Blocked special pages 
If a remote loader is blocking access to Special: pages, you can work around that by placing the following code on any page (such as a sandbox):
It's an easy way to get incontrovertible proof that they're remote loading, although any ordinary edit would do too.
Is the purpose of this list to immediately block these sites? It seems that loading once and then caching would have minimal impact on Wikipedia's hardware, for instance.
Anybody there? 
Are the developers actively blocking these sites or are people listing them on the assumption that developers will take action when they're not actually paying attention? If not, does this mean that live mirroring is not seen as a significant problem? 126.96.36.199 00:06, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
What's wrong? 
What's wrong with live mirrors? Ever heard of the GFDL?
- Using Content on GFDL is no problem - there are DB-Dumps. Using Wikimedia resources is an other, since these are paid by donations wich are not given to support SEOs. C-M 08:23, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
- Also claiming that they are wikipedia (i.e. by reusing the wikipedia logo) is a problem, besides that some of these sites fail to comply to some of the GFDL terms like naming of the authors or such. --PaterMcFly 20:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
On the use of Commons images. If a site, not a mirror, is linking in a handful of commons images, instead of hosting them directly, would that be considered a "live mirror"? Should we clarify what sort of image-use linking is acceptable in this case? Wjhonson 21:45, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
- It's the purpose of Commons, so to some extent that shouldn't be an issue. Ironically it is the biggest potential bandwidth eater. Rich Farmbrough 03:30 12 January 2013 (GMT).
Wide table, and getting wider.... wrap table columns? 
It would be nice if each entry listed when it was added to this list and when it was last updated. But that makes it even more ridiculously wide. Perhaps the data should be wrapped across several rows to make it all fit in a normal browser window? Group the long and short fields together into columns, and a big field at the bottom for additional notes, like so:
|Date Updated||ranked||link to a special page|
|GFDL compliant||text / image||Access via Open Proxy?|
|Notes and other information|
|118||17:22, 29 September 2008||up||http://www.popkult.de (from de-WP)|
|17:18, 8 December 2008||no||Special:Mytalk|
|no GFDL, no authors, own copyright|
|139||02:52, 4 February 2009||up||http://www.spivo.com/encyclopedia/|
|nothing about GFDL; no history, no link to actual article; pulls content in real-time. Special pages do not always work, see talk page for work-around|
I acknowledge that moving table cells around for a project page this huge is a major chore. DMahalko 09:18, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
See http://www.selltimeshare.co.uk/wiki.asp?k=timeshare as an example.Naraht 20:11, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
"they can have it auto-update once a day or the like to keep it current" 
- I think that was written when Wikipedia was much smaller. Rich Farmbrough 03:28 12 January 2013 (GMT).
It is difficult to add a site here, so I'm just going to list it on the talk page:
Example page: http://www.hifisound.freeiz.com/?sound=Crescent_Hotel