Talk:Slum/Archive 1

Archive 1

Attempting some small improvements

A big problem with this page appears to be that what is called a slum varies substantially from country to country, so the sweeping statements here need to be qualified. I've tried to do this by altering the language and introducing a very broad definition of a slum from UN-Habitat. I hope the page can briefly introduce the reader to the debate about what constitutes a slum but not get bogged down in it. To make a start I added criteria used to identify slums stated by a UN Expert Group and also refer to a slightly different set of criteria used by a research team in Bangladesh.

Under Growth and countermeasures - I've left some quite big generalisations in because it seemed to me they are more or less true internationally, although some more specific examples and references would definitely help. The income disparity section is totally irrelevant as it stands. It would be useful to have such a section, though, if it could be focused on the relations between income disparity and slums, internationally.

Under ghetto vs. slum I've removed the definition of slum which just repeats what is said elsewhere on the page.--81.179.87.128 23:27, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

A good way forward would be to add sections "Slums in history" and "Slums in developing countries" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.91.75 (talk • contribs)

Is a slum architecture?

I do not understand why slum is part of architecture. To me a slum is a mixture of planning, psychology and politics, but not a part of architecture. If the world of slum dwellers is to improve, Wikipedia should move slum from architecture to poverty where it can be properly dealt with. Wikipedia says: "Poverty is an economic condition of lacking both money and basic necessities needed to successfully live."

On another tack, for some years now I have been recording slum demolition around the world. I would like to start doing putting this on the internet on Wikipedia as I feel it is an important topic and one that lends itself to collaboration. My idea is to start a topic called 'Slum demolition' and then start listing demolitions by country and century. Is this a good idea? Who should I ask? I am new to Wikipedia.

you don't need to ask anybody. if you want to make changes to an article, make them, be bold. that sounds like a good idea for a section to me. --Cwhalvor 04:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Forum for SLUM

I agree, I have studied slums all over the world and although they seem simular in styles the building materials and often types of dwelling are hugely different. In Brazil, for example, development is vertical as apposed to the sprawling types you see developing in Africa —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.174.111 (talk) 15:39, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Neoliberalism is the problem?

Why is Neoliberalism the cause of war corruption and poverty in the third world countries?? It's povish setence.

According to Rasna Wara in "The Challenge of Slums: Global Report on Human Settlements 2003" - "Although the common perception is that slums are breeding grounds for crime, the report shows that slum dwellers, in fact, are more often victims than perpetrators of crime." Assertion in the wiki article is both factually wrong and bigoted.

Crime and (in) the slums

Discussing crime and its relations with the shanty towns is a complex effort. If, in fact, crimes such as robbery or drug dealing are the 'way of life' of a few people in the slums, since these crimes are closely related with massive poverty in the third world, we shall not forget that slum inhabitants are the most frequent victims of those crimes, given the lack of security in there, and, at the same time, defenseless victims of white collar crimes perpetrated by government's or corporations' 'big fishes'.

Irrelevent

I disagree that etymology is irrelevant. The OED indicates that the word slum first appeared shortly after the turn of the 17th century, about the time people in the first industrializing capitalizing countries were being hedged off their land and absorbed by the new phenomenon of factories. There seem to be connotations of poverty, slacker, and mild cheating attached to the word. It may be etymologically descended from slime. --User:Muriel

In carnival slang, slum is the term for the cheap trinkets that people win at the games of chance. The stuffed toys are called plush. I removed this sentence because it is irrelevent to this article.--Esmason 06:01, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

In many slums, especially in poor countries, people live in very narrow alleys that do not allow vehicles (like ambulances and fire trucks) to pass. Why is this relevent to the article? If you are going to put this in explain why this is a problem, don't just leave it hanging.--Esmason 06:01, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

I didn't write the sentence, but isn't it obvious that if ambulances and fire trucks can't pass then people will die in emergencies? Geffb 19:35, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

What i meant is like there should be a reference and it should be expanded...i guess the whole article needs an overhaul--Esmason 00:36, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

