MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 885: Line 885:


From [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2008_Archive_Jul_1#http:.2F.2Fspam.sermonaudio.com], reported by MER-C, raised again at [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam&oldid=233885967#sermonaudio.com]. Connection to banned [[user:Jason Gastrich]], whose domains are all on the meta blacklist. Adding now, this for logging. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 19:48, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
From [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2008_Archive_Jul_1#http:.2F.2Fspam.sermonaudio.com], reported by MER-C, raised again at [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam&oldid=233885967#sermonaudio.com]. Connection to banned [[user:Jason Gastrich]], whose domains are all on the meta blacklist. Adding now, this for logging. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 19:48, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

:And this is, I suppose, an entirely [[WP:AGF|good faith]] attempt to deal with spam, and not an attempt to bypass [[Talk:Mt. Blanco Fossil Museum#Banned|community discussion]] and get the upper hand in an [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mt._Blanco_Fossil_Museum&action=history edit dispute]? [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 20:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC)


=Proposed removals=
=Proposed removals=

Revision as of 20:53, 24 August 2008

    Spam blacklists
    Shortcuts

    Mediawiki:Spam-blacklist is meant to be used by the spam blacklist extension. Unlike the meta spam blacklist, this blacklist affects pages on the English Wikipedia only. Any administrator may edit the spam blacklist. See Wikipedia:Spam blacklist for more information about the spam blacklist.

    Instructions for editors

    There are 4 sections for posting comments below. Please make comments in the appropriate section. These links take you to the appropriate section:

    1. Proposed additions
    2. Proposed removals
    3. Troubleshooting and problems
    4. Discussion

    Each section has a message box with instructions. In addition, please sign your posts with ~~~~ after your comment.

    Completed requests are archived. Additions and removals are logged, reasons for blacklisting can be found there.

    Addition of the templates {{Link summary}} (for domains), {{IP summary}} (for IP editors) and {{User summary}} (for users with account) results in the COIBot reports to be refreshed. See User:COIBot for more information on the reports.

    Instructions for admins

    Any admin unfamiliar with this page should probably read this first, thanks.
    If in doubt, please leave a request and a spam-knowledgeable admin will follow-up.

    Please consider using Special:BlockedExternalDomains instead, powered by the AbuseFilter extension. This is faster and more easily searchable, though only supports whole domains and not whitelisting.

    1. Does the site have any validity to the project?
    2. Have links been placed after warnings/blocks? Have other methods of control been exhausted? Would referring this to our anti-spam bot, XLinkBot be a more appropriate step? Is there a WikiProject Spam report? If so, a permanent link would be helpful.
    3. Please ensure all links have been removed from articles and discussion pages before blacklisting. (They do not have to be removed from user or user talk pages).
    4. Make the entry at the bottom of the list (before the last line). Please do not do this unless you are familiar with regex — the disruption that can be caused is substantial.
    5. Close the request entry on here using either {{done}} or {{not done}} as appropriate. The request should be left open for a week maybe as there will often be further related sites or an appeal in that time.
    6. Log the entry. Warning: if you do not log any entry you make on the blacklist, it may well be removed if someone appeals and no valid reasons can be found. To log the entry, you will need this number - 233997630 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.
    →snippet for logging: {{/request|233997630#section_name}}
    →snippet for logging of WikiProject Spam items: {{WPSPAM|233997630#section_name}}
    →A user-gadget for handling additions to and removals from the spam-blacklist is available at User:Beetstra/Gadget-Spam-blacklist-Handler

    Proposed additions

    greenoptimistic.com + cars-and-trees.com

    Associated domains both adding links to Green articles (always at top of ELs).

    greenoptimistic.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
    cars-and-trees.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

    Edits

    More in-depth report at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#spam.greenoptimistic.com

    Caomhin (talk) 13:06, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    May be excessive to list for now. IPs warned though which is always a good thing to do. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 11:32, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Now  Stale? --Herby talk thyme 11:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    afii.org

    Please add afii.org and orthodoxjewishbible.org to the blacklist. These are to url's that feature the same junk content repeatedly being added to Bible society. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 21:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    afii.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
    orthodoxjewishbible.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
    Fredeee (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)

