 Not done though if you can prove copyright ownership or suitable license and undertake not to add directly but to discuss on talk pages, I'll reconsider. -- Heligoland 01:54, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I have pulled this item back from the archives temporarily to add my overdue comments. Firstly, perhaps my defense of the site did not make it sufficiently clear that I have absolutely no affiliation with the site or its owner; a casual reader might think I did, based on the above reference to WP:COI. I am merely an admirer of the site's collection. Indeed, if we strung up everyone here who had a WP:COI we would soon run out of trees. Secondly, I have spent most of my working life learning which levers to pull to get things done in various bureaucracies, and I don't care to learn which ones it takes here to "prove copyright ownership or suitable license". Yes, I know, WP:NOT a bureaucracy. It's unfortunate that none of the admins involved have recognized the value of the site – repeating something I said earlier, "If you surveyed a few of the regular contributors to the art articles this link was added to, I believe they also would wish the links to remain." It seems spiteful to blacklist a valuable collection (admittedly one only housed on a blog) to punish a spammer. That's all I have to say, now I'll leave the issue alone. I lose, but so does Misplaced Pages. --CliffC 16:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok... I can accept the site might have a ton of value... but the point of the whitelist is not to undermine or override the blacklist. The whitelist is to turn the nuke that is the blacklist into a finely tuned tool. I'm more then happy to whitelist a series of useful deep-links if you want to provide a list... But if you want to de-blacklist the page, this is not the venue to have that discussion.

Blacklisting isn't done to punish, it is done to prevent further damage. Please try not do demean the entire anti-spam effort by attacking it like this. We can discuss this here like reasonable adults. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 16:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Looking into this a little further it appears most (80-90%) of the images are in the public domain... however, some of the images (The Goat and the Flowers for example) are published recently enough to still be under copyright. The blog could probably qualify under a fair use claim however. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 16:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I see a ray of sunshine here, thank you for the explanation, J.S. Apologies to all for letting my frustration show through. Would it make sense for me to copy this whole section over to http://meta.wikimedia.org/Talk:Spam_blacklist as a request to remove the site from the blacklist? TIA for any advice. --CliffC 21:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

gamesff.com

This website was added to the spamlist. I requested a remove, bit they sayed, that I should make a request to add the site to the whitelist instead.

The reason why I wanted this website to be removed form the spamlist was: I don't know abpout the other links to this page, but at least the one which was used at the wikipedia-article tetris www.gamesff.com/classic/tetris.html leads to a very good tetris clone which can be played online, so I don' thinkt its spam. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MrBurnns (talk • contribs) 12:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC).

 Not done Sorry, cross-wiki spam attack has lead this site to be banned on every wikipedia-related website. At the risk of assuming bad faith, is this your website? I notice this is your only edits here on wikipedia. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 22:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

No, it is not my website. I also have done othe redits on the english wikipedia, but this was before I registered. I also never used the IP-address 62.90.5.197. -MrBurnns 09:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

wga.hu

This was unmotivated blacklisted. It's a famous webart gallery webpage with over 10 million visitors. I request it to become whitelisted again. There is art in there which is relevant to the Crown of Immortality article. Of course I wonder why this was site was blacklisted! --Roberth Edberg 19:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

"Unmotivated" it certainly isn't. The website was blacklisted because of cross-wiki spam. (See the blacklist for more info)

That article doesn't exist...However, Crown of Immortality does and that seems to be the article your talking about. It looks like it's currently being discussed at AFD. (AFD). I'd really rather see the AFD resolved before I whitelist any particular page on the domain.

That being said, I don't see any problem with the site itself... It looks to be entirely free, no advertising and contains wonderful images of classical art. Eagle, you were the one who blacklisted the page... can you provide some more information on this? Thanks, ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 22:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

The article (Crown of Immortality) certainly won't be deleted. It's seems to be conspirative speculations which has caused it to be AFD tagged, but it will surely pass. The article just needs a better structure. However the argument about AFD should not affect the webart site, which is a really good website for art lovers. A good referens source! --Roberth Edberg 22:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I have restricted the size of the blacklist, it is now just \bwga\.hu\/html\/t\/tintoret instead of \bwga\.hu . This may or may not fix the problem in this instance, but the cross wiki spammer was only adding that small section of the site, and I did not notice that at the time of the original blacklisting. —— Eagle101 23:12, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Roberth Edberg, does that let you use the links you need to use? ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 23:45, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Yep, Thanx. --89.233.213.145 05:27, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

