MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2008/05

www.amazon.com/gp/search?ie=UTF8&field-isbn=MAGICNUMBER&tag=wikipedia08-20
1. This Amazon URL includes an affiliate link that belongs to the Wikimedia Foundation. Some folks want to use this link as the URL that ISBN links refer to, through the externISBN userscript, in order to, as individuals, support the Wikimedia Foundation.

2. The pages that would be edited are Users' personal monobook.js pages.

Lunchboxhero (talk) 15:18, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


 * That discussion seems quite old. Probably shouldent solicit vote stacking "Please add your support to having it whitelisted". I don't see an issue with this specific link.✅--Hu12 (talk) 15:49, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Very good. Thanks. Lunchboxhero (talk) 15:54, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Zach Braff Myspace Blog
link is blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=97669648&blogID=387269933. Basically, Zach Braff has confirmed that 18 new episodes of Scrubs are being filmed, that has been added to the Scrubs article linked above, but as blog.myspace is blacklisted, i am unable to cite it. He also gives information about a soon to air episode, My Princess, which could be useful for the article. Thank you--Jac16888 (talk) 02:07, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Agreed this is valid - I just hope no one gets the truly ridiculous idea that I might be a fan of Scrubs from this :) -- Herby talk thyme 07:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Cheers. And who would ever think that. Awful show ;-)--Jac16888 (talk) 10:42, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

eHow.com
Hello. I tried to edit the article on eHow. I didn't add any links, but my edit was blocked just the same because the article already contains a link to ehow.com, which is apparently blacklisted. As far as I can tell, there is no way to currently edit this article, since the presence of the blacklisted links blocks any and all new edits. Seems to be throwing the baby out with the bathwater, if you get my drift. Should ehow.com be unblocked, perhaps just for this one article?Flatbush52-1 (talk) 11:20, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Editable now - it may be that the main url should be whitelisted but it will do you for now - thanks -- Herby talk thyme 14:21, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Whitelisted (ehow.com/about_us/about_us.aspx). --Hu12 (talk) 17:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

www.strumpette.com
Is there any intelligent reason why this influential public relations industry web site is blacklisted? It is a completely benign web site that is well-regarded by PR professionals. Can someone please unblock this? Thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 12:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Appears to be an Arbcom decision, of which you were informed about previously last June. Additionaly it appears to be a blog/forum which is a Link normally to be avoided. Would seem there are probably other Reliable and Verifiable alternatives available. --Hu12 (talk) 14:43, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello! Yes, I recall being told this last year. However, considering that Strumpette is a well-respected business trade web site, its blacklisting seems peculiar.  How is it possible to revisit the decision keeping it off Wikipedia?  Thank you. Ecoleetage (talk) 18:17, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The internet is full of good material, but Wikipedia is not a directory to that content. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - as such, many links do not belong here. Equally the MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist is not a place to whitelist domains against the wishes of Arbcom decisions. thank you--Hu12 (talk) 18:32, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

. For the record, ✅ strumpette.com employed bad faith use of Tor network open proxies and zombie computers To Spam Wikipedia.
 * Accounts

--Hu12 (talk) 04:36, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

www.squidoo.com
I'm not sure why this site is black listed though I suspect that it's because it's a type of link to be avoided as far as reliable third parties are concerned. That said, I think that at least on the page where the site is described, Squidoo there should be a link to the website. It's weird that an article about the website does not include a link to the site in question. So I am requesting a link to www.squidoo.com on the Squidoo article because an article about a site should include a link to the site. Lot49a (talk) 17:39, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/October_2007
 * MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/November_2007