    At a glance Fredeee seems to have a potential WP:COI and there seems a lot of keyword rich ELs added for those domains. Caomhin (talk) 22:16, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with that characterization of Fredeee. In fact he declared his COI and claimed his identity here. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 00:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I deleted all the links I could find in the article space per WP:EL. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 00:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    HELLO - I don't want to be a pest, but is this request going to be approved or denied? I just reverted him again. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 19:59, 16 July 2008 (UTC) Please also check:[reply]

    ojbible.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 --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 01:33, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Spam domains


    Related domains


    Possibly related domains


    Reference
    Blacklisting is a last step since there are reports that Google and other search engines are sometimes consulting our blacklist when evaluating domains as possible spamdexers. In most cases, I blacklist after about four warnings. I see this editor has been blocked briefly. If he spams again (using this or another account), let me know and I'll blacklist his spam domains. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:41, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Now  Stale? --Herby talk thyme 11:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    oilcarsandmotors.com

    Original report Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#spam.oilcarsandmotors.com_.2B_spam.tenssolution.com.

    Request blacklisting on the basis that the EL is being replaced by those same IPs about once/day. Edit summaries are clear why the EL is removed.

    oilcarsandmotors.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

    Most recent edit by 67.191.3.224 includes removing alternate ELs [5] - ACEA is certainly a valid link, carbibles.com needs a proper check but at a glance it has a fair amount of info and looks reasonable.

    Caomhin (talk) 10:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Bit early for listing in my view. Warnings etc first would be more appropriate for now. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 11:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Now  Stale? --Herby talk thyme 11:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    chaoticplayer.spruz.com

    The IP address 99.242.59.219 repeatedly adds links to this site to Chaotic-related articles [6] [7] [8], which violates the Wikipedia External Links policy on the grounds of requiring registration to view. The process of adding these links involves changing the URL of existing valid links, such as to the official website, while leaving the link text the same or modifying it slightly. [9]

    chaoticplayer.spurz.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

    Ⓔfitu (Ⓣalk) 03:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't see any links at present (en linksearch), and the cited anonIP editor appears to be doing this only occasionally. Blacklisting the domain feels like over-kill at present...if there's only one problematic editor, easier to try solving the problem at that level first. DMacks (talk) 07:58, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Now  Stale? --Herby talk thyme 11:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    phobos.apple.com

    phobos.apple.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

    Can anyone think of any particular reason that anyone would legitimately require to link to items for download at the iTunes store in a Wikipedia article? I'm unaware if any particular spamming as such has taken place - but I have noticed (and reverted) people adding these links from time to time. A recent occurrence prompted me to suggest this here. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 07:10, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Looking at the en linksearch, I don't see any good uses. Some artist/album/song pages link to them, but "download/buy this item here" doesn't seem within WP:EL (OTOH, it's better than linking to youtube or other sources of copyright-infringing download:). At least one image page uses it as the source for an album-cover image, but I think that could be replaced with a less infringing fair-use version (scan the album instead of taking a third-party's work, or pull from artist's own website to get an authentic original). Blacklist feels a bit pre-emptive right now...I don't see a massive/repeated/spammed use of this site. Could XLinkBot I guess. Or make an effort to remove all such links now and see how rapidly they reappear to justify blacklist (they'd all have to be removed if it's blacklisted anyway). DMacks (talk) 07:49, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, no worries. Over the next few days, I'll start going through the linksearch results and removing links from article space (yes, I'll do that first) and see what happens. I'll see about making a request for an XLinkBot addition too. Unless anyone else here can think of a good reason why these iTunes links need to be here... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 18:24, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    www.bollango.com

    First extensively by User:Baba roy and then by IP 66.245.157.97 ChiragPatnaik (talk) 04:35, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I warned the IP which had not been done. I'm inclined to wait a while to see if the message has got home. If there was further link placement I think this should be listed. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 11:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Now  Stale? --Herby talk thyme 11:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Possibly. Will keep an eye out> ChiragPatnaik (talk) 05:06, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    watchindia.tv

    This site is continuously being added, I have removed it on past ocassions and was added as recently as earlier today. ChiragPatnaik (talk) 04:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Can we have some IPs/users who are placing this please. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 18:28, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    ChiragPatnaik (talk) 18:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks - problematic I agree. Reflecting & looking to list. If they do place the link again once the block expires request blocking & I will link for sure. Regards --Herby talk thyme 19:04, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Spam and article-tampering by Volano Software Inc.

    Deleted spam pages


    Article tampering


    Domain registration

    Volano Software Inc.