 Not done - as this was just a problem with the blacklist. —— Eagle101 21:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Nozomsite

Please I request adding (www.geocities.com/nozomsite) to the whitelist as it can be useful in such the follwing topics:

http://en.wikipedia.org/PIC16x84 http://en.wikipedia.org/PIC_microcontroller http://en.wikipedia.org/Parallel_port

Thank you. (196.219.174.253 22:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC))

Please also see, this. Another admin needs to have a look see at this, as I cannot accept or refuse this request due to conflict of interest issues. In any case, this needs a few eyes other then my own ;) —— Eagle101 00:46, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

 Not done - site apears to fail WP:EL. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 17:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean by fail!. The website is running.

It fails the external links guidelines. The site appears to copy content directly from , with extra added advertising. -- zzuuzz 12:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

anarkismo.net

This site is an international anarchist communist news site containing over 5,000 articles. I can see no reason for it to be blocked in particular as it contains online reproductions of many anarchist related articles not available elsewhere as well as news and historical pieces. Thia makes it useful to a large range of pages but in particular the ones that relate to anarchism.

Declaration of interest - I am one of the 15 or so editors of the Anarkismo.net site

AndrewFleming72 13:27, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Just some added information the site was blacklisted due to cross wiki spam. (see here). As I did the original blacklisting I will leave it up to someone else to figure out if a whitelist is appropriate here or not. —— Eagle101 21:57, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Ah thanks - The IP address of the spammer is Dutch, we have no editors in the Netherlands. I have also asked if any Anarkismo editors have been adding links to wikipedia, it turns out I am the only one who has (and as you'll see from my history this has I think been where they are relevent). I also note the same IP address was used to get nefac.net blacked, NEFAC is a north American anarchist organisation so likewise it is odd for someone in the Netherlands to do this especially with a range of non-English wiki pages as the target. My initial suspicion was that this was someone hostile to anarkismo.net being clever, this tends to re-enforce that opinion. This was why I requested white listing. AndrewFleming72 13:54, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Can you give us some examples of where that site specifically must be linked to? It was previously blacklisted for cross-wiki spam, and whitelisting is generally not done without a good reason. Veinor 21:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

In terms of existing links there is one on the Anarchism page (in the section on Platformism) linking to a the text of a 1926 pamphlet that is on Anarkismo. There are two in the external links section of the page on Platformism - this makes sense as Anarkismo is a global news hub for Platformist groups. A footnote in the critique section of the Anarcho-primitivism page did link to an article on Anarkismo but that footnote is now labelled '(deleted spam-filtered link)'. In terms of where people might find it useful to link that is an open question, Anarkismo has over 5,000 individual articles covering a large range of topics and regions. For instance I'm in Ireland and the site includes a number of detailed articles on Irish history as well as reproductions of texts from periods in Irish history back to the 1860's ( see http://www.anarkismo.net/index.php?topic=history&region=irelandbritain ). Someone editing an Irish history related page might find these relevent enough to use as a source. AndrewFleming72 13:54, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, we prefer to white-list indivisual links and not entire domains - expecialy when spam is involved.

It would also be helpfull to give us a list of where you intend to use the link. It makes it easyer to decide if the site passes WP:EL or WP:RS. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 02:28, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Follow up - I don't see that EN:wiki was part of the spam campaign and the site looks good enough that at least the conversation over weather or not it is a reliable source should be had. I'm very inclined to whitelist the domain or recommend the domain be taken off the blacklist in a week or so. What are your thoughts Eagle? ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Anarkismo.net is linked from Ethel MacDonald as a reference, specifically this page: http://www.XXXSPAMFILTERanarkismo.net/newswire.php?story_id=3286 It really seems odd to blacklist anarkismo, and to request that each individual page referenced in wikipedia be whitelisted seems tedious, and a drag on the editing page. For instance, I was just trying to fix a spelling mistake on the Ethel MacDonald page, and now that can't be fixed without removing the anarkismo link! PvH 7:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.38.142.67 (talk • contribs) 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Mmmm ok, I can remove it from the blacklist, but if we get spam again, we might have to just whitelist the domain here on this wiki, and hope the spammers don't strike here. —— Eagle101 21:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks like this has been resolved. I'm going to mark this as  Not done since it was fixed though removing the entry in the blacklist. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 20:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

bharatatatparyanirnaya.122mb.com

It contains English Translation of Mahabhartatha one of the greatest epic of Hindu religions . It contains translation of Mahabhartata Tatparya Nirnaya composed by Madhvacharya one among greatest reformers during 12 and 13th centuries in South India. It is hard work and effort of translating 5000 verses to English. It does not contain any pirated material or abusive material..