I have recently done some cleanup on this article. Just thought everyone should know! huntersquid 17:22, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Irrelevant

Wide streets exist in the "super-slum" where I live. People employ those wide streets to bring trash, garbage, and contraband (i. e., drugs) into the "super-slum" where I live. Many clean cities of Europe and Asia feature narrow streets, ergo, narrow streets do not indicate the presence of a slum. Wide streets, freeways, highways, expressways, and railways have been constructed in the Great Superslum. Superslum 10:50, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Too Malaysian

Could someone either take down some of the Malaysia pictures and/or replace with some from other places? All of the pictures toward the end of the page were taken in Kuala Lumpur. The article needs more about non-Malaysian slums and less emphasis on the growing slum population in Malaysia, although that goes along with the previous expansion request. Cwilli201 03:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay I agree. futurebird 21:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed as well. We could use some pictures of US slum neighborhoods, such as those in Baltimore or Detroit, for example. --Kukini 02:30, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I think baltimore and Detroit would lack the crowded aspect that's a part of what makes a slum a slum. These areas are acutely underpopulated. New york on the lower east side in the five points era would be ideal.

Due to automobiles and lots of inexpensive gas not even city slums are crowded by global standards. There are regions poverty and bombed out regions of once proud cities.

I do have some photos of american urban decay-- but it's mostly abandon places. Do you think that would work?

I think a 1950s era american trailer park could also work. What do you think?

I put in an image request for this page, I hope that helps.

futurebird 03:57, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the pictures should be taken down. They also contradict the article as the malaysian houses are temporary shack-type buildings, whilst the article states slums are comprised of permanent housing.

Too Polarized+Malaysian

It's not just a matter of having too many Malaysian pictures. Much of the article discusses slums in Malaysia, which serves to:

1) Make Malaysia seem more desolate than it is. For example, it is stated that Malaysia has more income disparity than other Southeast Asian countries. But this neglects to disclose that Southeast Asia has dramatically lower income disparity rates in comparison to South Asia, East Asia, Northern and Sub-Saharan Africa, West Asia, AND Latin America (perhaps there are more)! As a recent visitor of Malaysia (was there less than 10 days ago!), I can say that though Malaysia currently does not have developed status, it ranks highly among other developing countries, and certainly should not be the showcase example of dilapidated living conditions!

2) Push the focus away from more desolate areas.

3) Reinforce the idea that Asian nations are behind

4) Take the focus away from the fact that developed nations with positive economic images also have major slum presences (New Orleans!)

More objective view needed

This article reflects an inbalanced view of slums, portraying them in a very negative light instead of an objective one. The reference to them being places of despair (and crime as another editor pointed out) undermines the resourcefullness and motivation of many inhabitants of slums around the world.

This article also states that a slum is different froma favela - this is incorrect - 'favela' is simply the Portuguese word for slum.

If a more accurate portrayel is sought the New Internationalist back issue Jan/Feb 2006 - issue 386 is a good place to start. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.125.93.52 (talk) 14:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC).

Income disparity

I'd suggest nuking the whole income disparity bit. The article and its references don't clarify the connection between this and slums, and the snatch theft article seems completely irrelevant. Jpatokal 07:20, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

No data available for the northern hemisphere?

The image "Urban population living in slums.png" seems odd to me. There is no data available for the US, Canada and whole Europe, except Greenland! Where apparently up to 10% of the people live in slums...strange. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.176.82.54 (talk) 06:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Define slum! To people it may mean different things!