    125A-1030 Denman Street
    Vancouver, British Columbia V6G 2M6


    Spam accounts


    Spam domains


    See also

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 04:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 04:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    hiitsource.com and others

    A concerted effort over more than a year to get related links (pub-6352184038900190 or registered to the same person) onto Wikipedia. Most recent addition is today [10].

    Websites:

    Accounts:

    Editor is using multiple IPs so requesting blacklisting. -- SiobhanHansa 20:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks &  Done. --Herby talk thyme 12:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    FYI:
    Cross-wiki:


    Related domains:


    Accounts:
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 14:32, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Typemock.com spam

    Spam domains


    Spam account

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 12:38, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 15:17, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    northsaintpaulresident.blogspot.com spam, disruption and threats on Wikipedia

    Spam sockpuppets


    Spam domain


    See also

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 15:08, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Also note that this link has been spammed onto both North St. Paul, Minnesota (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and Maplewood, Minnesota (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). --Elkman (Elkspeak) 15:18, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 15:20, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Seedbox Hosting spam

    Spam domains


    Spam accounts


    Deleted page

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:57, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done--A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:38, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    More spam today
    Redirects to the now-blacklisted myseedbox.com site


    Another spam account


    Related domains
    Notwithstanding their totally unrelated domain names, all but two are redirects to myseedbox.com
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
     Done: additional domains blacklisted. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 07:58, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Google Adsense ID: 5585439881931722

    Spam domains

    Google Adsense ID: 5585439881931722


    Spam account

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:19, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done--A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:38, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    cypher-zone.com

    Spam domain

    Google Adsense ID: 1874958528963200


    Spam account

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:48, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    ukofficialrecords.co.uk spam

    Spam domains


    Related domains


    Spam accounts

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:30, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    termpaperessayswriting.com

    Spam domain


    Related domains


    Spam account

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 15:24, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    water4gas.com spam

    Spam domain


    Related domains


    Possibly affiliated domains


    Spam accounts

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:41, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Golbro Tiger View Resort spam

    Spam domain


    Spam accounts

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:50, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    fifthindependent.com

    Spam domain


    Spam/vandal account

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:02, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    orissamedical.com spam

    Spam domains


    Related domain


    Spam accounts

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:00, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done (except nephroindia.com) --A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    blueresume.com

    Spam domain

    Google Adsense ID: 5373924336361027


    Related domains


    Spam accounts

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:25, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 01:54, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    oldunreal.com

    Accounts that have re-added the link:

    Links to this website have been repeatedly added by IPs to the Unreal article since the beginning of July when the article was cleaned up. In addition, the following users are the site owners/contributors:

    They have participated in discussions on Talk:Unreal, in which they are not shy about admitting that they asked people from the website to come to sway opinion on Wikipedia. I've already given them ample policy reasons to stop adding the link, firstly because of WP:SPAM, which I believe is justified because the content of the website is not significant enough to meet the requirements of WP:V -- it is not documented by secondary sources. The website's proponents (who are all either from the website itself or related community sites who couldn't help but leave their own URLs also) argue that the usefulness or popularity of the website justifies inclusion, but again there is no objective evidence that the website is either of these things. They have continually reiterated OR-based arguments despite being told, repeatedly, that OR is not allowed on WP, and they apparently refuse to read or accept established policies, believing their own case to be exempt. In some cases the visitors have also vandalized the article, used article space to make personal attacks, or overwritten official game information with information about their own mod. I believe it is an attempt to promote the website or its work on Wikipedia. Ham Pastrami (talk) 01:48, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Note this off-Wikipedia thread:
    and this vandalism.
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:10, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Before any decision is made here, we should get some consensus among established editors. I have left a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Comments wanted re: disputed link for the Unreal article asking for comments. I suggest centralizing the conversation at Talk:Unreal#Unofficial 227 patch. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that oldunreal.com is not a reliable source, but I'm not sure if a spam blacklist addition is the right way to go here as it's only being added on a single page. In this instance it might be better to request page protection for a short while. Hope this helps, Gazimoff 11:27, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Monarchy Brokers spam

    Spammer


    Spammer account

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:37, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    relianceinsider.com spam

    Domain spammed
    Google Adsense ID: 0761072420661746


    Related domains
    Google Adsense ID: 2213215412374142
    Google Adsense ID: 0761072420661746


    Accounts used

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:37, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    american-steamers.com

    Spam domain


    Spam account

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:55, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:45, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    web-anatomy.com

    flvplayer.web-anatomy.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

    FLV player spam from an IP at the same ISP; two blocks (and the third one expires today), multiple warnings. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Spam#Web-anatomy.

