MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2008/03

www.petitiononline.com/nomaddox/
I'd like to link to this page from The_Best_Page_in_the_Universe because, basically, how else are there going to be any citations made, showing that the petition was, in fact, deactivated? Thank you. Ciararavenblaze (talk) 16:13, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks reasonable & ✅ - apologies for the delay -- Herby talk thyme 12:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

bennettmg.co.uk/Project_MS_Cambridge_Busway_1.aspx
The following external link was posted and then reverted on guided busway
 * www.bennettmg.co.uk/Project_MS_Cambridge_Busway_1.aspx Cambridgeshire Guided Busway Gantry Crane - How the guideway track was laid

However, when I tried to post this as an external link to the more appropriate Cambridgeshire Guided Busway article, I find this web site is spam blocked !! I have examined the referenced URL and find it relevant to understanding the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway. I would also note the revert was made without a stated reason. Please can you unblock the specific reference ? Bigglesjames (talk) 07:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * . MER-C 07:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

The referenced article on the external site contains specialised technical information that I don't believe is available elsewhere. This includes explanations of how the track was laid that help the reader to gain an understanding of some of the technical design issues surrounding the implementation of the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway.

It is a similar situation with the previous external articles that I have referenced elsewhere. These are also articles of a technical nature that help the reader to understand the engineering principles pertinent to the Wikipedia article they were posted on.

Thank you. LisaInig (talk) 10:57, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Typically, we do not whitelist domains in response to those who where involved in spamming them. Instead, we whitelist urls when trusted, high-volume editors request a links be whitelisted because of their encyclopedic value in support of our encyclopedia pages. I'll whitelist this for Bigglesjames, for use on the article Cambridgeshire Guided Busway where the url can be demonstrated as a source.✅--Hu12 (talk) 11:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I am not sure what you mean by "where the url can be demonstrated as a source", but I have added the link as a useful reference to the building of the article Cambridgeshire Guided Busway. Thank you for your reconsideration. Bigglesjames (talk) 19:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Links are whitelisted when they are needed as a citation, because of their encyclopedic value in supporting content in our encyclopedia pages then it has potentiial value. I must have missunderstood. Based on your statements above, I whitelisted the link on the premise the request was for its use as a source or a citation for article content, not for it to be added to the External links section. Wikipedia needs content, not externl links. If this is not going to be used as a source (in an appropriate context), I'm going to have to reconsider the links approval. I'm sure there are other reasonable, non commercial alternatives available for use in the external links section.--Hu12 (talk) 13:41, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I fixed the concern, . --Hu12 (talk) 14:13, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the explanation. I am still coming to understand the "style" of various elements of Wikipedia articles.  It was my understanding "External Links" were the place were article readers were directed to sites that had deeper, more detailed, information that was perhaps not needed for the main article.  In this case, the use of a special Gantry Crane to cater for the narrow sections in which the precast guideway sections had to be laid was, for me who has an interest, an important understanding to the building of this guideway.  Your correction gives me the confidence to approach the adding of such detail by way of general article content with citation.  Thank you. Bigglesjames (talk) 04:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Nikki Sixx
The link I'm trying to add is: blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=176408813&blogID=366453131

I don't care about the rest of MySpace, but this link is needed at Nikki Sixx because it is the only reliable source for the existence of his relationship with Kat Von D. Without this source it will quite properly be reverted as a BLP violation. In fact, for the past week or two I've been regularly reverting all references to the relationship because there was no reliable source for it. Now there is, and it needs to be in the article. -- Zsero (talk) 17:18, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅. thanks--Hu12 (talk) 22:28, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

newyorkbirds.free.fr/manhattan/grammercy%20et%20le%20quartier%20du%20flatiron/index.php
I'd like to request that this address, specifically, be unblocked for use in the article Flatiron District, Manhattan. It contains photographs of the area in question, including some of the buildings that are not otherwise illustrated in the article, and would be a useful addition to the page. Thanks. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz)  (talk / cont)  17:26, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Looks reasonable - is it reliable? Thanks -- Herby  talk thyme 13:06, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I can't speak for the reliability of the site overall one way or another, which is why I was specifically asking for this particular page to be unblocked and not the domain in general, but I have reviewed all the images on the domain page, and can vouch for the fact that they are all what they purport to be, aerial shots of the neighborhood around the Flatiron building. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz)  (talk / cont)  15:44, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Is there any possibility of something happening with this request? Thanks. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz)  (talk / cont)  20:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Apologies Ed - now ✅ & I hope it works (not sure about the regex on the "%20" bits?). If not nudge me. I've been/am busy & few other seem to frequent this corner! -- Herby talk thyme 09:10, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Seems to be working fine - thanks again. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz)  (talk / cont)  09:19, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