Slum in Hong Kong: http://technoccult.net/archives/2010/05/30/hong-kong%E2%80%99s-rooftop-shanty-towns/

Slum in Mumbai: http://freethoughtblogs.com/taslima/files/2012/06/mumbai-slums1.jpg

Slum in London: http://www.flickriver.com/photos/greenwood100/sets/72157601329022676/ --188.79.76.188 (talk) 06:03, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Message by Rhino209

This text does not represent a good summary or synthesis of what we know about 'slums' - as can be seen by the very limited references. My personal view is also that neither of the main references given are good sources of information about this topic. There is also a growing documentation of 'slums' by their inhabitants and their own organizations and federations (see www.sdinet.org) that this article misses. Rhino209 (talk) 07:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello and thank you for your message. Please feel free to improve the article, the source you quote seems to be very interesting, in order to complement sources from UN-Habitat or other "official" evaluations. I am working on the French version of this articles and it will be useful for me. I'm afraid I can't help on the English version, I wouldn't write anything good. Cheers, le Korrigan →bla 16:19, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

List of slums/informal settlements?

I am working on starting articles for slums and other informal settlements around the globe and would like to present them all in a list, beyond the relevant category. Otherwise they remain orphans. Do the contributors here think that a list, perhaps by continent/region, would be appropriate for this article? - Damian Doyle (talk) 16:49, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree this would be good, if there is a reliable source that lists them under the same criteria. Such that any list would read: location, location, location[cite], and not location[cite], location[cite], location[cite]. Otherwise it's slightly original, if the criteria is changing from source to source. Xavexgoem (talk) 19:15, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Anonymous IP user's edit

There has been an anonymous IP user who's been trying to remove sourced materials from photo captions from this article, which constitutes as vandalism in its most basic action. The anonymous user also carelessly switching pictures around without any elaboration on his/her action.--TheLeopard (talk) 11:03, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

leopard r u there?

now whats the matter? any rules say that only one type of image can be at the top?? and who says that picture is from the 80s?

Ok glad to see you here. now why is it vandalism? switching pictures is vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.50.67.78 (talk) 11:11, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

instead of warring let us compromise here, leopard. 60.50.67.78 (talk) 11:26, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

The reason why the 1980s mentioning is on the Hong Kong image's caption was because the image linked to Tai Hang, and that article stated that the image was from 1980s (the Tai Hang article used the image long before you inserted it). The index of the link you added is unnecessary since it came from 8 years ago and you obviously did not use the data from any other cities for the purpose of illustration.--TheLeopard (talk) 11:29, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

we cannot base anything on the Tai Hang article. there is no indication to show that it is an 80s image. it may be, but to write that, you have to prove it. ok fine about the data i agree its old. so shall we both leave the article as it is? 60.50.67.78 (talk) 11:41, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Are there any slums in the United States?

Are there any slums in the United States —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.140.159.202 (talk) 04:16, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

There are no slums in the United States by world standards. 96.226.226.165 (talk) 22:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)Anon

LOL ... "there are no slums in the US" ... are you completely BLIND or rather IGNORANT? Use Google Street View, and then have a virtual walk through Gary, Indiana or Baltimore .. or peek into this clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJW8lOzJJPE&hl=de, this clip is showing Cairo, probably the worst of all US towns. There are so many slums in the US, that whole regions look like after a nuclear attack. Further information, and ONLY creditable sources:

• http://www.politik.de/forum/showthread.php?t=199600
• http://www.hausarbeiten.de/faecher/vorschau/96411.html
• http://de.indymedia.org/2009/03/244822.shtml
• http://www.materialien.org/texte/papers/slumcities.htm
• http://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/article2272256/US-Vorstaedte-werden-die-Slums-der-Zukunft.html

Your own government admits that there are slums in the US. Anyway, nothing is done on this problem. --84.141.22.121 (talk) 19:26, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

OMG!!! You are like so lucky that Obama reads WP talk pages. LOL!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.32.134.151 (talk) 07:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Main article - Impovrished Setlements or ???