Are these reasons sufficient to unblock it ?

If yes - THankyou Very Much If No - Thanks again.. I will not make any more efforts to explain it further.

216.9.243.103 18:46, 28 February 2007 (UTC) Harshala

122mb.com seems to be a free-website host. I could see why it was blacklisted. However, I wasn't able to track down the original request in the blacklist so I'm not sure what the reason was.

However, the page in question looks fine. It has no advertising and I don't see it pushing any particular agenda. However, I'm fairly ignorant of the subject so I could have missed something.

The only concern I have is weather or not it should be considered a reliable source. If the page's own stat counter and the fact that it's on a free web-host are indicators of anything, it indicates that the website doesn't receive the kind of traffic you would expect from an authoritative web page. I'm leaning towards listing this page, but it would be nice to have some more input from people who are more knowledgeable about the subject. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 07:40, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Are there any other sites that contain the same material? -- zzuuzz 18:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know... But thats not realy the deciding factor. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

No, but probably of interest. -- zzuuzz 18:47, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

you could check http://www.dvaita.org/sources/mbtn/ - where there is sanskrit original of the script

you can also check http://mahabharata-resources.org/mbtntrans/mbtntrans.html which essentially takes to the same website... I just wanted it to be listed on its own as well .. also add the page ud\nder reference for various Madhva sections on wikepedia 216.9.243.103 21:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC)harshala —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.9.243.103 (talk) 21:07, 6 March 2007 (UTC).

fisheaters.com

Help:Circle of stars

The article Circle of stars reports (when try to re-save), that fisheaters.com is blacklisted even if it's not in the article. How come? --Roberth Edberg 14:35, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Works fine for me. Try purging your cache? Veinor 15:55, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

• Link was in a ref tag, should not have saved. I have asked about this at meta. Article is now fixed, this request can probably be closed. Guy (Help!) 16:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Yep, you can drop my entry here. --Roberth Edberg 20:40, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

• Ok,  Not done then. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 21:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

tinyurl.com

Hi there. I'd like to request that http:// tinyurl.com / 253 (w/o the spaces;) is whitelisted, as I feel that The Book of Mozilla will benefit. As you may know already, TinyURL allows sites to be linked to by another means. Generally people use this to shorten large URLs to smaller (tiny) ones. In this case, I would like to use it to direct to about:mozilla Now, current wiki markup doesn't allow for about: links to be placed, and the Book of Mozilla's article I feel would benefit from a link to the page where the 'book' originally is. This would also allow Internet Explorer users to see if their about:mozilla is a bluescreen or blank etc. etc. the fun is endless. Now I can only guess why tinyurl has been blocked, but this provides a way for a direct redirect (if that makes any sense) from a reliable source that looks to be around for ages to be given. Finally, if you know of a way to link to about:mozilla without tinyurl, all the better. Please contact me through my talk page if you have a way to do this, or will/won't unblock this page. Thanks for listening ;)--]</sup>]] 22:35, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

 Not done - Tinyurl.com was blocked because it is a redirect website. It was used extensively as a way to bypass the blacklist. I'm not sure I feel confortable whitelisting any link from that website since things can be changed so easily. Also, you are better off using a screenshot and describing, in prose, how someone with the right browser can access the site. Not all browsers are able to see the page... Infact, the majority don't. So... yeah, a screeshot.

Oh, on a side note, this isn't the right section for this kind of request. Not a big deal, just a FYI for next time. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 22:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reasons and patience, so sorry about putting the section in the wrong place (I hope that it's better here). Still, I think that if it could be included (and yes, the tinyurl workaround was a little unclean), a link to about:mozilla would be nice on the page.

Still, thanks again, and I accept your reasons fully.

--xensyria 21:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Information on trade of Ryan Smyth

I wanted to post an external link that provides detail into the trade of Ryan Smyth to New York but the site is blacklisted It would contribute to the bio of Ryan Smyth

national-hockey-league-nhl.suite101.com/article.cfm/all_is_good_on_the_island —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bure pavel96 (talk • contribs) 21:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC).

