The above seems, from the looks of it, to be a file hosting platform. The problem is, I guess, that anybody can update anything there, including copyright violations, including other legal violations, ... Being entirely unusable, there's not any place this should go but the blacklist... RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 22:30, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi please unblock the above keyword, someone has blocked this keyword on purpose while there are so many resources that can be used and cited on Wikipedia Please unblock it for public interest and authors' helpful resources.— Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnBirdie ( talk • contribs)
defonic.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
indiantrain.in: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
News aggregator (at best!) that republishes information from other websites, blunt warning given to IP [1] and links continue to be added. There are a couple of links cross-wiki, but only a couple and look to be added by established editors while translating pages from EN, not by spammers. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:21, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
The website is published by science journalist Leonid Schneider who covers scientific misconduct including predatory publishing giants such as MDPI and Frontiers. His articles are sometimes rather critical of those companies, but as far as I (and others who have weighed in, e.g. Elisabeth Bik [4]) can tell factual and an important contribution to the topic he writes about. I can't really see any justification for it being blacklisted. It would be useful to be able to use this source e.g. in articles on MDPI or Frontiers, given that he is one of the few journalists who cover them regularly in detail. -- Bjerrebæk ( talk) 16:32, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
This was just added earlier in September because it's a generic upload site. But it's is being used by the government of American Samoa to host official documents like the State of the Territory address and COVID-19 info (links censored with *** so I can post them here), so I'm having trouble adding references to articles talking about AS. -- Beland ( talk) 21:34, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
Multiple accounts spamming a trio of commercial links. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:01, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
Spammed from multiple socks, site is just a affiliate link portal to garner commissions from amazon.com. - MrOllie ( talk) 22:11, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello @MrOllie, thanks for mentioning me - I have never received a reasonable answer (on your talk page) regarding my edits. For some reason you consider it acceptable enough to delete new content created (including math formulas and clarifications on certain niche IT-related topics). My understanding is you are willing to exterminate any link and contribution that does not fit your personal opinion (however, the mentioned website seems to be a collection of reviews and informational articles as well). I also cannot see any meaningful explanation from your side regarding other (numerous) requests from other users that can be found on your talk page. Your huge experience and time spent on Wikipedia is remarkable and I very much respect it, but would like to ask you for a bit more well-weighted decisions. Thanks!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Miosi042 ( talk • contribs)
Bot generated site spammed from many accounts. Pachu Kannan ( talk) 10:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
I have just gone through the reasons why my site got blacklisted and understood the way Wikipedia wants the content and the linking. My reason for posting my link was to give citations where ever possible. However, my purpose was never to spam the Wikipedia pages. Also, the warning given to me regarding this was on public IP hence I could not get it. As correctly cited, one of the functions of my website is of a news aggregator and the news published on the site is collected from various sources. The language used on my site is changed significantly so that our users may understand it in a very simple way. The same links of our site was used as citations on wikipedia pages just with a simple though to make the citation stong. Now since I have a good undestanding of what Wikipedia wants, I would reqquest you to unblock byscoop.com and give you the following reasons that the blocking is not required anymore: First: Unnecceasry links will not be added anymore from my side. Second: Links will be added only when proper content addition is made from my site.
The reason why this will be useful for visitors is: that byscoop.com is an educational website and is in a growing phase. We keep an updated track on latest events in India. Hence we can very much help to keep wikipedia's content updated on time.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:201:4:1845:2415:68c6:8c1c:26ef ( talk • contribs)
No, you got me wrong. My purpose was never to spam Wikipedia. Also, try to understand the purpose of our website. Our website serves news content to students who are preparing for competitive exams. So we extract the most important part of any news and publish it in 3-4 lines. Apart from this, we also publish our original contents on topics like Banking. So in future we will not do any such thing that you consider as spamming. Whatever links we add in future will serve the purpose of Wikipedia. Hence I request you to remove this blacklist.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:201:4:1845:2415:68c6:8c1c:26ef ( talk • contribs)
You now we are on the same page. See I got your point that news articles can be linked directly from original news websites, so I will not link my news article. But our banking articles are of great use to students. These can be also helpful for the rest of the public if they add some info to Wikipedia content. All our articles on banking are regularly updated by us. So it is a humble request to remove the blacklist and give us an opportunity. And rest assured we will not repeat our old mistake which you termed as spamming.
