Talk:Mir Suleman Dawood Jan
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Stabila711 in topic Wikipedia acting up
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Name
editHi, The Google test shows way more results for this English rendering of his name so I have redirected Suleman Daud Khan here. If this is against consensus, please feel free to revert me. Curro2 (talk) 09:13, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia acting up
edit | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Wikipedia insists examiner DOT com is on its Spam blacklist. The only problem is that is not on the blacklist. Why can't I save the link properly? Curro2 (talk) 02:06, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
- It is on the blacklist. See MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. The Examiner has been deemed by the community to be completely unreliable and has been banned from use on all Wikipedia articles. If you want more help, stop by the Teahouse, Wikipedia's live help channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Stabila711 (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
- Weird, I did not see it in the list. I find this pre-emptive block extremely annoying. It's one thing to notify users that sources are undesired but blocking a news site altogether feels obstructive. Curro2 (talk) 02:30, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
- Well it is this line: (?<=[/@.])examiner\.com(?:[:/?\x{23}]|$). And if you can only find the information from the examiner it really shouldn't be included anyways. The examiner is not a news site and has absolutely no oversight. Anyone can say anything they want on there. If you want to try to get it unlisted you can try MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#Proposed removals but I really wouldn't bank on it happening. --Stabila711 (talk) 02:35, 28 December 2015 (UTC)