 * squidoo.com links:
 * Have no editorial oversight (see WP:RS) and articles are essentially self-published
 * Fails Wikipedia's core content policies:
 * ”Verifiability”
 * ” Questionable_sources”
 * "Verifiable Reliable Sources"
 * ”Self-published sources (online and paper)”
 * ”Reliable sources”
 * ”Self-published sources”
 * I have whitelisted the homepage (www.squidoo.com/homepage/index.php) for the article Squidoo --Hu12 (talk) 18:28, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Perfect! That's all that was needed. Thanks! Lot49a (talk) 04:01, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

mehfiltube DOT magnify DOT net
A website containing numerous videos of Mehfils, a rarefied type of classical Indian music performance taking place in intimate, elegant surroundings. It is similar to YouTube in that musicians and music enthusiasts may submit videos, but restricted to videos of mehfils. As such, its inclusion is most appropriate to presenting the most encyclopedic article about this subject. The link was just removed from the Mehfil article, leaving our users without access to actual videos showing this form of performance. Thank you for your consideration. Badagnani (talk) 19:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * . and MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist Item. I would strongly caution against whitelisting the entire channel (mehfiltube.magnify.net), it was one of the the most pevasive violator of our anti-spam guidelines.
 * This seems to be a personal website with over 3000 videos, is this copyrighted material that would raise the concerns of possibly Linking to copyrighted works?
 * What specific link do you wish considered?
 * Are there reasonable alternatives availables?
 * If there are no reasonable alternatives available and no violations of copyright, Could provide a specific example to consider for whitelisting? thanks--Hu12 (talk) 20:59, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I looked at the site and the content appears to be hosted on a YouTube type model; the uploader is responsible for the ownership issues. See mehfiltube.magnify.net/help/faq. We link to lots of YouTube videos without vetting the copyright status of each video. Unless we have a good reason to suspect copyright violation, I don't think we have a burden to track the status down if we're just linking to it.


 * Assuming copyright is not an issue, I'm willing to whitelist a specific deep link for Badagnani but I need to know which one.


 * I wonder what's the best way to resolve the extent of our obligations on the copyright question? I am not a copyright expert.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I think if a specific editor is willing to take responsibility for ensuring that a specific video is copyright-clean, as appears to be the case here, then there should be no real problem with whitelisting individual videos. The spam report was more of a generic too-much-crap report, but actually I think that in cases like this (and indeed YouTube) a precautionary approach is justified, with general blacklisting and specific whitelisting.  If admins on any one project want to whitelist the whole site, and take responsibility for policing copyvios, they can, but we don't have the resources on this multi-million page wiki. Guy (Help!) 17:40, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

BouzoukiDVD.com
1. I would like to request that you whitelist the BouzoukiDVD.com website. The website is dedicated to the niche Greek instrument called the Bouzouki. The website provides a comprehensive tutorial on the playability of this instrument. There is a section on respected bouzouki players worldwide along with a forum for discussions about related bouzouki topics.

2. Articles that would benefit from the addition of the link are: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouzouki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_music http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_culture

3. Specific link to be added:  www.BouzoukiDVD.com  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.9.177.34 (talk) 13:58, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Appears 66.9.177.34 is the account responsible for the initial link additions, including moving own links "up" (not a sign of good faith). Here is an additional IP used to spam this link .--Hu12 (talk) 14:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

given that the IP was involved with the linkage. Wikipedia is not somewhere to be used to try and gain web traffic. Thanks -- Herby talk thyme 12:16, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

RA MySpace blogs
The article on the U.S. band RA refers to blogs made by the band on its MySpace. The article that would benefit is Ra (U.S. band). The pages to be whitelisted are: blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=11309695&blogID=369954952 blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=11309695&blogID=270821753 Ideally, any blog.myspace.com link with friendID=11309695 would be permitted. Anyway, these sources should be included because they are about the band and written by the band itself. The blog format is how the band has chosen to release information to its audience. -ZendarPC (talk) 01:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Mobile Marketing Watch
1. This is the most extensive blog on mobile marketing that I am subscribed to, it covers everything regarding to the mobile marketing field and is well-written by different authors. I don't understand how it can be blacklisted and bothered to ask here to have it whitelisted since I wanted to add it to the mobile marketing article on Wikipedia as an additional resource. It stands out in the field of mobile marketing, ranks very high in Google for this keyword, and deserves the right to be mentioned as an external link for mobile marketing no less of not more than other links there. 2. Article on mobile marketing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_Marketing 3. URL: mobile marketing watch dot com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cinedictum (talk • contribs) 22:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC) Cinedictum (talk) 00:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Blogs are almost invariably to be avoided and so -- Herby  talk thyme 07:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