insomnia.ac
When I tried to add a review article about ketsui as reference, I was informed it was a spam site. Last time I checked, it is a legitimate video game review site. Why was it entered spam list in the first place? The whole idea of the spambot list simply isn't working, because spammers would just switch domains, while innocent people who happened to inherit spammer's domains will suffer. 142.150.48.186 (talk) 21:28, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The owner of the site added links to it to many VG-related articles, which was done in good faith, but it seems somebody thought it was not.see this, this and this. - Master Bigode from SRK.o// (Talk) (Contribs) 23:49, 8 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Reference:
 * MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/December 2007


 * Given the cross-wiki spamming, I'm surprised this wasn't blacklisted across all Wikimedia projects. -- A. B. (talk) 03:34, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It was not blacklisted because it was not considered spam in the other wikipedias. I think the guy removed the links to other sites by accident. - Master Bigode from SRK.o// (Talk) (Contribs) 16:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I see a lot of cross-wiki spam; spot checking, a lot of it was reverted:
 * br:Special:Contributions/88.160.235.227
 * de:Special:Contributions/88.160.235.227
 * en:Special:Contributions/88.160.235.227
 * es:Special:Contributions/88.160.235.227
 * id:Special:Contributions/88.160.235.227
 * it:Special:Contributions/88.160.235.227
 * ja:Special:Contributions/88.160.235.227
 * nl:Special:Contributions/88.160.235.227
 * no:Special:Contributions/88.160.235.227
 * pt:Special:Contributions/88.160.235.227
 * sv:Special:Contributions/88.160.235.227
 * en:Special:Contributions/82.226.65.87
 * en:Special:Contributions/82.216.178.192
 * en:Special:Contributions/82.127.0.235
 * de:Special:Contributions/88.160.235.227
 * en:Special:Contributions/88.160.235.227
 * fr:Special:Contributions/88.160.235.227
 * ja:Special:Contributions/88.160.235.227
 * -- A. B. (talk) 18:35, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Given the evidence -- Herby  talk thyme 12:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

cais-soas.com
I was trying to update a dead link on the Alans article (an article on The Origin of the pre-ISlamic Iranians by Dr Oric Basirov) but the new address cais-soas.com/CAIS/Religions/iranian/Zarathushtrian/Oric.Basirov/origin_of_the_iranians.htm is blacklisted. I see no reason why this should be the case so I thought I'd suggest a whitelisting. The whole site seems pretty harmless so I presume this was an accidental blacklisting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.116.99 (talk) 17:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * has a long history of abuse. βcommand 17:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

tyrod-taylor.com
I attempted to link the Tyrod Taylor wikipedia page to the site to find that it is blacklisted. The site is the only one dedicated exclusively to Tyrod Taylor and while not an official source, it still seems it would be valued in the external links section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.111.133.48 (talk) 19:07, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This is obviously a spammy non-notable blog with a very high ad/content ratio. There is a massive effort to spam a particular group of fansites - see User_talk:B/page2 for a list of ones I have seen.  All of these appear to be owned by the same person/company/whatever.  The Tyrod site does not appear related to the rest of these, but I still don't think we should have it here.  It doesn't meet our external link policy and actual content is lacking.  One of the "articles" is just a link to buy fatheads with an affiliate ID (ie, advertising disguised as an article).  One of them is selling "Fire Jim Weaver" t-shirts.  (No serious source of Tech information would promote such a thing.  Jim Weaver is unquestionably one of the best ADs in the country, TSL trolling notwithstanding.)  Three of them are links to youtube videos.  This is just a spam site and absolutely should not be permitted here. Considering that every single edit from this IP has been to add a spam site ... well, you can see where this is going. --B (talk) 15:06, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * per B -- Herby talk thyme 16:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

choosemalta.com
why is this blocked? i dont understand... its not uncyclopedic at all from what I can see... I need it for the Maltese language page discussion, and possibly the article itself. Thank you 89.241.219.79 (talk) 10:23, 24 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll check into this. It may be a day or two.


