Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

User:COIBot/XWiki/drupalmodules.com

< User:COIBot | XWiki

drupalmodules.com

edit

BOT generated XWiki report. More than 90% of the cross-wiki placing of this link has been performed by one editor, and the link has been added to 3 or more wikipedia.

Links:

drupalmodules.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)drupalmodules.com
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

216.86.150.75

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)216.86.150.75
(Reports: Report ← track | XWiki | Local | en | find entry)(DomainTools: whois | AboutUs | Malware?)

Users:

User:72.138.37.233(IP tools: Google | WHOIS | domaintools | RBL | tools)
(spamhaus | projecthoneypot | malwareurl)

(commons: talk (←links) || Edits: +/- || search)
(enwiki: talk (←links) || Edits: +/- || search)(Tools: GUC | gblock | log | → links ←User talk) | (Reports: COIBot)

Last additions by user:

User:72.138.37.233(IP tools: Google | WHOIS | domaintools | RBL | tools)
(spamhaus | projecthoneypot | malwareurl)

(commons: talk (←links) || Edits: +/- || search)
(enwiki: talk (←links) || Edits: +/- || search)(Tools: GUC | gblock | log | → links ←User talk) | (Reports: COIBot)

Additions in database of this link:

Log entry for the Spam blacklist: 

\bdrupalmodules\.com\b # ADMINNAME # see [[User:COIBot/XWiki/drupalmodules.com]]

Request Status - Closed

See COIBot report for more details. --COIBot 16:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

All reverted. Closing, not sure if this is necessery, blacklist on reoccuring? --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 14:42, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Closed report, reopened. --COIBot 10:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

One reoccurance (despite linkfarm and nomorelinks tags), reverted, closing. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 18:27, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Closed report, reopened. --COIBot 10:07, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, user keeps pushing, has now helped to cleanup on en, still includes the link to a review site to drupalmodules on the page about the subject drupal. Reviews about the modules are not necessery for the subject drupal, even if it has 300 editors reviewing (and does that make it a reliable source, not per sé; qoute in edit summary: "this site has over 300 independant authors, it's the largest database of drupal reviews ever compiled, and gets 300,000 page views a month. this is not spam.", reply: spam is pushing links, even appropriate links, and we are writing an encyclopedia here, not a repository of external links, or an internet directory). The link was added to external links sections xwiki, therefore   Added. If established editors want to use this as a reference, please request removal or whitelisting of specific documents. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 10:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to dispute this. Hopefully this is the correct way to go about it. Just finding this wiki page was difficult enough.

DrupalModules.com is the main resource for Drupal module ratings and statistics (modules are the building blocks of the Drupal CMS). The site has hundreds of volunteer reviewers from the Drupal community, including members of the Drupal core development team. This site provides Drupal resources not available anywhere else, and has been linked on the front pages of virtually every national Drupal site. Here are just a few examples (many of these are foreign language sites):

Drupal.org
Drupal Berlin
Drupal Germany
Drupal Norway
Drupal Thailand
Drupal Poland
Drupal Bulgaria
Drupal Russia
Drupal Israel
Drupal Italy
DrupalHelp.org
And thousands more.

The site is also mentioned in print (from Learning Drupal 6 Module Development, May 2008, Packt Publishing, ISBN 1847194443) [1]

The site was automatically picked up as "spam" when I attempted to add it to some of the non-english Drupal articles. As I hope I've shown, the site is a relevant, legitimate, and internationally recognized Drupal reference.

72.138.37.233 13:23, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The only thing you were doing was pushing it to several external links sections. This site, as I understand, reviews drupal modules, and as such would have made a good reference for some notable modules. But at least as goes for the English wikipedia, the page linked to does not tell more about drupal, you have to go on to find more about the drupal modules. As all policies and guidelines suggest, discussion would have been the way forward. May I suggest you contact an appropriate wikiproject, discuss this link there, and when they concur that the link is appopropriate, request removal from the blacklist, or request whitelisting of specific documents on the server? Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 13:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure what a Wikiproject is, could you be more specific? I also would have appreciated a link to this page, frankly I didn't realize there was even a discussion to be had. As you may have guessed, I am new to Wikipedia. Aside from Drupal administrators from around the world linking to the site, and a reference in the current best selling Drupal book, what more justification would one possibly expect?72.138.37.233 13:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
The page linked to from the 'this link is blocked by a blacklist' page gives a link to the log, where all items should be logged. That is the only way to find where and when something is discussed anyway. The banner on Spam blacklist could maybe be a bit clearer, that is true.
Wikiprojects are (on the en wikipedia) places where people come together to discuss certain subjects. E.g en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry is where you find people who 'manage' chemistry articles. This could be discussed e.g. in a en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Computing (but there may be a more specific one, en:Wikipedia:WikiProject PHP or something like that, see en:Wikipedia:WikiProjects for a list). Other wikis have similar systems.
The page you edited on wikipedia contained some banners in the external links sections, which point to appropriate places where applicable policies and guidelines were discussed. You ignored the banners and explanations given in there.
I will remove the link from the blacklist, assuming that you will read through some of wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and from then use the link as a reference (what you say it is). As it stands now, this link in this way is not an appropriate external link (per en:WP:NOT#DIRECTORY and en:WP:NOT#REPOSITORY, and in en:WP:EL#Links normally to be avoided, a.o. #13). As I said earlier, it may make a good reference for one or two notable modules, when they are mentioned in the text. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 14:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I appreciate it. I'm not clear why it would be inappropriate to place DrupalModules.com in the external links. I have taken a look at the external links guide, specifically "what should be linked" and #4 is "Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews." I did see the notices you mentioned, and took the advice into practice when I removed roughly half of the links in the list. 72.138.37.233 14:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
(ecx2)The problem is that you link to the mainpage of a module review site, that is not directly linked to drupal, it is indirect (though close). Direct would be a review of Drupal, but then a link to the actual review (not e.g. to a search of drupal reviews). I hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 14:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I can see your point, but it seems like there is precedent for adding review sites. For example, the external links section of Film. Would you suggest removing IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes? They don't tell you anything about film in general, but they do review various movies. Also, DrupalModules.com is much more than simply reviews. The site features a number of exclusive utilities (related module finder, an RSS feed of newly released modules, download statistics, interactive search, etc). It's at least as relevant on those merits as the Drupal API documentation link.
Hmm .. the difference is (besides that this is not a good argument in this discussion, see en:WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS), imdb is a review site for films, on the page film. Here you have a specific page on a PHP program, where you link to reviews on modules inside drupal. It is further away, I would say. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 15:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Also, imbd is an authority. You say you have 300 authors, but that does not necesserily make it an authority. Wikipedia has thousands of editors, still it does not make any claim of validity. The main page you linked to actually seemed like a blog. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 15:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Closed report, reopened. --COIBot 16:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

  1. ↑ Packt Publishing
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:COIBot/XWiki/drupalmodules.com&oldid=1025388"