But the 2 external links in this wiki-article are not much different from the one proposed... Also, there are so many external links in Wikipedia that are blogs. This makes no sense. I think this is the case where you are wrong so I want to kindly point it out for you. Please, reconsider. Cinedictum (talk) 09:56, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I second the, though you are correct that there are many blog links. Far too many in my opinion. OhNo itsJamie Talk 17:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I too am an avid reader of MMW.com. Cinedictum told me that you guys blacklisted it. The last comment makes no sense. If wikipedia links to just one blog, then it being hypocrtical. I thought Wikipedia stood for providing the masses with knowledge. While I agree that not all blogs should be serious resources for knowledge and news, a number of them are. Some are as credible as major news outlets are today. I think we can all agree that it makes perfect sense to link to certain blogs that are authoritative on subject matters. MMW.com is the type of blog that isn’t bias, it simply reports on news, products, and services in the mobile space. Its #3 on google for the word ‘mobile marketing’, behind the wiki article, and the MMA. If Wikipedia is gonna link to one blog that is an authority, then you need to make exceptions. If you disagree then add every single blog to this blacklist and let’s move on. For the sake of what Wikipedia stands for, I strongly urge you to re-consider. If you disagree, then at least provide your readers with a through explanation of why you would blacklist one blog, but not another. Why you would link to one blog and not another. Possibly even giving examples of a certain blog you would link to. We already know the type you would blacklist. --Jaredkmg (talk) 18:40, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Blogs may be appropriate if they are (1) highly notable; (2) maintained by the subject of an article (e.g., if Bill Gates wrote a blog, it'd be fine to link it on his article page). Other than that, we generally avoid blogs and other self-published works.  (P.S.; see our policy on meatpuppetry. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 18:43, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


 * These arguments are weak. Those 2 other external links in the article are not much different from MMW but they are OK to be there, why? Also, there are hundreds if not thousands of blogs here that doesn’t meet the 2 requirements listed by you: they are not “notable” and they are not “subject of the article” – but they are still here. Why? I suggest you research on the subject and blacklist all those blogs if you want Wikipedia be that “clean” – though I think if the blog (in this case a website in the form of blog that is all about mobile marketing) provides with great additional info on the subject and covers it all over, it has all rights to be listed as an external resource. P.S.: I don't think our discussion has anything to do with meatpuppetry or anything else, it’s about justice. Right now it seems very unjust to blacklist the great resource and allow others of the same kind. Cinedictum (talk) 14:22, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

lost.eu/7627e
This is a harmless online game website, and I really don't understand why this website is black-listed. Once you visit this website, you will understand my point. FreakFish (talk) 17:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Here's the original discussion:
 * meta:Talk:Spam blacklist/2007-03


 * If a regular contributor/encyclopaedia-builder requests we whitelist it, we may consider it but not a request from a game participant (such as 7627e.)


 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:41, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

thatsqingdao.com
I tried to create a page on the Qingdao International Beer Festival after having an extremely difficult time finding information (both in Chinese and English) on the 2008 festival. The website www.thatsqingdao.com and more specifically (the link had to be removed because it got caught in the blacklist filter? huh?) This site proved to be very helpful in finding information, which I found support for on Chinese language websites. I am not affiliated in any way with thatsqingdao, I've never even been to Qingdao (but I do plan on going).

Here is the conversation on the ban:
 * thatsqingdao.com Qingdao Travel & Living Guide is a neither a commercial site nor does it participate in/or promote spamming! It is run by locals who care about the Qingdao Community and want to provide current, accurate, and unbiased information to ALL. We support the local government and our site provides expats and travelers with valuable information. Please take a look for your self! OhNoitsJamie's actions are limiting the amount of valuable information that Wiki users are able to gather about Qingdao.


 * You've been warned multiple times for spamming. This is your last warning. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:12, 17 October 2006 (UTC)


 * OhNoitsJamie, why do you continue to delete valuable information? Why can't you edit it instead?