 Not done - I don't see how Shawn MacDonald is a reliable source as a 1 time contributer to Suite101 and I am very suspicions of new accounts that make whitelisting requests. It's very likly that that link fails WP:EL as well. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 21:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Whitelist request for Hellfire Club link page

Cypherpress 00:51, 10 March 2007 (UTC) Cypherpress freemasonrywatch.org/hellfire.html Hell-Fire Club, Masonic Deism, Dashwood, Franklin, and the Black Mass - a very well-researched, VERY reliable article about the Hellfire Club

Not that it's relevant or anything, but are you aware that the page has more google adverts then the google TOS says is permissible? That could get the account blocked and any income owed unpaid. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 03:15, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Cypherpress 12:21, 12 March 2007 (UTC)Cypherpress I wasn't aware of that part - the ads on the page seem mostly innocuous though - the usual amateur web designer's desperate webring stuff. However if that's the reason, and notwithstanding that i think it really is a good, balanced piece, it's good enough for me. How come it wouldn't be relevant?

My meaning was that my comment was irrelevant to the discussion at hand. It's just a point of interest to those who fight spam.

Onto the more relevant questions at hand: Who is the author of the essay? I see his name there, but who is he? Is he a notable scholar in the field of Masonic study? Basicly, does the website pass to the guidelines setforth in WP:RS. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 15:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Cypherpress 10:20, 14 March 2007 (UTC)Cypherpress No idea - the piece does seem to have been published, in Gnosis magazine, of which I had not heard. (www.lumen.org and www.gnosis.org tell something about it). I have no time for gnostics or masonry and absolutely no desire to give madmen the oxygen of publicity, so I'm happy to drop it - it's just that a lot of rubbish is talked about the Hellfire club and this author does a lot to cut through it (while admittedly adding a little of his own...).

Whitelist request for Sri Sathya Sai Book Centre website link

Link for whitelist consideration: srisathyasaibookcentre.org.uk

Page to use the link on: en.wikipedia.org/Sathya_Sai_Baba

Why the link would be useful to the encyclopedia article proper:

The website in question serves two functions:

a. It represents the Sri Sathaya Sai Book Centre (SSSBC), based in London - the only Sri Sathya Sai Book Shop or Centre in Europe with its own premises. The Book Centre also ships Sathya Sai books to parties all over the world; with books in various ethnic languages, the Book Centre is the only such provider in the West that stocks Sathya Sai books in Hindi, Gujarati and Chinese.

b. It provides a wealth of information and resources about Sri Sathya Sai Baba, his life and his message. This information complements the Misplaced Pages resource as it provides devotees with direction and help, especially with regard to visiting the Ashram. See for example: srisathyasaibookcentre.org.uk/ashram-going-to-the-ashram1.php

The reasons given for blacklisting this website are that:

1. It is not an official Sri Sathya Sai website 2. It is not an International Sri Sathya Sai website 3. It a commercial entity

In dealing with each, we hope to show that that the SSSBC website is a valuable resource to Misplaced Pages users and should be reinstated in the stated Misplaced Pages page

1. The SSSBC is entirely owned by the Sri Sathya Sai UK Trust (SSUT), which is the official charity of the Sri Sathya Sai UK Organisation, and recognised by the Charity Commission. The website in question represents the SSSBC and therefore represents an official Sri Sathya Sai body under the auspices of the Sri Sathya Sai Seva Organisation in India.

2. Whilst the SSSBC is located in London, it provides resources to interested parties all over the world. However, in order to accommodate the stated objection, a 'Regional' section of the stated Misplaced Pages page was set up. However, it seems this change did not satisfy the stated objections.

3. The SSSBC is owned by the SSUT, so it is in no way a commercial entity - it is part of a charitable trust. The main function of the SSSBC is to make Sai Baba's message freely available to the general public. The fact that the SSSBC sells books should be seen to conflict with this function, but in fact supports it. Any revenue from the sale of books goes directly to the SSUT. The SSSBC is also subsidised by the SSUT to cover the operating losses. 89.243.90.190 18:22, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the site was blacklisted because of a persistent campaign by a single editor to add the link in contravention to blocks and warnings. You can see the real reasons outlined on the MetaBlacklist.

Consider this to be  Not done until there is a consensus of the editors at Sathya Sai Baba for inclusion of these links.