 * Is there a specific page on that site you want to use?-- A. B. (talk) 01:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * It appears that this and several related domains were spammed across a number of Wikipedias:
 * da:Special:Contributions/88.203.4.156
 * da:Speciel:Bidrag/212.56.128.20
 * de:Special:Contributions/88.203.4.156
 * de:Special:Contributions/212.56.128.20
 * en:Special:Contributions/88.203.4.156
 * es:Special:Contributions/88.203.4.156
 * es:Special:Contributions/212.56.128.20
 * fr:Special:Contributions/88.203.4.156
 * fr:Special:Contributions/212.56.128.20
 * it:Special:Contributions/88.203.4.156
 * it:Special:Contributions/212.56.128.20
 * nl:Special:Contributions/88.203.4.156
 * nl:Special:Contributions/212.56.128.20
 * pl:Special:Contributions/88.203.4.156
 * pl:Special:Contributions/212.56.128.20
 * pt:Special:Contributions/88.203.4.156
 * pt:Special:Contributions/212.56.128.20
 * simple:Special:Contributions/88.203.4.156
 * sv:Special:Contributions/88.203.4.156
 * sv:Special:Contributions/212.56.128.20
 * ta:Special:Contributions/212.56.128.20
 * tr:Special:Contributions/88.203.4.156
 * choosemalta.com was then blacklisted on the meta blacklist. The other domains were overlooked.




 * Additional spammed domains:


 * Related domains:
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Seems this has significant history and would be particularly problematic if whitelisted, I'm inclined to --Hu12 (talk) 06:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

z8.invisionfree.com/RRR_Racing_Forum
A site which is directly dedicated to the Re-Volt PC Game, and has several tech information in cited sources which could not be added to the page... Gaming4JC (talk) 03:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Is it necessary & are there any other reliable alternatives? Thanks -- Herby  talk thyme 12:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Nothing more heard so closed as -- Herby  talk thyme 16:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

www.deathcamps.org/occupation/warsaw%20ghetto.html
The link to an article about Warsaw Ghetto, containing information about the notorious Group 13. Information about the Group 13 in English is very scarce on the net. Used as one of the supporting references in the article. --Lysytalk 17:14, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Are there any alternative & is this a reliable source? Thanks -- Herby  talk thyme 12:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Quite a while & nothing heard so closed as -- Herby  talk thyme 12:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

mainstreetbridge.bounceme.net
This website should be whitelisted because it is simply a webcam of the construction of a bridge. The article Main Street Bridge (Columbus) would benefit from having a link so users can watch the construction process live. I'm surprised it was blacklisted to begin with.--Analogue Kid (talk) 22:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I regret that I do not see a link to a webcam as being necessary for en encyclopaedic article? Anyone else?  Thanks -- Herby  talk thyme 12:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Nothing more heard so closed as -- Herby  talk thyme 16:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

petitiononline.com/DVDwzrds/petition.html
I had used one of this this petition in the article Wizards (film) in a citation. I feel that it is important to cite/link to this petition, as it is an acknowledged fact that the petition had gotten the film released on DVD, verified by the director both in interviews and on the film's DVD release. It should be linked in the article. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 08:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC))
 * Are there any other reliable alternatives? Thanks -- Herby  talk thyme 12:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Nothing more heard so closed as -- Herby  talk thyme 16:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

elginweather.com
This page should be white-listed as it is a free, ad-free, spy-ware free, non-revenue generating web page of actual weather in Elgin. Unlike many other weather websites this is not weather copied from the Dupage airport and relabeled for the purpose of placing ad banners everywhere.Strikethunder (talk) 00:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Strikethunder (talk • contribs) 16:22, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Given that your only edits are to this I am not sure quite why this site interest you? It seems to me unlikely that this site would be a reliable source?  Thanks -- Herby  talk thyme 12:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Nothing more heard so closed as -- Herby  talk thyme 16:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

petitiononline.com/netflix
Why the site should be whitelisted? - This is a grassroots generated petition making specific requests to the Netflix Corporation by Netflix subscribers. This petition has no commercial, marketable or branding value and currently has over 2,000 signatures.

Which articles would benefit from the addition of the link? - The Netflix article. A citation to this link will help lend factual credibility by establishing that the petition existed, the reason for the petition, and support the latest additions to the article (which is currently marked as "citation needed"). While this specific petition may not be particularly important in and of itself, showing its existance has great value in documenting the article. I have not yet found other alternatives but will replace this if I come across a better one.

Provide the specific link to the page you're requesting be added -http : //www.petitiononline.com/netflix Thank you, Bigemperor (talk) 00:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)Bigemperor


 * I fail to see how this could be used as as a citation, (in an appropriate context). Would seem there are reasonable Reliable and Verifiable alternatives available. als e see WP:NOT--Hu12 (talk) 11:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

members.aol.com/belpaire/us.html
This website lists information and photographs of all of of the surviving S160 steam locomotives in the United States. This page would compliment this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USATC_S160_Class. Thank you. Belpaire (talk) 04:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * --Hu12 (talk) 06:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

squidoo.com/buffalocommons
Don't know why this brilliant webpage that suggests returfning entire Western Us to Prairie is blocked! Too radical?