 * You've been blocked. If you continue after the block expires, you will be blocked indefinitely. In the meantime, read WP:EL and WP:SPAM. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

This website would benefit any articles on Qingdao and its related events. Thank you for your consideration. This is one of my first posts, so I'm not sure on how to sign. Jeff007s (talk) 01:12, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You're obviously of many sockpuppets attempting to add this site or to add urls that redirect to it. Here's my proposal to meta along with a partial list of socks; I was asked to blacklist here instead. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 14:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Unencyclopaedic content - closed as with some suspicion of puppetry -- Herby  talk thyme 14:18, 14 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Jeff, just to be on the safe side, I'll double-check this for you. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:20, 14 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Jeff, I spent a good deal of time looking into this case. It appears this problem has been going on longer and more extensively than initially thought.


 * First, it was spammed cross-wiki:
 * ja:Special:Contributions/24.123.178.179
 * en:Special:Contributions/24.123.178.179
 * ko:Special:Contributions/221.3.72.235
 * it:Special:Contributions/220.225.247.231
 * en:Special:Contributions/Gaoshan
 * es:Special:Contributions/75.61.121.46
 * de:Special:Contributions/75.61.121.46
 * et:Special:Contributions/60.209.194.228
 * eo:Special:Contributions/75.61.127.19
 * cs:Special:Contributions/75.61.127.19
 * en:Special:Contributions/75.61.127.19
 * fr:Special:Contributions/75.61.127.19
 * nl:Special:Contributions/75.61.127.19
 * zh:Special:Contributions/75.61.127.19


 * Second, we overlooked some domains:


 * Third, the site-owner used multiple anonymous IPs and user names to spam this material, ignored numerous requests to stop and was then uncivil about the whole thing. In short, the site-owner has been sufficiently disruptive that he can be considered indefinitely blocked when he pops up in a new guise.


 * These domains should not be blacklisted here but rather on the global blacklist.


 * The global blacklist is used by more than just our 700+ Wikimedia Foundation wikis (Wikipedias, Wiktionaries, etc.). All 3000+ Wikia wikis plus a substantial percentage of the 25,000+ unrelated wikis that run on our MediaWiki software have chosen to incorporate this blacklist in their own spam filtering. Each wiki has a local "whitelist" which overrides the global blacklist for that project only. Some of the non-Wikimedia sites may be interested in these links; by all means feel free to request local whitelisting on those.


 * Thanks again for bringing this one up. I'll remove this from this blacklist and move it to the global list later today or tomorrow. -- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Information on some of these sites, specifically (thatsqingdao.com) is encyclopedic when it comes to local events, festivals, & attractions. Don’t you think putting these sites on wiki’s global black list is a bit harsh? LizGodfry (talk) 02:06, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I am a bit confused as to this whole process, and maybe chose a bad topic to start editing. I'm a little upset to be accused of sockpuppetry, but I guess I have to accept the process. I will not attempt to add any more references to this website, as I have been shown its history of abuse, but I would like to restate that it was helpful in gathering information on events in Qingdao. Otherwise I would have had to dig through Chinese language websites (and my Chinese sucks). Thank you for your patience. Jeff007s (talk) 03:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

tutorialspoint dot com
I would request to unblock this site for few tutorials which are really the best among all the tutorials available on the net.

Script.aculo.us, Ruby on Rails, Prototype Framework, MySQL, etc.

This is a great education site specially for the beginners and should be made available for the community.

Thanks Prarikh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.126.170.20 (talk • contribs) 07:47, 15 May 2008
 * IP 206.126.170.20 Spamming of http://www.tutorialspoint.com http://www.talentgroups.com


 * Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2007_Archive_Apr
 * m:Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2007/05
 * Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2007_Archive_Mar
 * m:Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2007/04 ← your IP (206.126.170.20) requesting
 * Its your site. Adsense pub-7133395778201029. We do not remove domains from the blacklist in response to Owners of those sites or those who where involved in spamming them. Instead, we de-blacklist sites when trusted, high-volume editors request the use of blacklisted links because of their encyclopedic value in support of our encyclopedia pages.--Hu12 (talk) 06:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Econoline Crush Official Web Site/Blog
I would like to request that the following URLs be unblocked. I am linking to these as sources in the article Ignite. Each of these proposed links is housed at the blog.myspace.com web site, which appears to be blocked site-wide.

