MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2019/12

econlib.org


I was making edits to the Bryan Caplan page, and many of his writting are on econlib.org. However, the website seems to be blacklisted. econlib being blocked makes it difficult to cite articles, which Caplan has written, on his own page.

I understand that econlib can be seen as often supporting specific ideological positions over others, however, I am only using these sources to cite Bryan Caplan describing Ben Bernanke as an influence on his microeconomic thinking (which is different than using econlib to back an ideological positon); these articles cannot be found anywhere else.

GoldwaterMan1771 (talk) 20:18, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It is unfortunate that pimping Bryan Caplan was a core part of the paid spamming that got the site blacklisted in the first place. Guy (help!) 01:37, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I have not heard of the incident you are talking about. I'm not planning to do anything you mentioned with the links. I am just asking to be able to use those 2 pages to cite a source, not found anywhere else, where Caplan describes Bernanke as an influence. GoldwaterMan1771 (talk) 22:00, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , and no-one else found it worth mentioning anywhere else? Dirk Beetstra T C 04:20, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , not many people have written about Bryan Caplan the person. It was Caplan himself is the one who has mentioned this. GoldwaterMan1771 (talk) 06:07, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , so why do we talk about this if no-one else is? Dirk Beetstra T C 07:29, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Because it is important to know the influences to certain economists. There is already one source citing Bernanke as an influence to Caplan, but a source from Caplin himself is much more direct at pointing this out. Is it not important that Caplan considers Bernanke as an influence? What exactly is the issue? GoldwaterMan1771 (talk) 07:34, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , ‘Is it not important that Caplan considers Bernanke as an influence?’ .. well, if no-one independent cites it then that seems to be the case. Dirk Beetstra T C 07:45, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Some independent sources have cited it, and are already cited on his page. I'm just saying that it would also be useful to put Caplan's own words on his page as well. What exactly is the issue? GoldwaterMan1771 (talk) 15:37, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , 2 of the sources are primary, and the third is describing him as a student (... influenced by ... sure). Do you have any independent sources that describe Kaplan’s influences? Dirk Beetstra T  C 06:46, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there a reason why the sources I am asking to be whitelisted are not sufficient? It would make sense to include, under Caplan's influences, someone who Calpan said was a big influence of his macroeconomic thinking. What exactly is the reason you're holding back whitelisting these sources? GoldwaterMan1771 (talk) 07:26, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , I thought that Guy made that clear, and what we need are independent sources. If there are no secondary sources he material should be deleted altogether. Dirk Beetstra T  C 22:27, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  13:25, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Request was made by a sockpuppet.

verywellmind.com
I would like the above page whitelisted because it's one of the better sources I've been able to find about whether nonbinary and genderqueer are different terms, which is relevant to a discussion on Talk:non-binary gender and perhaps eventually the page itself. Loki (talk) 00:03, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
 * , we’ll put this on hold for now, we don’t whitelist to facilitate discussions, you can post the link on the talkpage without the trailing http://. Dirk Beetstra T C 03:57, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

vegasslotsonline.com
I would like the above page to be whitelisted as it's a comprehensive source for unbiased gambling news. It is indexed within Google News, is updated regularly on a daily basis and provides instant coverage of related topics., aiming to be the quickest site to deliver gambling news. It was built with expertise, authoritativeness and trustworthiness in mind, written by people who have been in the industry for very long. The pieces go through rigorous checks before they go live. Thank you! --RBl1212 (talk) 15:38, 12 December 2019 (UTC)RBl1212
 * I'm calling your bluff here. It's a website that offers "free to play games!" and is not even encyclopedic in the slightest. Praxidicae (talk) 15:49, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * and blocking as spam-only account. Guy (help!) 15:51, 12 December 2019 (UTC)