    --AVRS (talk) 13:58, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:40, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    This turns out to include cross-wiki spamming, so I have relisted this at Meta:  Defer to Global blacklist --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    downtownbellevue.com

    Links
    Accounts

    Repeated re-addition of commercial link (here, here, here, here, and here) that does not meet criteria of WP:ELNO and WP:NOT#REPOSITORY. It's a community blog and forum site, and appears to be getting added for self-promotion of the site. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:15, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:45, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    be-long.com and hosebelt.com spam

    Spam domains


    Spam accounts

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 15:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:41, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    "weaponologist": article-disruption and eBay store spam

    Spam domain


    Related domain


    Spam account

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done
    Note that I blacklisted all eBay stores pre-emptively. We get spam from store-owners from time to time and I see no way 99% of these links can ever meet our External Links Guideline. Any legitimate uses can always be handled on a case-by-case basis at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:44, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Shine Music School spam

    Spam accounts


    Spam domain

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:00, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    flexyx.com

    Spam domain


    Spam account

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:41, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    handbagvip.com spam

    Spam articles


    Spam domain


    Account

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 23:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    gaysbr.com

    Spam domain


    Related domain


    Spam accounts

    Very disruptive spam -- spams large chunks of spam in place of sections of unrelated articles. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 00:21, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    MyOyVey

    Why has myoyvey been removed from the Yiddish articles, and put on spam block since the website is all about Yiddish--Java7837 (talk) 02:50, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    New West Realty (Chicago) spam

    Articles deleted as blatant advertising


    Spam domain


    Related domains


    Accounts

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:34, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:59, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    sexhealthguru.com

    Level four warning on 2008-08-17 [25] (and on other accounts). Editor back again today [26] [27] [28]. Admin may also want to consider this exchange today [29] [30] in case I'm just being grumpy. -- SiobhanHansa 12:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Yes agreed &  Done thanks. Sorry it took more than "5 mins" ;) --Herby talk thyme 17:56, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    MyCloud.com.au spam on Wikipedia

    Spam domains


    Spam accounts

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 15:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


     Done --A. B. (talk • contribs) 15:28, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    rich-media-project.com

    rich-media-project.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

    See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#Rich Media Project. The link has also been added to the top of an internal links list in fr:Flash Video.

    --AVRS (talk) 17:19, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


     Done earlier today. However, it looks like I should have listed this on the meta blacklist since it's been spammed cross-wiki. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    mysmp.com

    69.255.236.89 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • RDNS • tracert • robtex.com • StopForumSpam • Google • AboutUs • Project HoneyPot)

    Persistent, long-term spamming on finance pages. Ronnotel (talk) 17:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Thanks, Ronnotel.
    Domain
    Google Adsense ID: 0719114306637522


    Additional accounts


    Cross-wiki spam
     Defer to Global blacklist since it's cross-wiki; I'll take care of handling this on Meta.--A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    searchmycampus.com

    I have reverted most of the spam adds by the above IP for searchmycampus.com. IP blocked for 24hrs. They may add the link again. Please blacklist the website -- Tinu Cherian - 08:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Not as far as I am concerned. I'd rather see what happens after the block expires. If they do repeat it then it should be blacklisted but blacklisting is a last resort. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok no issues.Considering the style of contribs of the this IP editor, they are likely to try again. Anyways let us wait for the block expire. I reported this here as it was a big pain reverting these all the large scale additions of this website.-- Tinu Cherian - 09:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I kinda agree but AGF for now I think. With rollback it only takes a moment? Cheers --Herby talk thyme 10:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    g0ogle.co.uk

    Link was posted via a misleading edit summary to Google (disambiguation). It appears to be a referal page, to gain hits / revenue. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:32, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Agreed (& user blocked).  Done --Herby talk thyme 18:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    magicurl.net

    A tinyURL type website that is being used to redirect to the already blacklisted site disneylandresort-paris.tk. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:32, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Hum - url shorteners go straight to Meta. As such  Defer to Global blacklist but I've done it there! Thanks --Herby talk thyme 18:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    weddings-readings.info

    Editors:

    All accounts warned Maxpogoda back adding it today [31].