No, its not about promotion. Last thing I can ask is, You can warm me this one last time, and if in the future a single useless link is shared you can block me immediately. No one would like to be blocked on a reputed site like Wikipedia that too for the work done in ignorance. So once again request you to unblock me with this being the last warning from your side to me. Thanks!!!
This was black-listed because it was consistently added as spam (see example), not as a valid reference, which I want to do now. No doubt people related to this website tried to promote their site, but I trust that after almost 10 years they have moved on. As a source for references it should be permissible and not indefinitely black-listed because of some actions 10 years ago. Of course, if this website is added again as spam, we can reevaluate. Thanks. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:18, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
News aggregator or News scraper spammed from many accounts. Pachu Kannan ( talk) 11:02, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Continues to spam after warnings and blocks. Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:18, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Atarhe Okejotor ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)
criticalinfo.com.ng: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
News scraper owned by user. Spammed despite multiple warnings and one block (see user talk page).
Some diffs: Special:Diff/1033284340 Special:Diff/1040494283 Special:Diff/998191530 Special:Diff/1045045726 Special:Diff/1040664084 -- rsjaffe 🗩 🖉 18:17, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
This site was blacklisted two years ago after overzealous content contributors added content to Wikipedia pages on the topics they were writing about for the site as well (gift economy, gift registry, baby registry traditions, etc) and linked the site pages they had written as a resource for more information. This was against wikipedia policies and it made sense to block the domain at the time. Today the site has grown to be a top 200K site per Alexa and it is a resource at disaster recovery efforts and regional child and family services departments or charities with a lot of public activity. It is similar to companies with wikipedia pages such as /info/en/?search=MyRegistry.com and /info/en/?search=Zola_(company) Does it make sense to white list it in case it is pertinent to local and global news and events? If the behavior ever repeats, it can go right back on the blacklist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lexietta ( talk • contribs)
No desire to add anything from the site to wikipedia. In fact, would it be better to blacklist the specific 2-3 pages they were linking to: .../baby-registry, .../best/private-baby-registry.html, .../christmas-wish-list.html (from what I could dig out) instead of the entire domain? It seems like wikipedia is not blocking all of Facebook, or Twitter, just specific user pages. Lexietta ( talk) 22:23, 22 September 2021 (UTC) Lexietta ( talk) 22:23, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
I think a lot of those efforts come from competitors - if you have one company with a Wikipedia link, all others in the industry want a link as well. At the same time, competitors could also spam link any site they want to down-rank to get them banned from Wikipedia in an afternoon. Wikipedia has no-ref links, but hundreds of sites copy Wikipedia content generating thousands of backlinks for the spammers. The first DreamList quote was for legitimate contributed content in 2017 and then there seems to be a wave of links in 2019. Why would a site need more links if they already had multiple linked references from Wikipedia, so they already got whatever benefits they would get out of the process? It doesn't make sense to turn an already quoted site for years into a spammer, except to get it banned. Lexietta ( talk) 22:23, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Understood. Couldn't figure out how to sign my posts until your message. I have not and will not be posting anything to promote the site or anything else (have better things to do). Just trying to clean up a mess as being on the blacklist is damaging the site's reputation. I plan to personally monitor and remove any spam links with this domain if it ever happens again. Please, remove from the blacklist if it's possible. Lexietta ( talk) 22:25, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
It looks like Grwiggins contributed content, not spam links or any kind of promotion to sections that were very sparse for content at the time in 2017: [1] and [2] Someone then removed the link citation for the content and they tried to put the citation back to the content they contributed and it looked like just links being inserted and was thus flagged as spamming. Wikipedia asks for content contributions and citation of sources and that is what they did. I don't think the intention was to ever spam. Registries are monopolized by a handful of big box stores with the goal of driving all of a family's purchasing into one store, even if it has higher prices. Wikipedia is a resource for families who have never set up a registry before, so letting them know that they have the option to setting up registries in more than one place (without mentioning brands) is a way to break up the monopoly and expand the their options, lowering prices for families with babies or those who are starting a family. None of the content they ever added was promotional or even mentioned DreamList. The site was used as a source to back up the information. Lexietta ( talk) 17:12, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Useless garbage which is frequently spammed and should not be used anywhere, per the obvious consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#ancient-origins.net_is_surely_an_unreliable_source; where editors also express reasonable doubts that this will keep getting added in if no action is taken. RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 02:31, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