In addition, if you disagree with a blacklisting I would recommend placing your protest on the blacklist page and not here. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 15:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Frances Isabella Duberly

This Suite101 link appears to have been a legitimate citation in the article. -- Zanimum 15:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

The link you are requesting to be added is "www.suite101.com/article.cfm/crimean_war/108572/1"

 Not done The article was writen by "John Barham". As far as I can tell, Mr. Barham is not a reliable source on the topic of Frances Isabella Duberly. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 01:28, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Brock Lesnar

I would like to add a new box to that page but i cant do so beacuse of this spam-protection. OC 10:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

What is the address you want added to the spam-whitelist? ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 01:30, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

 Not done - never mind, requester is indefblocked. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 01:32, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Zod

I move to add the following URL to the white list: zodgaming.zapto.org. It seems that the entire zapto.org domain is currently blacklisted. In the Zod article, the author gets around it by simply bolding the URL but not properly linking it, but that's a big of an ugly (not to mention un-clickable) hack. I'm not involved with the game or the article, but just happened upon it looking for something else. Thanks! Revaaron 19:04, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

 Not done That article looks like it was created as an advertisement and I doubt very much that the article itself would survive a AFD. (It could be speedied under #A7 perhaps). I'll let others make that move, but I don't think white-listing the link would be prudent at this time. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 14:19, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

touregypt.net

The following reference was removed from Egyptian Railways: touregypt.net/featurestories/trainmuseum.htm because touregypt.net is a blacklisted hyperlink. Unfortunately the removal of the link leaves the article without the critical reference that is needed in three now unsupported assertions. I request to allow the link to be reestablished. A similar issue has been created for Statue of Ramesses II (Mit Rahina) where the removal of touregyt.net compromises the reference. Thank you. Ekem 12:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'm looking into this... apparently the domain was blacklisted due to "cross wiki spam" ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 14:22, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

KyraVixen removed the links with this edit. "m (Removing external link: *.touregypt.net -- per external link guidelines)". It looks like she removed two links in the external link section (both would have failed WP:EL in the context they were used) along with the citation to trainmuseum.htm.

So the question remains... is that website a reliable source? I think it's close enough for now. Consider the request to add touregypt.net/featurestories/trainmuseum.htm  Done. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 14:29, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

removed domain as it is a clear violation of WP:EL WP:SPAM Betacommand 04:04, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Again

I am trying to 'profundicate' the wiki info on Egyptian dynasties. Unfortunately, one of the best, (most informative), sites is at TourEgypt. The specific page is: hdyn12.htm The general page is: ehistory.htm I am moving this one slot up the list, because there it will follow another conflict regarding this same site. SMOMMSSSmommss 17:16, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Whats the exact address you need whitelisted? If you don't put the "http://" on the front it will let you post the link. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

DO NOT WHITELIST TOUREGYPT.NET thank you Betacommand 04:15, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Are you making that proclamation under the authority of The Board on pain of desysoping or is that your personal opinion? ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 05:22, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I am looking around the site now and while it has some good information, it is mostly a blog site and seeming to want to sell me stuff. I would probably wait a few more days and ask around to see if this is worth white listing or not. User:Zscout370 07:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

take a look at the site, its advertisement with a little non original research. we can get the information in those pages with a little digging that doesn't provide them with free advertisement and profit. Betacommand 12:39, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I have looked Beta. I don't whitelist any page without careful consideration and I don't appreciate being talked down-to.

I would appreciate my question answered before we can continue this conversation... Is your proclamation of "Do not whitelist..." a directive from the board or is it your personal opinion? I'm not being sarcastic here... your answer makes a difference in the direction this conversation will head. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 14:35, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

But really, what, if any, assertion of authority or notability does TourEgypt provide? It seems like another tourism site, as far as I can tell. Shadow1 (talk) 14:47, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

We aren't trying to write an article on TourEgypt... people want to use it for some fairly uncontroversial sources. The site might not be a reliable source, but my choice was based on the idea that it was close enough that the regular editors at the article should make the call and have the discussion. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 15:22, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

No this discusion is a end run attemt at forking and bypassing the sbl. it was placed there for a reason and that argument is ongoing there this request to whitelist pages is just a way to ignore the reasons that it was SBL'ed I do not speak for the board I never said that I did. Betacommand 04:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

India Financial Markets

The site indiafinancialmarkets.blogspot.com is blocked. This is the only site that I have come across that gives a regular (weekly) update on the performance of major stock indices of the world. I wanted to add it to the page on stock indices of the world. Request you to unblock the same. Regds Somusk 08:21, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