    A permanent block of the Maxpogoda account might be a good idea too since it seems to be spam only.-- SiobhanHansa 14:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Spamming continuing [32]. -- SiobhanHansa 11:52, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Done and checking the spammer. Guy (Help!) 20:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    sermonaudio.com

    sermonaudio.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

    Spammers

    From [33], reported by MER-C, raised again at [34]. Connection to banned user:Jason Gastrich, whose domains are all on the meta blacklist. Adding now, this for logging. Guy (Help!) 19:48, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    And this is, I suppose, an entirely good faith attempt to deal with spam, and not an attempt to bypass community discussion and get the upper hand in an edit dispute? *Dan T.* (talk) 20:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals

    www.vuze.com

    Cannot add official site for Vuze (client) page under external links without delisting. At least delist it for that page. Thanks! ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 03:45, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Deferwhite It was heavily spammed before (see[35]) so de-blacklisting leaves us wide open to further attacks. Suggest requesting the exact page(s) you need at the whitelist instead. -- SiobhanHansa 11:50, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. I've done that. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 21:03, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm, I've just had a look at the initial report, and I don't see the spamming. Actually, I don't see any spamming whatsoever. I've looked at about half of the edits of the IP's listed, and not a single external link was added by those IPs. Special:Contributions/60.52.74.63 was listed, for example. What on earth do those edits have to do with spamming? They look like helpful contributions to me. --Conti|✉ 11:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    My reading of the report is that it's edits like these - [36] [37] [38] [39] - that were the initial link additions that were spamming. The edits by 60.52.74.63 cleaned up those initial edits and the similarity of the IP address -given the edits as well- is an indication that it is the same editor under a moving IP. Which is one common pattern seen in link promotion (and other editing).
    Certainly several of the editors mentioned in the report seemed simply to be adding the official site to the Vuze page - which is unlikely to be spamming. And it seems the problem is with people promoting things published through Vuze rather than Vuze trying to promote themselves on the Vuze page. -- SiobhanHansa 16:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, I missed those edits, thanks. I still don't see much of a spam problem, tho, only a few articles were spammed. Anyhow, those edits were made a year ago, so I think we can remove that entry now. We could always readd it if someone starts to spam that URL again to those few articles. --Conti|✉ 17:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    postchronicle.com

    Verified to not be blocked by meta here. I'm not sure why this page is blocked as spam. Would be helpful (as I noted at meta) for the dismissal of rumors about Bernie Mac's death. Perhaps there is some good reason it is blocked. I don't know. Protonk (talk) 18:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Post Chronicle is problematic - far too complicated to explain just why, but you can try http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=ajdnnkIECaPE&refer=us or any other site linking to the Chicago Sun-Times. Nick (talk) 20:50, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • no Declined. Spammed by the site owner in a deceitful way, some history of copyvios, virtually all content is also available elsewhere. If there is a genuinely unique link which meets WP:RS being written by an identified authority, then whitelisting of that page may be appropriate. Guy (Help!) 23:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    badastronomy.com

    This site seems to have been inadvertently blocked due to the domain badastronomy.info being used as linkspam. Badastronomy.com is used as a reference source in several wikipedia articles and deserves to be unblocked. See Phil Plait#Badastronomy.com for a description of the site. --Lasunncty (talk) 10:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Currently badastronomy.com redirects to http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/ Can the discovermagazine.com URL not be used instead? Generally we shouldn't use redirected URLs. -- SiobhanHansa 17:09, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    While a blog is equally questionable maybe closing this as no Declined, no point in delisting something that is a redirect. --Herby talk thyme 11:22, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    The Discover magazine website only has the most recent badastronomy articles (March 2005 and later). Articles written prior to that are still on the old site. The old homepage is at <domain>/bad/index.html. --Lasunncty (talk) 23:34, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    lulu.com

    In the article Lulu (company), I'm being prevented from adding appropriately hyperlinked references because the list has lulu.com in it. See footnote 22, where I had to mung the URL in order to give a link to lulu's policies. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of lulu customers try to use wikipedia to spam for their books, and maybe that's what got lulu.com on the list. However, I don't believe that lulu itself is guilty of spamming. I would recommend eliminating it from the blacklist. If that's not acceptable, there may be an alternative, which would be to write a different and/or more complex regex that would block links to particular books on lulu, while allowing links to the site itself, pages giving its policies, etc. If the intention is to forbid links to authors' stores and books, I think the lulu.com line could be removed, and you could insert lines reading stores.lulu.com and lulu.com\/content .--76.167.77.165 (talk) 01:32, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    If you have a specific link at the site, the better solution would be to request it at WT:WHITELIST, rather than unblacklisting the entire site.
    However, note that forums rarely, if ever, qualify as a reliable source, so should be removed from the article. However, the link to the lulu policies may get approval from admins for whitelisting. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 02:15, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined per previous discussions etc. --Herby talk thyme 11:23, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    healthfieldmedicare.suite101.com