index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&FriendID=165669588&blogMonth=5&blogDay=15&blogYear=2007

index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=165669588&blogID=318378672

index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=165669588&blogID=298292828

index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=165669588&blogID=304003732

index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=165669588&blogID=333552105

Thank you. Americaninseoul (talk) 06:00, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Per request by Jimbo. Would seem there are other reasonable Reliable and Verifiable alternatives available.--Hu12 (talk) 07:10, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

web-app dot net
An attempt to add a link to the perl, gpl, open source free script here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_content_management_systems ended as being blacklisted. Kindly whitelist this link. My two cents: wikipedia is written in PHP, its nice etc etc. You surely know that there are many other non PHP open source CMS scripts out there. Eg. written in Perl (did you know that PHP is actually a Perl spin-off?)... please do not "kill" Perl CMS, please let them be listed too, or at worse... please do not blacklist this Perl CMS and others.

Thank you.

PS. I hope I wrote this correctly, there are so many formating rules, that if something was missed, please accept my apology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.164.215.242 (talk) 22:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Updated:

On second thought, why bother? Stick to your own spam PHP with 1 million commercial PHP CMS scripts links everywhere and call open source, GPL scripts for "SPAM".... You guys can't be possibly serious. But since you are acting/pretending to be serious, you may as well do homework (yes it is a 16 year old kid that added web-app to the SPAM list) and learn what SPAM is.

There is plenty of cross wiki stupidity going on.... see under for details: — 85.164.215.242 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Plenty of cross wiki spamming going on

Additions in database of this link:
 * 2008-05-15 06:53:17: User id:85.164.215.242 (talk - contribs; 15) to id:Sistem manajemen konten (diff) - Link: www.web-app.net.
 * 2008-05-15 06:52:15: User sl:85.164.215.242 (talk - contribs; 15) to sl:Content Management System (diff) - Link: www.web-app.net.
 * 2008-05-15 06:50:33: User uk:85.164.215.242 (talk - contribs; 15) to uk:Ð¡Ð¸ÑÑÐµÐ¼Ð° ÐºÐµÑÑÐ²Ð°Ð½Ð½Ñ Ð²Ð¼ÑÑÑÐ¾Ð¼ (diff) - Link: www.web-app.net.
 * 2008-05-15 06:47:45: User eo:85.164.215.242 (talk - contribs; 15) to eo:Enhav-mastruma sistemo (diff) - Link: www.web-app.net.
 * 2008-05-15 06:46:00: User it:85.164.215.242 (talk - contribs; 15) to it:Content management system (diff) - Link: www.web-app.net.
 * 2008-05-15 06:31:07: User tr:85.164.215.242 (talk - contribs; 15) to tr:Ä°Ã§erik yÃ¶netim sistemi (diff) - Link: www.web-app.net.
 * 2008-05-15 06:29:13: User ca:85.164.215.242 (talk - contribs; 15) to ca:Sistema de gestiÃ³ de continguts (diff) - Link: www.web-app.net.
 * 2008-05-15 06:27:59: User bs:85.164.215.242 (talk - contribs; 15) to bs:CMS (diff) - Link: www.web-app.net/.
 * 2008-05-15 06:19:40: User nl:85.164.215.242 (talk - contribs; 15) to nl:Contentmanagementsysteem (diff) - Link: www.web-app.net.
 * 2008-05-15 06:17:48: User pl:85.164.215.242 (talk - contribs; 15) to pl:PorÃ³wnanie systemÃ³w CMS (diff) - Link: www.web-app.net.
 * 2008-05-15 06:03:46: User zh:85.164.215.242 (talk - contribs; 15) to zh:åå®¹ç®¡çç³»ç»åè¡¨ (diff) - Link: www.web-app.net.
 * 2008-05-15 06:01:40: User vi:85.164.215.242 (talk - contribs; 15) to vi:Danh sÃ¡ch há» quáº£n trá» ná»i dung (diff) - Link: www.web-app.net.
 * 2008-05-12 15:20:40: User sv:85.164.215.242 (talk - contribs; 15) to sv:Lista Ã¶ver innehÃ¥llshanteringssystem (diff) - Link: www.web-app.net.
 * 2008-05-12 10:05:41: User en:85.164.215.242 (talk - contribs; 15) to en:List of content management systems (diff) - Link: www.web-app.net.
 * 2008-05-09 20:10:22: User en:85.164.231.6 (talk - contribs; 1) to en:Web application (diff) - Link: www.web-app.net.


