MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2017/12

rebelmouse.com


Hi There. I'm trying to create a page for RebelMouse, but the domain is showing as blacklisted. RebelMouse's old free platform allowed for User-Generated Content that was often times abused by users. I'm assuming the source of the blacklist has something to do with something a user posted. That platform has since been shut down, so there is no risk for future abuse. Can you please whitelist this domain? Rebeldan (talk) 17:23, 22 November 2017 (UTC)


 * per /Common requests, we would need an about-page or a full url (including an index.htm) of the index page. Can you please provide a suitable link?  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 20:03, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/microarchitectures/zen
I would like just this specific page of wikichip to be whitelisted because it's the only website I've been able to find that not only lists the die sizes for both of AMD's current Zen based chips, but actually goes into great detail in regards to how exactly those numbers were calculated, which makes it possible for anyone to verify their accuracy simply by using some basic math. Every non-blacklisted source of these die sizes were either notably rounded (aka not truly accurate), rough estimates, or given without regards to where said #'s originated or any way to verify their accuracy Cooe (talk) 05:03, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Is this even blacklisted: http://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/microarchitectures/zen#Zeppelin_.28Octa-Core_Die.29 ? —Dirk Beetstra T  C 20:10, 2 December 2017 (UTC)


 * , not blacklisted. --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:10, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

www.econlib.org/library/Mill/mlP73.html
Can your stupid bot be switched off? It's repeatedly posting it's dumb, disruptive, spammy warnings. This link is fine. Why should people waste time telling you what's not blacklisted? If you can't get it right, then pack your bot in and go away.  Wik idea  12:32, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * - no reason to respond to requests phrased in this way. --Dirk Beetstra T  C 17:59, 26 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Could you please switch your bot off for the website above? I urge you to check the pages you're blacklisting in future.  Wik idea  15:14, 2 December 2017 (UTC)


 * , you did not address the points in the header, and there is NO bot. And your tone and your insinuations are still not making me want to make any effort here.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 19:08, 2 December 2017 (UTC)


 * The website is a database of economic literature, therefore it should not be blacklisted. If you do not alter the way you are pasting these notes, as I am urging you to do, you are only going to make more people frustrated, and it will likely lead to more complaints, which will become more formal. A casual look at the other comments makes it obvious there is widespread dissatisfaction with what you are doing. Please act as soon as possible.  Wik idea  19:14, 2 December 2017 (UTC)


 * OK, last time from me: . You obviously did not understand nor care why this was blacklisted (not by me, by the way), nor are willing to justify why this should be whitelisted.  Go complain to the spammers, good luck.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 20:02, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * And FYI, there are more links whitelisted by me on this page currently than declines .. and we just had an abandoned RfC on this specific site. If your initial and continuing tone would have been more forthcoming, I would very likely have whitelisted this, but ..  —Dirk Beetstra T  C 20:07, 2 December 2017 (UTC)


 * What's wrong with you? No, I don't understand why it was "blacklisted", I don't understand why you feel you're entitled to deference, and I don't understand why you're spamming pages with notices which are obviously wrong.  Wik idea  20:08, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I am not spamming any notices. What bot and what notices are you talking about?  —Dirk Beetstra T  C 20:11, 2 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Please, please, can you just fix this? I'm not interested in you being clever. I don't want to argue. It's the notices whoever/whatever is posting on multiple pages, and this is incredibly tiresome - like English contract law, UK labour law, UK company law, etc.  Wik idea  20:20, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, I am not interested in being addressed like that. As I said, a more moderate tone and friendlyness would have gotten you somewhere much faster.  I don’t know why you think you have the right to talk to the volunteers here like that.  Also, I am not going to find out for you what needs to be done, whether it actually needs to be done or why it needs to be done.  —Dirk Beetstra T  C 03:38, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Please remove "econlib.org" from your blacklist. I have no connection to the site, other than browsing it for my own private research. However, it is a useful and widely respected resource for understanding a certain political point of view. I have read through as much of the discussion of blacklisting this site as I can find. The argument for blacklisting seems to be that some entity called Vipul once posted a bunch of spam links to this site. That's it. The general attitude of the blacklist administrators seems to be that anyone who wants this site reinstated must first track down Vipul and extinguish it/him/them. My skills are in history and economics, not computer-hackery. Given that I can't track down Vipul, what CAN I do to encourage you to remove the blacklist of this extremely useful reference? 67.188.225.244 (talk) 03:56, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * "The argument for blacklisting seems to be that some entity called Vipul once posted a bunch of spam links to this site." - no, the editing ring that Vipul was the leader of created articles, and there is a clear and direct link between Vipul and the site. Since this is then related to a form of meatpuppetry/paid editing, maybe we should get it into our minds that there is a clear conflict of interest and a clear spam aspect to this site.  Apparently this site, just like the other sites that were spammed, need to use SEO techniques to get linked.  --Dirk Beetstra T  C 06:37, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * (replied at blacklist removal request page, which seems to be a better place for this) 67.188.225.244 (talk) 07:18, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

roblox official


Main site not used appropriately, considering blacklist. —Dirk Beetstra T C 03:53, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Blacklist executed, whitelisting the couple of links that are needed for Roblox. Note, do not whitelist mainsite, that is the one that is abused next to a lot of material on the site. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:10, 28 November 2017 (UTC)


 * to MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:10, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=143926311#post143926311
For my userpage, and as an aside I don't understand why it's blocked in the first place. Buffaboy talk 20:23, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

AdSense-related links on the article about AdSense
the bot detected AdSense related links on the page about AdSense, but obviously these links are related to the page topic so there should probably be an exception for that particular page. I'm not entirely sure how this system works but I thought I ought to bring it up here in any case

links to be added: any AdSense-related links listed in the template at the top of this page

why they should be added: the page is about AdSense

pages that would benefit: the page about AdSense

if possible, the links should only be allowed on that specific page. If not possible, it might be better not to whitelist them in the first place. .--Macks2008 (talk) 00:51, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * can you paste the links here, without http:// ? —Dirk Beetstra T  C 06:50, 24 December 2017 (UTC)