It's used for a lot of extensions, etc.
Return to "Spam-whitelist" page.
Reply to "Github.com, please"
Reply to "Tradingeconomics.com"
Reply to "Can you add lists dot wikimedia dot org to the spam whitelist"
Reply to "Cathar.info"
Please add tradingeconomics.com to whitelist. They have useful non-copyrighted graphs of economic info.
Can you add lists dot wikimedia dot org to the spam whitelist
This appears to be a useful site for discussing catharism and indeed, is the 2nd-ranked search result webpage on catharism (behind only Wikipedia's page on the subject). It appears to have been blacklisted back in 2007 because it is owned by James McDonald, and many links were being put on Wikipedia to his sites. Nonetheless, the edits in question appear to have been constructive in many instances (e.g. providing citations to pages on catharism/the Albigensian Crusade lacking in citations). This diff, e.g., was what A.B. chose to show as evidence of spamming cathar.info at the time.
Simply submitting edits with links to a legitimate site, e.g. nytimes.com, does not mean that is evidence of a spamming pattern necessitating blacklisting of nytimes.com. In the same way, I disagree with blacklisting all of James McDonald's sites, particular cathar.info (which is a top-ranked search site with very useful info on cathars) so that individual wiki owners like myself can't cite it. There appears no issue with the site content or an objection to said content would have been raised by now. As such, I would like this site whitelisted so I can cite it on my wiki.
There are no older topics