Is this the proper venue to request domains that host pirated material not be added to pages as references or otherwise? The "Proposed additions" sections emphasizes spam domains, so I wasn't sure if this is the right place. It's not really spam, but it's definitely something that should be declined when hitting the submit button—similar to what this spam blacklist does. As WP:COPYVIO states: Copyright infringing material should also not be linked to. Allowing links to such sites helps propagate access to them. See the {{revdel}} summary at Endless Winter for some context. -2pou (talk) 19:53, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
2pou, we tend not to blacklist on single instances of linking to copyvio material. They often just get removed and not re-added. If there is persistence then we do blacklist these. Often that is the individual document (e.g. someone uploaded a document into their account on blogspot, then that one document can be blacklisted, not the whole of blogspot), but for some sites (where the vast majority of the material is hosted in violation of copyright, think scihub and similar) we blacklist the whole domain (and may do so before systemic abuse/misuse takes place). Dirk BeetstraTC06:44, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Dirk Beetstra. It does look like the site has propagated to additional use at other pages. I'm not sure if this constitutes persistent use at this point, but it is worth pointing out. The content of pretty much this entire site is pirated copyright material, so I don't think this would be a case of an individual document block. On a related note... pretend that this site is blacklisted, is there automated way to clean up revdels that linked to the site at one point, or is that a painstakingly manual process? (Or is that a question for the WP:CP board?) Dealing with spam, removing the link seems enough, but linking to illegitimate sites seems like a different animal. -2pou (talk) 22:16, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
2pou, Please report the domain above in the appropriate section. Regarding the second question, no, there is no automated cleanup. If there is a lot of use of a site, it is better to cleanup before the blacklisting is performed as it may result in some disruption in some cases of vandalism. Dirk BeetstraTC05:42, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The current blacklist setting even prevents editors from adding an archive.org link. I think this is over-reaching given that we're talking about a local white list for the article mentioning the very platform. Gnkgr (talk) 01:43, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Promotion has been going on and off since 2014 or so, when their article was deleted at AFD. They've recently moved to adding one or two links and then moving on to the next sock account to avoid scrutiny and/or warnings, so I think it is time to blacklist this one. - MrOllie (talk) 14:33, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please remove \bmanning\.com\b from the local English language wikipedia blacklist.
Manning Publications is a respected publisher of technical content and publishes or links nothing in violation of wikipedia policies. Inclusion in this list has resulted either from an unintentional error or a misattribution. Many Manning authors are contributors to Wikipedia pages and the large volume of Manning content freely available to support technical topics is currently being excluded from reference in wikipedia. 184.170.167.136 (talk) 13:10, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi D A Hosek, the .xyz top-level domain was blacklisted in June 2020 due to persistent abuse among .xyz domains. From the logs, it looks like you attempted to add finl.xyz, a personal blog, to your user page. Unfortunately, we generally do not whitelist websites unless they are intended to be used in Wikipedia articles, and there is a specific use case for the website in the request. — Newslingertalk17:40, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if this was ever a legitimate publication but as of 2020, it was either sniped or a continuance of some dubious claims. The journal is currently owned by ASTNT Technologies Private Limited, an Indian technology and SEO company and unlike it's name, posts neither business journal articles, nor articles about the Ukraine and is just a blackhat SEO op. CUPIDICAE💕19:18, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Similar to the above, Metapress was once a decent site (though I debate it's reliability even then, personally) but as of 2017 it was taken over by some dubious SEO firm as per their about us page and has no encyclopedic value and is used only as a method of SEO spam. Also similar to past requests of mine, you can find certain authors under various names on different websites. Lakisha on Metapress, Carol Miller on this random site, Jenna of Penn State, Stephanie your chat assistant. CUPIDICAE💕13:20, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
was blocked because of spam edits, but this also included reliable domains. I tried to add a citation to www.gangnam.go.kr/board/article/2932/view.do which was blocked because of this domain filter, although it is an official government website. I don't think that the intention of the original block was to exclude government domains, as the spam edits were all using .co.kr domains. I request to refine the block to only include the commercial .co.kr domains or to whitelist government owened .go.kr domains. Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 13:56, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
RandomCanadian, Hmm, yes, they are open wikis, but there are thousands and thousands of links everywhere (see Aquagirl#External_links, that linking in itself is questionable). This would first need a massive cleanup as otherwise blacklisting may result in quite some disruption. Note that there are also a lot of wikia's linked on some pages (see Lois Lane). Dirk BeetstraTC06:12, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Back in November there was a problem with fake websites being spammed across a couple of pages, creating several new domains as the old ones were blacklisted. They've returned with a new domain that needs to be shut down. Ravensfire (talk) 04:23, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