 Not doneI'm sorry, but that website does not seem to pass the requirements in WP:EL. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

www.ruswar.com

Propose to unblock this site on pages:

http://en.wikipedia.org/War_photography

http://en.wikipedia.org/Salang_tunnel

http://en.wikipedia.org/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan

• I have moved this request by 216.244.26.42 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) to the bottom of the list. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:11, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

According to the blacklist request here this IP address has spammed this website across many different language wikis. Consider this request to be  Not done for now. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

This is true. This subject was discussed on blacklist discussion room. What is the promblem with photography? The site exists as a Collection of Afghanistan War Photography/Documentary and dos not make language difficulty for international users. There is no another site like this one can offer international users visual source of Afghanistan-Soviet war. The forementioned site can not be a spam to the due no commercial interests, advertising goods or politics. I know, there is no equel site like ruswar.com even in Ru-Net. I want you understand, I'v been on that war, I know this subject. It is not spam - it is a history, memory and notice for the people around the world. Check Ruswar.com youself - any critics will be accepted.

The problem isn't the website... the problem is how you are abusing wikipedia to promote your website. If you wish to share your pictures please release them under GFDL and upload them to wikipedia-commons. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 05:01, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Now it is clear. The problem is common human envy, then somebody does better then you. You want me to upload the whole photo/video collection under wikipedia logo? That's what you mean? At first, I do not promote anything, neither my website nor pictures. Promotion is - to attempt to sell or raise in position for further sale. I do charity work spending my own time and finance, because it is my obligation to the people who died on that war. Second, it is not me who abuse Misplaced Pages. Very few individuals, who became Wiki-Admins, begun to abuse the power which other people entrusted them. I think it is time to review qualification of wiki-admins and they ability to perform such work.

blog.myspace.com/firerescuelieut

I understand why MySpace links are blocked on articles as they are strictly for social networking and really do not have a place in an actual article. With that being said, I had this link on my personal information page where it was removed by one of the article reviewers. It was very relevant to my personal information page as it is a running journal of my firefighting activities. This is supposed to be a page explaining me and what I am about, and this journal is a significant part of what I am about. I would compare this to putting an external link to a band's official web site off of their Misplaced Pages page.

The reviewer told me to add it back in, but when I did the "Spam protection filter" kicked in, preventing me from doing so. So, here I am. If possible, can only this web page (not the entire blog.myspace.com) be "whitelisted" only for my personal page, so it is not inadvertently used on a regular article?

Firerescuelieut 02:35, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

No Betacommand 04:07, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Betacommand, it would be nice if you could explain your reasoning...

 Not done we traditionally only add websites to the white-list when they are required for use in articles. The desire to add a link to your personal website is secondary to the concerns of the project. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 05:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I can live with that answer. Thanks. Firerescuelieut 03:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

www.gravinaoggi.it/pg097.html

Diocesan site of the Bishopric of Gravina and Montepeloso (see this update: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Bishopric_of_Gravina_and_Montepeloso&oldid=81966610 ) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JASpencer (talk • contribs) 20:41, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

unblock (ipetitions.com)

ipetitions.com because there a petition related to an article: Televsion New Zealand —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ddogg2 (talk) 02:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

 Not done: the site fails the guidelines set forth in WP:EL. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 05:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposed removals from Whitelist (sites to block)

sirnuke.sytes.net

sirnuke.sytes.net -- Was my personal website, but I am now using a glorified domain. The whitelist entry is no longer necessary.--SirNuke 21:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok,  Done. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 01:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Troubleshooting and problems

Fiesta Patronal

• • I'm trying to add a link to this page, Fiesta patronal, but the submission is blocked because an already posted link contains the blacklisted "welcome to." Not sure what to do. Sorry, if this is not the right place for this query. Apirie 22:28, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Seems fine now. -- Heligoland 13:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Last Measure

It is currently impossible to edit the Last measure article because it links to a Last Measure site, which is itself blocked. I don't think removing Last Measure from the blacklist is a very good approach since it is frequently abused, but another recommended approach would be appreciated. For now I have simply obfuscated the link, which is also not a very good approach.

I'm not sure what your talking about chief, Last Measure is a redirect and has been for some time. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 19:55, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

..make that Last measure, not Last Measure. Last Measure is a redirect, Last measure is a separate article. The redirect should probably be fixed too..

