Jump to content

MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2020/11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Alexandra Elbakyan's Website

[edit]

The webpage link from Alexandra Elbakyan's infobox currently points to an old (and no longer functioning) Sci-Hub domain. This URL should be unblocked as it does not contain any pirated papers (as other pages in Sci-Hub do), and so that the infobox can be updated with a working link to her "about" page. A smart kitten (talk) 08:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. I've used \bsci-hub\.\w+\/alexandra\b, instead, which covers all top-level domains in case Sci-Hub changes domains again. Thanks for submitting this.​ — Newslinger talk 10:08, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

T&C page for gnews.org

[edit]

I thought that this page might be useful for citing the names of this organisation (G News LLC and GNews). and perhaps its registration location, for the purposes of redirects and relationships among the various people and organisations, at least for Guo Wengui#G News and GTV Media Group. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 08:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Also perhaps this one:

no Declined. The fact that G News claims to be hosting child pornography is enough of a reason to disallow the entire site from being linked to from Wikipedia. It is also not a reliable source – please see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 316 § GNews.org - deprecate? — Newslinger talk 08:17, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I know that it's not a reliable source, but surely the T&Cs are a legal document about its registration? And the whole point of using the second one is in an article demonstrating its lack of reliability, and describing its stated intention for expansion plans. This article is unfortunately not reported anywhere else that I can find. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 09:17, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am absolutely not willing to whitelist any links to a website that purports to host child pornography, including a pornographic video with the phrases "underage niece" and "underage daughter" in its title. If no reliable sources cover information about a certain topic, it would be best to exclude the information from the article in question. As the verifiability policy states, "All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable" and "verifiability means other people using the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source". — Newslinger talk 09:59, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

deaddeath.com for Donald Wetzel

[edit]

This page is the only one I can find as a source for the death of Donald Wetzel. I am not sure why it is blacklisted, but at least it should be made available for this case.

I am aware that this is not the most reliable source, but then again it should be known for readers of the article that Mr. Wetzel is probaly dead. -- H005 (talk) 14:49, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

no Declined. DeadDeath (deaddeath.com) was added to the global spam blacklist, which covers all Wikipedia websites, because the website was spammed on multiple wikis. Unfortunately, it is indeed not a reliable source because it is self-published by a non-expert, so it cannot be added to the spam whitelist for this use case. The entire deaddeath.com page is based on this Twitter post by Stu Nicholson, which would also not pass the verifiability policy. Unfortunately, I am not able to find any obituaries for Donald Wetzel. For now, I recommend excluding the alleged death from the article and waiting for a reliable source to emerge.​ — Newslinger talk 02:10, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Re: and waiting for a reliable source to emerge It hasn't happened for the entire year he is dead now, and will probably never happen. Problem is unfortunately that there are quite a few people in this world who draw remarkable attention as long as they are alive and make them relevant enough for Wikipedia, but no attention anymore when they have deceased - and then become 120 years old and still Wikipedia deems them to be alive. I find it better to have the information in the article with a disclaimer regarding reliability than nothing at all. -- H005 (talk) 17:49, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
H005, you state in your opening post that he is 'probably dead', which means that the article is still maybe a WP:BLP. That also means that we need better sources to proclaim someone dead. Dirk Beetstra T C 05:25, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Book of Travels Kickstarter Page / Updates

[edit]

I would like to aks that Book of Travels' Kickstarter site be whitelisted. Significant details of the game are released on Kickstarter with that being used as the main page of information release about the game. As more information comes out about the game on other channels, these details will be moved to non-blacklisted sites. However, at this time it is the most significant source of game information. In addition to the site link, I would also like to request updates page also be whitelisted as ongoing updates are provided with more game information as the campaign went on.

The project was fully funded and using the kickstarter site as reference for the game will be incredibly useful and reliable. Mightanddelight (talk) --Mightanddelight (talk) 18:25, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mightanddelight, as far as I can see there is no page yet for this subject. You would first need independent reliable sources to start this subject and show that it is worth having an article on Wikipedia about it. If then one or more additional sources are needed from this kickstarter that can be discussed then. It is unlikely that we will whitelist for the creation of a page that is then only supported by these primary sources and therefore likely to be deleted. What adds to the situation is that the kickstarter is still open (though fully funded). Dirk Beetstra T C 05:17, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BiglyBT.com

[edit]

The Bittorrent client is now officially released as a standalone software as it seams. Also press has already covered it. Therefore it should be added to the Comparison of Bittorrent Clients pages. As it seems there webpage was blocked last year because it was attempted to take over the former parent project page of the Vuze client. I don't think we need a global blacklist here. If that problem still exists, just blocking it locally on that page should be sufficient. News articles by TorrentFreak: https://torrentfreak.com/former-vuze-developers-launch-biglybt-a-new-open-source-torrent-client-170803/ https://torrentfreak.com/biglybt-is-the-first-torrent-client-to-support-the-bittorrent-v2-spec-201011/— Preceding unsigned comment added by Agowa (talk • contribs)

  • Object Article was created multiple times and seems part of a promotion effort. All earlier creations did not survive AfD. In the past there was also a CoI-issue, with the creator getting grumpy that his program did not survive AfD and therefore was not listed on related lists of notable programs. In fact, there is still no evidence that the program is now notable. The Banner talk 09:01, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Agowa: no Declined for now. If a subject article is stable we can talk about an about page. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:06, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I created the first draft for BiglyBT on Wikipedia in Mid October of 2017 (over 3 years ago). I clearly stated my COI. The draft was rejected a few weeks later for lack of notability, and I have never created an article or edited one since then. I have participated in Talk pages related to the client, but have clearly stated my COI and made it clear that the decisions are for other people to make. Any new drafts or edits adding BiglyBT have not been done by me, any of the BiglyBT team, and have not been orchestrated by me. All edits I've seen have been by unique individuals with no association with BiglyBT (other than, editors probably being users of the software). Please stop using me as evidence for your ban, you already have two a valid reasons -- lack of notability and individual spammers. The Banner's name calling ("grumpy", and "demand"ing) are insulting, inaccurate, and I feel do not belong on Wikipedia. TuxPaper (talk) 07:46, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2020/11&oldid=993414317"