I wanted to link to it in Jesusland entry,

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.12.222.230 (talk) 18:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Is this a reliable source, are there alternatives & do any established editors see the link as necessary, thanks -- Herby talk thyme 13:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Nothing more heard, closed as -- Herby  talk thyme 16:34, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

h.1asphost.com/nhbadfinger/index.html
This website was originally located on Virgin Media. It was removed by that company when they were alerted to the libellous and defamatory nature of its content. The page has now resurfaced at 1asphost and is continually being added as an external link on Wikipedia's Badfinger article. The website even contains a disclaimer at the bottom of its front page regarding its content and its previous legal entanglements. Please review this and take action as you see fit. Thank you. ZincOrbie (talk) 02:10, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * As you have placed the link it is not blocked - are you looking for whitelisting of another URL (or indeed blacklisting of this one)? Thanks -- Herby  talk thyme 13:05, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Nothing more heard so closed -- Herby talk thyme 16:34, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

liveinkorea.freewebpage.org
This is a site I made about all things South Korea. I have lived here for 8 years and I am just trying to share my experiences of this country with a web page I made. Please allow this page to be added. Bwjkr (talk) 07:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Your web site appears to be empty. You'll have to excuse me for being a little unclear on why a link to it would be appropriate. Zetawoof(&zeta;) 08:57, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

It's not empty. It has the FAQ section and it has already started to become known in the city of Jeonju(which where I have tried to link it). I am trying to provide a free service for the foreign residents of this city. The more people that know, the more helpful it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwjkr (talk • contribs) 03:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Three pages (the index page, an empty "Contents" page, and the FAQ board)? Looks pretty empty to me. In any case, there doesn't appear to be any content there that would be useful as a reference or as supplemental information to an article here. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a web directory. Zetawoof(&zeta;) 03:47, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Then also remove the Jeonju Hub. It is used for selling things and advertising jobs in Jeonju. Bwjkr (talk) 06:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Indeed, that doesn't appear to be an appropriate link either. I've removed it. Zetawoof(&zeta;) 06:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)


 * per Zetawoof -- Herby talk thyme 16:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

aboutmyarea.co.uk/pe29
Please can you unblock .aboutmyarea.co.uk/pe29 as it is a local community interactive website for Huntingdon, UK and I'm not sure why it is blacklisted? www.aboutmyarea.co.uk/pe29 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.137.101.82 (talk) 03:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * - Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia not a form of web directory. Additionally the site has been responsible for excessive link placement -- Herby  talk thyme 10:07, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Netfirms
The majority of entries in the whitelist are for.

The majority of these links are to low-quality sub-geocities sites that have conspicuous netfirms banners and content that can just as easily be found on non-spammy sites. Why the carte blanche?

chocolateboy (talk) 04:20, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Netfirms is a popular (and, I believe, free) webhost, so although a lot of the sites are spammed, and that's presumably the reason for blacklisting the domain in the first place, it's perfectly possible for many useful sites to be on the domain.  I haven't looked to see why the particular sites we have have been white listed - but if you have evidence that any of them have been spammed I expect that would be good cause to take them off the list.  General content issues can also be dealt with on each article's talk page.  I don't disagree with your characterization of the sites in general but others may and it doesn't stop some from being good. -- SiobhanHansa 16:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Netfirms.com has both free and paid hosting. Whether a site is using free or paid hosting does not determine the quality, notability, or reliability of the site. Have you read my comments at ? I think a blanket ban against the posting of external links (not citation/reference links) by unregistered users would be a lot better than all these problematic blanket blocks of whole domains. It would save a lot of time, too. We wouldn't have to spend all this time explaining all the fine points of external linking to millions of drive-by unregistered users. Posting external links should be a privilege and skill that comes with being a registered user. Even then we could block new registered users for 1 to 3 months from posting external links. All editors could enforce these rules by checking the "oldest" link in the user contributions history page. It would not only save time, but would stop a lot of ill feeling generated by the vagueness of the guidelines concerning external linking. I am talking strictly about external links in the "external links" or "further reading" sections at the end of articles. --Timeshifter 19:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't paid hosting customers tend to have their own domains? --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 13:46, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * People upgrade free sites to paid sites when they reach the bandwidth limit of a free site, or if they just want to get rid of the ads. Getting their own domain name is optional. Getting a domain name can mess up links to one's site pages from elsewhere too. --Timeshifter (talk) 11:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)