    I tried to post a link to an article on this site as an example of something in a talk page...not as a reference on the main page. I think the article would have enriched the discussion, whether or not it was acceptable to use as a source. I did not suggest using it as a source. Why is this domain blacklisted for spam? I can understand rationale to not accept some or most individual articles as sources, but to blacklist them? I would like to hear justification for this, and in the absence of such justification I'd like to request you to unlist this domain. Thanks, Cazort (talk) 04:26, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Cazort, this site is blacklisted due to massive spamming (hundreds of links spammed by multiple Suite101.com editors). In the course of investigating the whole affair, it turned out that Suite101.com:
    • Has no editorial oversight (see WP:RS) and articles are essentially self-published
    • Offers its authors financial incentives to increase page views
    • Fails Wikipedia's core content policies:
    Previous Suite101.com discussions
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 05:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. This (more than) thoroughly addresses my concerns. Cazort (talk) 23:37, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Ok - closed as no Declined then for archiving. --Herby talk thyme 11:24, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    telogis.com

    Requesting white-listing for usage in the article Telogis --bapinney (talk) 04:56, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    • Any idea why it was blacklisted? I understand the domain was hijacked at one point, but it is valid right now. Guy (Help!) 20:49, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    diplomaticsociety.org

    Please list 


    www.diplomaticsociety.org

    The Knights of St Gabriel is a international organization of the laity. International practice shows that persons and bodies other than states are often the subjects of international rights and duties, such developments are not inconsistent with the structure of international law. International legal personality , independent of specific of territorial sovereign status.

    OUR GLOBAL LINKS



    All the Embassies; DIPLOMATIC ASSOCIATIONS (UK) Asociación de Diplomáticos Escritores (MEX) BON Web Embassies (FR) Congrosso Europeu Diplomatic Traffic (NGO's)(US) Diplomacia & Negocios (BR) DIRECTORIO CULTURAL (AR) Everything Catholic International Alliance of Catholic Knights (IR) Idealist.org NGO's (USA) International Organizations INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS (UK) USA MILITARY ARCHDIOCESE Catholic Church in Australia Catholic Canada (CA) US CATHOLIC WEB Catholic Search Engine CATHOLIC COMMUNITY CATHOLIC COMMUNITY FORUM CATHOLIC ONLINE CHRISTSITES Catholic's in the Holy Land, Al-Bushra. Catholic World Every Thing Catholic Official Nobility, Chivalry and Heraldry Orders, Decorations and Medals Indonesian Catholic Community Knights of St. Columba (UK) Knights of St Gabriel KNIGHTS OF THE SOUTHERN CROSS (AU) Knights of Saint Thomas More (BEL) Mande Bilaterial Organizations Hungarian NGO Directory (HU) NIGERIAN Catholics of St.Mulumba Núcleo de la Lealtad (SP) Political Science Resources: PRAGUE LEADER'S (CZ) Public Diplomacy,University of S.C. Annenberg School Europe's-Diplomatic Associations SOCIAL ACTION OFFICE/Peace Making NGO's (AU) Quo Vadis University of Birmingham (UK) UN Peace Keeping forces Worldwide NGO Directory (US) WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES / Human Rights WCC / Economy & Development WCC/Refugees and migrants —Preceding unsigned comment added by AmbassadorW (talk • contribs) 01:14, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    The link was blacklisted on meta: see [40]. x42bn6 Talk Mess 02:00, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Lots of spam, plenty of warnings -- I'm not surprised it was blacklisted:
    Typically, we do not remove domains from the spam blacklist in response to site-owners' requests. Instead, we de-blacklist sites when trusted, high-volume editors request the use of blacklisted links because of their encyclopaedic value in support of our encyclopaedia pages. If such an editor asks to use your links, I'm sure the request will be carefully considered and your links may well be removed.
    The global blacklist is used by more than just our 700+ Wikimedia Foundation wikis (Wikipedias, Wiktionaries, etc.). All 3000+ Wikia wikis plus a substantial percentage of the 25,000+ unrelated wikis that run on our MediaWiki software have chosen to incorporate this blacklist in their own spam filtering. Each wiki has a local "whitelist" which overrides the global blacklist for that project only. Some of the non-Wikimedia sites may be interested in your links; by all means feel free to request local whitelisting on those.
    Unlike Wikipedia, DMOZ is a web directory specifically designed to categorize and list all Internet sites; if you've not already gotten your sites listed there, I encourage you to do so -- it's a more appropriate venue for your links than our wikis. Their web address: http://www.dmoz.org/.
    Should you find yourself penalized in any search engine rankings and you believe that to be a result of blacklisting here, you should deal directly with the search engine's staff. We do not have any arrangements with any of the search engine companies; if they're using our blacklist it's purely on their own initiative. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 05:54, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • no Declined per A. B. Legitimate blacklist, and on meta anyway so this is the wrong venue. Guy (Help!) 20:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    ezinearticles.com