@ Peter Gulutzan: you say that the thread wasn't started about blacklisting, but the first words in the thread - which I wrote - are "Which should probably be deprecated". The title I gave the thread is "ancient-origins.net is surely an unreliable source" - it's unreliability was not something I was asking about, so far as I'm concerned that's a given. I was suggesting deprecating. It's also the case that blacklisting has been used to stop bad sources from being used, not just spam. Doug Weller talk 12:23, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
idebate.org: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
I was brought to this blacklist while editing Australasian Intervarsity Debating Championships where I have been adding references to the winner entries. For 2006 (Elizabeth Sheargold) I wish to add https://idebate(.)org/news/monash-win-australs-2006 and for 1999 (Dan Celm) I would like to add https://idebate(.)org/news/austral-asian-debating-championships-1999. I am sure there will be many more pages from this website as more entries at the article still needs to be referenced. I have gone through the old discussions on removing this site from the blacklist, and I see that they were declined because there was no justification on use in Wikipedia. I believe the blacklisting was done because of a wiki on the site which no longer exists. Jay (Talk) 05:09, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
dailyhunt.in: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com Dailyhunt.in is the official website of Dailyhunt which means this website is real so please remove this website many newsapers upload news in this website it is not a fake website it is the official website of Dailyhunt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2401:4900:51da:ba8d:c97d:f15d:6d6b:7393 ( talk • contribs)
The above seems, from the looks of it, to be a file hosting platform. The problem is, I guess, that anybody can update anything there, including copyright violations, including other legal violations, ... Being entirely unusable, there's not any place this should go but the blacklist... RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 22:30, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi please unblock the above keyword, someone has blocked this keyword on purpose while there are so many resources that can be used and cited on Wikipedia Please unblock it for public interest and authors' helpful resources.— Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnBirdie ( talk • contribs)
defonic.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
indiantrain.in: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
News aggregator (at best!) that republishes information from other websites, blunt warning given to IP [1] and links continue to be added. There are a couple of links cross-wiki, but only a couple and look to be added by established editors while translating pages from EN, not by spammers. Ravensfire ( talk) 14:21, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
The website is published by science journalist Leonid Schneider who covers scientific misconduct including predatory publishing giants such as MDPI and Frontiers. His articles are sometimes rather critical of those companies, but as far as I (and others who have weighed in, e.g. Elisabeth Bik [4]) can tell factual and an important contribution to the topic he writes about. I can't really see any justification for it being blacklisted. It would be useful to be able to use this source e.g. in articles on MDPI or Frontiers, given that he is one of the few journalists who cover them regularly in detail. -- Bjerrebæk ( talk) 16:32, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
This was just added earlier in September because it's a generic upload site. But it's is being used by the government of American Samoa to host official documents like the State of the Territory address and COVID-19 info (links censored with *** so I can post them here), so I'm having trouble adding references to articles talking about AS. -- Beland ( talk) 21:34, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
Multiple accounts spamming a trio of commercial links. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:01, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
Spammed from multiple socks, site is just a affiliate link portal to garner commissions from amazon.com. - MrOllie ( talk) 22:11, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello @MrOllie, thanks for mentioning me - I have never received a reasonable answer (on your talk page) regarding my edits. For some reason you consider it acceptable enough to delete new content created (including math formulas and clarifications on certain niche IT-related topics). My understanding is you are willing to exterminate any link and contribution that does not fit your personal opinion (however, the mentioned website seems to be a collection of reviews and informational articles as well). I also cannot see any meaningful explanation from your side regarding other (numerous) requests from other users that can be found on your talk page. Your huge experience and time spent on Wikipedia is remarkable and I very much respect it, but would like to ask you for a bit more well-weighted decisions. Thanks!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Miosi042 ( talk • contribs)
Bot generated site spammed from many accounts. Pachu Kannan ( talk) 10:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
I have just gone through the reasons why my site got blacklisted and understood the way Wikipedia wants the content and the linking. My reason for posting my link was to give citations where ever possible. However, my purpose was never to spam the Wikipedia pages. Also, the warning given to me regarding this was on public IP hence I could not get it. As correctly cited, one of the functions of my website is of a news aggregator and the news published on the site is collected from various sources. The language used on my site is changed significantly so that our users may understand it in a very simple way. The same links of our site was used as citations on wikipedia pages just with a simple though to make the citation stong. Now since I have a good undestanding of what Wikipedia wants, I would reqquest you to unblock byscoop.com and give you the following reasons that the blocking is not required anymore: First: Unnecceasry links will not be added anymore from my side. Second: Links will be added only when proper content addition is made from my site.
