Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of e-mail spammers
considering that Spamhaus is currently being sued in part for mentioning someone on their ROKSO list, I'm not sure that they alone qualify as a reliable source.  In particular, the parts of  that mention "bias", "confidentiality" (SpamHaus doesn't release all evidence to the public that the collect to protect themselves in a court case), and "Recognition by other reliable sources" (in particular, courts have not recognized them).  To be clear, I *personally* feel that Spamhaus is a highly reliable source, but for purposes of Wikipedia defending itself in a legal sense, we need to be very conservative here
— User:Wrs1864, 18:32, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)