There is much "universal" information contained in the various articles about "impovrished setlements". I attempted to group then altogether in the "see also section" and noticed some important ideas in all of them. Perhaps someone with better editing abilities than myself could organize and merge these into a single main article. All the various terms could then focus on the particular aspects associated with that term and not need to repeat information. All could link to the main article. 172.163.130.18 (talk) 06:36, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Hong Kong slum image

The image of the HK slum was taken in the 1990s. I changed the text from 1980s to 1990s. The image showed a buildings of Central Plaza, Times Square, etc. which were completed in the 1990s. Themanilaxperience (talk) 02:25, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Contradiction with Kibera

This article says that Kibera is the second largest slum in Africa, but Kibera says it is the largest. Mahahahaneapneap (talk)

Planning on revision and expansion of this entry

Hi, I am a student in Rice University and currently taking a Wikipedia course. As part of my class assignment, I will propose my plan of revising this entry in the Talk Page. I know that ThomasJessica is also working on this entry and you really did a good job! I plan to revise and expand the existing entry and hope to get some valuable suggestion by posting my plan in the talk page. I will mainly adjust and create some sections and add to more supporting materials.

Three main changes:

(1) I plan to merge some causes into four main causes, namely“Rapid Rural to Urban Migration”, “Poor Planning”, “Poverty” and “Colonialism”. I will create a sub-section “Other possible causes” for the rest in the existing entry.

(2) “Disease”, “Crime and violence” and “Informal economy” are seldom regarded as “Characteristics” of slums (e.g. in the first reference listed in this entry “What are slums and why do they exist”, five characteristics are listed). I want to move them into a new-created section “Problems in slums”. I think “Public health” concerning sanity and “Mortality” are also common problems in slums. Can you think of other major problems in slums?

(3) I am thinking about adding two other new sections: “Slum prevalence”, which demonstrates the geographical concentration and growth of slums so that the article would be more objective (in response to many comments that the entry should avoid polarity), and “Development of slums”, which will include approaches to slums and the governments’ and NGOs’ contribution to slums. Do you think the creation of three new sections is necessary? And do you want to read some other aspects of slums that are not mentioned in the existing entry?

A detailed outline is posted in my (sandbox). (Feihuamengxue (talk) 17:48, 1 October 2013 (UTC))

Feihuamengxue - your participation is welcome. I like some of your outline, but do not like parts of it. Please keep in mind the five pillars of wikipedia, particularly neutral point of view and balance. I will post more specific suggestions to your proposed outline, on the talk page of your sandbox, later this week. ThomasJessica (talk) 01:44, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

ThomasJessica, I saw you made some changes according to my proposal and since it's my first time to edit an entry in Wikipedia, I am looking forward to getting more detailed advice from you. (Feihuamengxue (talk) 20:58, 8 October 2013 (UTC))

Feihuamengxue - Check your sandbox talk page. As you are working on a school project and first time contributor, consider presenting any section drafts on your sandbox page for constructive comments from others. See WP:STUDENTUSER. ThomasJessica (talk) 18:02, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

ThomasJessica, you suggestion is really helpful and I have replied to some points you mentioned in the talk page.:) (Feihuamengxue (talk) 16:03, 14 October 2013 (UTC))

Feihuamengxue - I reverted your edit because it is not constructive: the claim about 2050 is anybody's guess, reads like WP:ADVOCACY, not worthy in article lead; you also removed useful 2012 facts about slums contributed by two editors. Please post your school project draft(s) in sandbox, give others a week or two to comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.144.231.186 (talk) 07:40, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I deleted some statistics because I will add a new section about that. I know these facts of slums were important. But thanks for your advice, I would revise the head section again. (I revised it because i think the information in the head section is better to match the whole entry-- since I would add or change some orders of the entry)(Feihuamengxue (talk) 21:14, 20 October 2013 (UTC))

I have revised Feihuamengxue's biased subtitles to neutral subtitles, because the location of many of the oldest and largest slums of our world - Kibera, Orange, Dharavi, Soweto, etc etc - are not considered hazardous by scholars; 1000s of smaller slums are no more hazardous than the urban area they are part of or next to. See WP:NPOV. ThomasJessica (talk) 13:35, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