The reason why this will be useful for visitors is: that byscoop.com is an educational website and is in a growing phase. We keep an updated track on latest events in India. Hence we can very much help to keep wikipedia's content updated on time.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:201:4:1845:2415:68c6:8c1c:26ef ( talk • contribs)
No, you got me wrong. My purpose was never to spam Wikipedia. Also, try to understand the purpose of our website. Our website serves news content to students who are preparing for competitive exams. So we extract the most important part of any news and publish it in 3-4 lines. Apart from this, we also publish our original contents on topics like Banking. So in future we will not do any such thing that you consider as spamming. Whatever links we add in future will serve the purpose of Wikipedia. Hence I request you to remove this blacklist.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:201:4:1845:2415:68c6:8c1c:26ef ( talk • contribs)
You now we are on the same page. See I got your point that news articles can be linked directly from original news websites, so I will not link my news article. But our banking articles are of great use to students. These can be also helpful for the rest of the public if they add some info to Wikipedia content. All our articles on banking are regularly updated by us. So it is a humble request to remove the blacklist and give us an opportunity. And rest assured we will not repeat our old mistake which you termed as spamming.
No, its not about promotion. Last thing I can ask is, You can warm me this one last time, and if in the future a single useless link is shared you can block me immediately. No one would like to be blocked on a reputed site like Wikipedia that too for the work done in ignorance. So once again request you to unblock me with this being the last warning from your side to me. Thanks!!!
This was black-listed because it was consistently added as spam (see example), not as a valid reference, which I want to do now. No doubt people related to this website tried to promote their site, but I trust that after almost 10 years they have moved on. As a source for references it should be permissible and not indefinitely black-listed because of some actions 10 years ago. Of course, if this website is added again as spam, we can reevaluate. Thanks. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:18, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
News aggregator or News scraper spammed from many accounts. Pachu Kannan ( talk) 11:02, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Continues to spam after warnings and blocks. Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:18, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Atarhe Okejotor ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)
criticalinfo.com.ng: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
News scraper owned by user. Spammed despite multiple warnings and one block (see user talk page).