 * --Hu12 (talk) 23:06, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Spam redirect site →
 * Spammer is attempting to circumvent via creating a redirect ( web-app.us ).
 * http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96zel:Contributions/Vertu
 * http://tr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/85.164.206.220
 * http://sv.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/85.164.206.220
 * http://ru.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/85.164.206.220
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/85.164.206.220
 * http://cs.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/85.164.206.220
 * see also request which has another domain (buyuyenicerik.com)--Hu12 (talk) 04:56, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Spam Articles
 * WebAPP
 * and Web-APP
 * Additional spam Sock accounts
 * --Hu12 (talk) 23:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Additional spam Sock accounts
 * --Hu12 (talk) 23:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


 * web-app dot net is a free, gnu-gpl multilingual CMS with atleast 6500 websites worldwide hosting it. It has articles about it in several none English WP. There are many serious Perl sites recommending the script or discussing it. The script has been out there (always as open source and free gpl for about 7-8 years now). There is a book about the script (in press).

Calling this project for SPAM is an insult. The links you are showing were added in several languages because the script is provided in those languages. It is provided for free in 32 languages. I do understand (now) that in order to be listed on the English WP CMS, one needs to establish a notability by having an article about it. But from here to calling it a SPAM and blacklisting it there is a long way to go, I also think that you did go too far by banning my IP and deleting/editing my comments for trying to start a general discussion about the quality of the respective article in English WP.

Are you in concern about the .us? How about being concern about the 6500+ that use the script and have a link to the site on their footer (hopefully), are you going to blacklist all of them too as a SPAM? You do understand that this is not the way to get constructive progress, I hope.

I am not patronizing you, but I ask you to not blacklist it. And to stop calling it a SPAM, all the people in the development and support project work for free in order to provide a free script, how dare you call this work of providing free open source script for SPAM?

PS. None English WP do not require that the CMS is "notable" by a previous article in WP. Unless I have misunderstood something (again). And again, there are some articles about the script in non English WP, which makes it "notable" enough for being listed. Please remove the blacklisting. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oe65 (talk • contribs) 21:50, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Every project sets it's own rules for inclusion. Whitelisting the domain here at this time serves no purpose, as there is currently no place an external link to this site would serve an encyclopedic purpose. If the product you are speaking of is notable as you claim it is above, then write a Wikipedia article about it.. heck, I'll even help you. If you'll start the page under User:Oe65/Sandbox, I'll assist you with formatting and documenting verifiable notablity. Once a documented assertion of notability is established, the page can be moved into article space & added to the various lists. At that point, I'll personally whitelist the domain so it can be added the product's page. -- Versa geek  22:21, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * We've been there done that twice, See WebAPP and Web-APP. Articles for deletion/WebAPP--Hu12 (talk) 22:31, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Spamming Our multiple wikimedia projects gets one's site blocked.
 * SPAM
 * External link spamming
 * Source soliciting
 * How not to be a spammer
 * External links policy
 * Links normally to be avoided
 * Advertising and conflicts of interest
 * Conflict of interest
 * Editors who have a conflict of interest
 * Accounts used for promotion
 * Law Of Unintended Consequences
 * What Wikipedia is not
 * Wikipedia is not a repository for links
 * Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising
 * SOCK
 * Inappropriate uses of alternative accounts
 * 'Role' accounts
 * BLOCK
 * Persistent spamming
 * Accounts that appear, based on their edit history, to exist for the sole or primary purpose of promoting a person, company, product, service, or organization in apparent violation of Conflict of interest or anti-spam guidelines
 * Added apparent violation of anti-spam guidelines. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - as such many links do not belong here. Equally Wikipedia is not a place to to promote a site--Hu12 (talk) 22:25, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Request for help from Indian Football Fans
We are young group of Indian Football Fans (a 3000+ indivdivduals, with nearly 300 pro-active members), we are doing well in raising money, awareness, interest for Indian Football Players and Clubs. This has been a very difficult task in a cricket crazy nation but we still have managed to raise money (5500$) from contributions from our members across India and we gave free football kits to young footballing poor kids in southern India and also send this money to 4 nursery football academies(3 cities - Trivandrum, New Delhi and Mumbai) across the country.