I am the professor of the class Feihuamengxue is taking. Thank you for the useful suggestions you have made, especially to the proposal that Feihuamengxue placed in a sandbox three weeks ago. In a few places, you reverted a number of edits without any explanation. If an addition that has been added is supported with scholarly references, it would be helpful if you would provide an explanation for the deletion in the talk page, or provide an alternative point of view, along with supporting references in the text of the article. At the same time, I will ask Feihuamengxue to move material intended for alternative placement prior to deletion. Additionally, please feel free to contact me directly about any concerns. DStrassmann (talk) 20:17, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Feihuamengxue edits were not reverted, but merged in with restored content that Feihuamengxue had deleted. New sections added by Feihuamengxue on Prevalence and Urbanization are good, welcome, and still in the article. The article grew from 83K to 91K with Feihuamengxue edits, and it currently is 92K. Few references, such as Joe Flood(2006), added by Feihuamengxue were adopted and merged in elsewhere, but see WP:CITEKILL. Revisions to Feihuamengxue contribution were necessary, because of WP:DUE, WP:OR and WP:SYNTHESIS concerns. For example, scholarly sources presenting a case study on a slum, do not justify tentative conclusions for that slum to be encyclopedically presented as generalizations true for all slums.

Everyone is welcome to edit wikipedia. However, our goal here is a good encyclopedic article. Your school project/homework is not my responsibility. ThomasJessica (talk) 23:22, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank for this clarification. Please don't forget to explain your edits when you make them. DStrassmann (talk) 17:15, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

I have revised part of this entry and provided reasons for each major change. Everyone is welcome to leave messages to me on the TalkPage. I am looking forward to getting more feedbacks so that I can improve my work. :) (Feihuamengxue (talk) 00:11, 6 November 2013 (UTC))

Update of my revision

I have nearly finished my revision. Under the section “Causes that create and expand slums”, I edited two subsections, namely “Rural-urban migration” and “Poor housing planning” as well as added one subsection “Urbanization”. I added the subsection “Insecure tenure” as one of the characteristics of slums. I also revised the section “Risks”. I edited subsections “Disease”, “Vulnerability to natural and unnatural hazards”, “Unemployment and informal economy” and “Crime”. I then added subsections “Violence”and “Child malnutrition”. Finally, I added a section “Prevalence” (I appreciate ThomasJessica 's revision of this section. For example, he replaced old data with the latest one.) I respected work done by previous editors and therefore I mainly added more materials and kept the original work as much as possible (I left much content in the original entry untouched except reorganizing some sentences). Since it's my first time to edit a wikipedia entry, there must be more things I can do to improve the quality of my revision. If you have any advice, you are welcome to leave a message in the Talk Page.

In addition, I feel like the whole entry is a little bit disorganized. For example, there seem to be too many causes. Some subsections only include several sentences and some information does not talk about why these factors can cause slum growth. If anyone can find more information, it would be nice to revise these subsections. Feihuamengxue (talk) 17:44, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Peer Review

It is obvious that a lot of work has gone into this article, and the sheer amount of content here is a testament to that. Perhaps the biggest issue that needs addressing in this article is the organization, both of the article as a whole and of the individual paragraphs. Right now, it seems like each section contains a disordered collection of subsections that don't flow logically from one to the other. The more pressing concern is how each paragraph is organized, though. There are some pretty lengthy paragraphs that contain many more core themes than they should, which makes for some rather difficult reading. That problem could also be helped through variation in sentence length and structure as well as slight changes in word choices (especially in the Disease section). Further but less pressing changes could include reducing the amount of pictures in the article (which are cluttering many portions) and adding meta-analyses/literature reviews to balance the numerous case studies which, while valuable, may not be representative of all cases. Existing NPOV issues could be resolved with such analyses. Overall, a general streamlining and simplification would be beneficial to the readability of this article, and further additions to references would serve to make it even better. DerekHolliday (talk) 03:20, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice! I will definitely work on the writing (as it's in fact part of my plan for final revision). I might also adjust some pictures and chose some typical/representative ones. I will probably put some others in one album altogether. For the entry as a whole, because there are some subsections added by previous editors, I just did not touch them. I will talk about the whole organization and future possible expansion of some subsections later on the TalkPage. Feihuamengxue (talk) 06:49, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Peer Review 2