Some diffs: Special:Diff/1033284340 Special:Diff/1040494283 Special:Diff/998191530 Special:Diff/1045045726 Special:Diff/1040664084 -- rsjaffe 🗩 🖉 18:17, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
This site was blacklisted two years ago after overzealous content contributors added content to Wikipedia pages on the topics they were writing about for the site as well (gift economy, gift registry, baby registry traditions, etc) and linked the site pages they had written as a resource for more information. This was against wikipedia policies and it made sense to block the domain at the time. Today the site has grown to be a top 200K site per Alexa and it is a resource at disaster recovery efforts and regional child and family services departments or charities with a lot of public activity. It is similar to companies with wikipedia pages such as /info/en/?search=MyRegistry.com and /info/en/?search=Zola_(company) Does it make sense to white list it in case it is pertinent to local and global news and events? If the behavior ever repeats, it can go right back on the blacklist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lexietta ( talk • contribs)
No desire to add anything from the site to wikipedia. In fact, would it be better to blacklist the specific 2-3 pages they were linking to: .../baby-registry, .../best/private-baby-registry.html, .../christmas-wish-list.html (from what I could dig out) instead of the entire domain? It seems like wikipedia is not blocking all of Facebook, or Twitter, just specific user pages. Lexietta ( talk) 22:23, 22 September 2021 (UTC) Lexietta ( talk) 22:23, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
I think a lot of those efforts come from competitors - if you have one company with a Wikipedia link, all others in the industry want a link as well. At the same time, competitors could also spam link any site they want to down-rank to get them banned from Wikipedia in an afternoon. Wikipedia has no-ref links, but hundreds of sites copy Wikipedia content generating thousands of backlinks for the spammers. The first DreamList quote was for legitimate contributed content in 2017 and then there seems to be a wave of links in 2019. Why would a site need more links if they already had multiple linked references from Wikipedia, so they already got whatever benefits they would get out of the process? It doesn't make sense to turn an already quoted site for years into a spammer, except to get it banned. Lexietta ( talk) 22:23, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Understood. Couldn't figure out how to sign my posts until your message. I have not and will not be posting anything to promote the site or anything else (have better things to do). Just trying to clean up a mess as being on the blacklist is damaging the site's reputation. I plan to personally monitor and remove any spam links with this domain if it ever happens again. Please, remove from the blacklist if it's possible. Lexietta ( talk) 22:25, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
It looks like Grwiggins contributed content, not spam links or any kind of promotion to sections that were very sparse for content at the time in 2017: [1] and [2] Someone then removed the link citation for the content and they tried to put the citation back to the content they contributed and it looked like just links being inserted and was thus flagged as spamming. Wikipedia asks for content contributions and citation of sources and that is what they did. I don't think the intention was to ever spam. Registries are monopolized by a handful of big box stores with the goal of driving all of a family's purchasing into one store, even if it has higher prices. Wikipedia is a resource for families who have never set up a registry before, so letting them know that they have the option to setting up registries in more than one place (without mentioning brands) is a way to break up the monopoly and expand the their options, lowering prices for families with babies or those who are starting a family. None of the content they ever added was promotional or even mentioned DreamList. The site was used as a source to back up the information. Lexietta ( talk) 17:12, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Useless garbage which is frequently spammed and should not be used anywhere, per the obvious consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#ancient-origins.net_is_surely_an_unreliable_source; where editors also express reasonable doubts that this will keep getting added in if no action is taken. RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 02:31, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
@ Peter Gulutzan: you say that the thread wasn't started about blacklisting, but the first words in the thread - which I wrote - are "Which should probably be deprecated". The title I gave the thread is "ancient-origins.net is surely an unreliable source" - it's unreliability was not something I was asking about, so far as I'm concerned that's a given. I was suggesting deprecating. It's also the case that blacklisting has been used to stop bad sources from being used, not just spam. Doug Weller talk 12:23, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
idebate.org: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
I was brought to this blacklist while editing Australasian Intervarsity Debating Championships where I have been adding references to the winner entries. For 2006 (Elizabeth Sheargold) I wish to add https://idebate(.)org/news/monash-win-australs-2006 and for 1999 (Dan Celm) I would like to add https://idebate(.)org/news/austral-asian-debating-championships-1999. I am sure there will be many more pages from this website as more entries at the article still needs to be referenced. I have gone through the old discussions on removing this site from the blacklist, and I see that they were declined because there was no justification on use in Wikipedia. I believe the blacklisting was done because of a wiki on the site which no longer exists. Jay (Talk) 05:09, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
dailyhunt.in: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot- Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com Dailyhunt.in is the official website of Dailyhunt which means this website is real so please remove this website many newsapers upload news in this website it is not a fake website it is the official website of Dailyhunt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2401:4900:51da:ba8d:c97d:f15d:6d6b:7393 ( talk • contribs)