Ah, thanks for brining that to my attention. I've speedily deleted it as an exact recreation of a deleted article. (see Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Last_Measure) ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 16:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

END

Discussion

Archived

This page needs to be archived. Could anyone do the job? --Meno25 01:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I archived the items that were completed on or before the end of November 2006. The archive can be accessed by following this Archives link (it also appears above at the beginning of the page).—Chidom   08:51, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Backlog

Ridiculous backlog here... I'm working to clear it. If anyone wants to help, great! I'm adding (Status: Approved/Declined) to the section headers to make the process a little easier and I'd appreciate it if anyone who gets involved follows that convention. Thanks, ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 16:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey J.smith, I suggest that we not modify the title, but instead use the templates {{done}} ( Done) and {{not done}} ( Not done). This will allow existing links to titles (such as link#section to not be broken. —— Eagle101 20:10, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I've introduced a whitelist log, try to use it for when you log entries, instructions are given on the /log page. Its fairly easy, and the point of it is to allow easy ways to figure out the full context of why something was added. It is modeled after the spam blacklist log. I will be going as far back as possible and trying to log most every entry to this list. —— Eagle101 04:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Eek... now it's gotten all complicated! :) ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:46, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how much more complicated it really is... I just find it easier to look up why we whitelisted stuff. The old method simply had the admin's name and who requested it... that does not really tell anyone why we added something. I stole the method from the spam blacklist, so I'm trusting that its tried and true, (go check out how long they have been doing it). —— Eagle101 21:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh... and I've archived the page, we are down to 16 (minus the two "done" I left). —— Eagle101 21:49, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

New template

{{Whitelist request processed}} creates the note:

Hello! This note is to inform you that your whitelist request has been "note". More information about your request can be found at the whitelist talk page, the log, or the request archives if the request is older. Thanks,.

I figured it would be helpfull for communication. Thoughts? ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 15:35, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I like, its nice for some of the older requests, though for the newer ones, we should be able to expect the people to check up on the page themselves. I'm thinking of getting a bot to archive this page automatically x days after a  Done or  Not done tag is present. That way we can be assured that finished requests will be on this page long enough for people to take notice that something was done. I'm thinking the value of x should be something in between 3-10 days, ideas? —— Eagle101 05:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and congrats! we are down to 9 more requests... I'm sorry I've not been as active here as I would like... I've been busy over at m:Spam blacklist. —— Eagle101 05:18, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, the older requests were what I had in mind. I was going to mass-spam this template sites we have processed recently so people know someone is actually paying attention to this page now.

I don't really know what to do with those Russian/whatever language requests. Maybe I can drop a request at the village pump.

This page doesn't seem to get a high-volume of requests, so 7+ days would be fine. If things pick up, now that the backlog is basically cleared, we can always tweak the time. I'd really rather avoid a situation where the page is habitually empty. An empty page, much like an empty tip jar, can discourage people from participating. (Did you know the staff will seed the jar with a handful of change and a few small bills?) ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 06:23, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

If there are requests for other language wikipedias, best to redirect them to the proper wiki page. Like Russian should be http://ru.wikipedia.org/MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist ect ect. And yeah best to keep some stuff on this page, rather than immediatly archiving. I did immediate archives to get this page down to something smaller... from 100 requests down to ~10 or so... we've done well. —— Eagle101 17:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, those wikis can't approve white listing for this one. Not sure what good it would do the requester.

Yeah, we sure have. :) ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 17:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Mmmm I was more thinking that perhaps the site should go to the russian wiki article, as its more appropriate there... and that might have been the original intent of the poster.... Oh, and I'm taking the {{adminbacklog}} off of this page. I think its reasonably cleared out now. ;) —— Eagle101 17:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Review

Things tend to go on the whitelist and get forgotten. I started looking through it and found several sites which were not linked, some which were no longer on the blacklist anyway, some entries which simply serve to override the blacklist for entire domains (why?), some which have no place in the project anyway (e.g. ad-riddled fansites). I have made a review page at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/review and am looking through them. I've excluded the latest ones, which at least have comments stating why they are on the list, and added links to show "mainspace" and "all" linksearch. I did not do this with the expectation of anyone but me reviewing it, but it is going to take a looooong time so if anyone else wants to help please do pitch in. Guy (Help!) 19:29, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, Eagle has implimented a system that should make anything new fairly easy to track down... but yeah, the older ones are hard. Good idea to review the older entries. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 20:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)