Like Derek said, the comprehensiveness and level of detail in this article is incredible! Great job! I also agree that the biggest area of improvement for this article is readability. Some of the paragraphs (particularly in the Disease and Violence sections) need to be reorganized so that ideas flow more clearly from one sentence to the next. There are a few places where I think citations are missing and it is unclear whether you are referring to a particular research study or to a wider phenomenon -- I can point out my specific questions in class. Also, a few of your sentences come across as non-neutral, but I think this has more to do with wording choice than anything else. Good job overall, though! Sallyhc42 (talk) 04:56, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

As I said in class, some less neutral sentences were written by previous editors, but I will definitely take care of them since neutrality is one of the main concerns for a wikipedia article. Also, I will revise the writing as part of my final contribution to make the article flow more naturally. Both of your mentioned that there is much information added. Do you think there is any point unnecessary? Thank you for your advice!Feihuamengxue (talk) 06:54, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Plagiarism and close paraphrasing

Feihuamengxue sent me a list of plagiarised or inadequately paraphrased material from this article, and I'm about to start going through it and removing the material as appropriate. I'll leave a list here as I go; it'll probably be tonight before I finish.

• removed sentence taken almost identically from given source. Added by ThomasJessica on 16 September 2013.
• removed material taken almost word for word from given source. Added by ThomasJessica on 16 September 2013.

As it turns out those are the only two changes needed -- the other list of possible plagiarised material turned out to have been taken from the Wikipedia entry in the first place. -- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:47, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Mike. I am sorry for some wrong information and thank you for pointing that out! Fortunately, I consulted you first. I in fact did not know how to check the date of those two websites. I will pay more attention next time. Feihuamengxue (talk) 06:57, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

No problem about the wrong info -- I think everyone who's looked at plagiarism has made that mistake at least a couple of times -- it's an easy one to make! I really appreciate you taking the time to mark up the information in detail -- it made it very easy for me to check everything. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:00, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Mike - Please see the note at the bottom of UN-HABITAT press release. It reads: "This is a UN-HABITAT Feature/Backgrounder, please feel free to publish or quote from this article provided UN-HABITAT Features is given credit."

Plagiarism is the use of someone else's language or other original material without acknowledging its source, according to Princeton. In this case, UN-HABITAT as source was acknowledged, and UN-HABITAT has already given everyone the uncommon explicit permission to source from its press release.

The single line from The Economist was acknowledged and fair use. I will reword both and add them back. Thank you, ThomasJessica (talk) 17:29, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

ThomasJessica, please do not do that, and please see Wikipedia:PLAGIARISM for how to avoid plagiarism. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 06:32, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

What do you mean, jbmurray? I read Wikipedia:PLAGIARISM, and intend to do the three things that the page recommends: incite, intext, and reword with integrity. We must stick closely to sources, but not too closely, isn't it? Or did you misunderstand what I wrote above?

I was reading the content Feihuamengxue has added in November. In a few places, it suffers from the same inadequately paraphrased issue. That needs to be reworded too. ThomasJessica (talk) 15:29, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

OK, I think I misunderstood your intentions. Sorry, ThomasJessica. I thought you were defending (and about to repeat) your previous edit. NB that the disclaimer on the UN-HABITAT document really doesn't mean very much. We can quote from any reliable source. Personally, rather than getting all in a twist trying to reword, I usually find that direct quotation, within quotation marks, is the way to go. Plus, obviously, a footnote citing the document and (where possible) the specific page number. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 17:59, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/75/16/70/PDF/1._Rosa_Flores_Fernandez_-_VULNERABLE_SLUM_CHARACTERISTICS.pdf

  Triggered by \bhalshs\.archives-ouvertes\.fr on the global blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 15:27, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

 Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 07:13, 29 March 2014 (UTC)