As of now we don't have a website but the webmasters within the community are working on one. We are currently reaching out through to the members through an orkut "community" and plan to include the link in the "external links" section of the "Indian National Football Team" and "All India Football Federation" article.This would help raise awareness of India's First National Football Fan Club. Any help from the Wikipedia team would be gladly appreciated. Football in the country is in shambles and we strive to improve the current scenario with help from all quarters.

We are currently not registered officialy but would be done so by 26th of May, 2008. The above specified information can be verified by the club President as he holds all records of our monetary earnings and fundings.

I join my hands in request as I know that Orkut links may not be entertained but I pray for you to understand our situation. Thanking you, and I apologise for my poor english. The Link - www.orkut.com/Community.aspx?cmm=31840185

The Article - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_India_Football_Federation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_national_football_team

Ashish Pandey

Member, Indian Football Fans

email id - ashish_krishna6@yahoo.co.in

Fan Club - I.F.F.@aol.in --59.178.34.255 (talk) 13:06, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Please, only just this one link from orkut. - --59.178.44.67 (talk) 15:04, 19 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, though a worthy cause, we are not here to promote your fundraising drive. ❌ MER-C 10:03, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Grapefruit-diet.org
Please whitelist grapefruit-diet.org for linking to Grapefruit Diet. This site focus main only providing detail information on the diet plan including menu, food list and tips. One of the page grapefruit-diet.org/grapefruit-diet-plan-and-menu.htm provide a sample menu which is not available but should be included into the article Grapefruit Diet for the benefit of readers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.53.236.155 (talk) 00:11, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't see any need to whitelist this. It looks like a self-published page with Google ads. OhNo itsJamie Talk 01:27, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Per Ohnoitsjamie. In addition it would appear this was one of 39 related domains spammed by 80 anonymous IP accounts' over 68 articles. Requester is also from this same Malaysian IP range.--Hu12 (talk) 02:07, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

HollywoodChicago.com
Why would the daily film publication HollywoodChicago.com be blacklisted as a domain? It is published by a Chicago Film Critics Association-accredited film critic who's listed on the Tomatometer at Rotten Tomatoes, the publication is indexed by Google News, its news has been cited all over the world, etc. This domain blacklist seems very wrong. — 68.72.112.61 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist --Hu12 (talk) 06:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

ValueCDN.com
I wonder why a ValueCDN.com has been blacklisted? They are reputable European Content Delivery company offering very low rates comparing to other providers, maybe this was the reason it's blacklisted by a competition? Please review - thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doria (talk • contribs) 16:38, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * , Spam / advertising-only account. see WT:WPSPAM item. --Hu12 (talk) 08:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

nappyafro.com
It's hard for me to understand why nappyafro.com would be blacklisted. They review Hip-Hop albums. Who to say which sites should be in the review section of a music album article and who shouldn't be. This is definitely not a spam site but it's a small site which is sad since that now, every time some one searches for the site, the first thing that pops up is Wikipedia blacklisted (because of Wikipedia's popularity. The site is stictly a Hip-Hop/Rap review site, has interviewed many Hip-Hop/Rap artists, and it would seem a shame to blacklist it as it would benefit Hip-Hop/Rap album articles. www.nappyafro.com (specific link to the page requesting be added). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.30.112.19 (talk) 01:36, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I presume? I suggest reading your talkpage. see also ;
 * SPAM
 * External link spamming
 * What Wikipedia is not
 * Wikipedia is not a repository for links
 * Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising
 * BLOCK
 * Persistent spamming
 * Accounts that appear, based on their edit history, to exist for the sole or primary purpose of promoting a person, company, product, service, or organization in apparent violation of Conflict of interest or anti-spam guidelines.
 * If a specific link is needed as a citation, a trusted, high-volume etablished editor can request it on the whitelist on a case-by-case basis, where the url can be demonstrated as an appropriate source (in an appropriate context) when there are no other reasonable alternatives available. --Hu12 (talk) 02:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)