    I'm not really sure why this domain is blacklisted. I wanted to add a link to one of their articles to the entry on Account for profits, only to be informed that the site tripped the spam filter. I was able to find another copy of the article I needed, but I still don't understand why it is necessary to blacklist this whole domain. --Eastlaw (talk) 21:51, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    See m:Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2007/05#ezinearticles.com, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2006 Archive Dec#ezinearticles.com links and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Mar#Spamming through ezinearticles.com to Wikipedia: James B. Allen spam for why I think it's unlikely to be removed. x42bn6 Talk Mess 22:34, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Troubleshooting and problems

    members.aol.com

    When I first became a Wikipedia editor, I added very-pertinent "External links" to articles, which were hosted at "members.aol.com/..." - However, they were reverted by a bot (which, by the way, has since been shut down). Also, I noticed that this page contains an "External link" to one of those sites. [41]

    The web page that I want to link to was created by an individual, and was featured at LewRockwell.com, shortly thereafter. It is directly pertinent to this existing Wikipedia article, and would make an ideal addition, to the "External links" section there.

    I also tried to do a search (it was a little difficult) on the global blacklist, and while hometown.aol.com was list, members.aol.com was not. Has this been removed from the "blacklist"? If not, ihow can exceptions be made?

    This web page is a widely-read resource, dedicated to that book. Thanks, Pacificus (talk) 05:17, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    RegExp problem on pt.wiki

    Hi. Anyone knows what's the RegExp for the following:

    • travian.pt/?uc=
    • travian.com.br/?uc=

    Example diff. We need to block that on Portuguese Wikipedia. Not the Travian domain, only part of URL used for referral linking. We tried this and this but doesn't works. Thanks in advance. Mosca (talk) 23:19, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    travian\.(?:pt|com\.br)/\?uc=
    -- seth (talk) 16:32, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    bugs in list

    hi!
    please correct the following:

    \bhonor-cords\.com\b\   -> \bhonor-cords\.com\b

    a closing backslash could crash the whole extension in worst case. tia! -- seth (talk) 16:32, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    FYI, bad regexes are split out and ignored.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:02, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    well, if you are that sure, try to insert backslash at the end of the last entry. ;-)
    when i do this in my offline version of the extension (which is somehow modified, i have to admit), it crashes the script. and afaics the backslash does not need to be at the last entry for that behavior, because the regexp is built in blocks.
    perhaps only my modified version will crash, and not the real one. but anyhow it would be better to fix that by removing that closing backslash, wouldn't it?
    oh, we can test, whether the line is really kicked. if it were kicked, i would not be able to link the following entry: [deleted]. -- seth (talk) 17:25, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks - fixed I hope. Cheers --Herby talk thyme 17:27, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    yes, it is fixed now. i cannot link http://cool-maps.blogspot.com/test anylonger. and for archiving reasons i delete the previous link, too. -- seth (talk) 17:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    List not working?

    Today I was able to save this edit which included the url for sexhealthguru.com (and also this one which had the url in the section I was editing).

    This URL was blacklisted yesterday as \bsexhealthguru\.com\b [42].

    Is this a problem with the list? The blacklist entry? Or me? -- SiobhanHansa 12:31, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Hum - I couldn't save on this page with a full http:// link to that domain. --Herby talk thyme 13:11, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Interesting. I can save the full http:// sss.sexhealthguru.com in my own user space [43] but not on this page. But I can't save http:// www.sexhealthguru.com in either. Is this worthy of a bug report? -- SiobhanHansa 20:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Discussion

    Blacklist logging

    Full Instructions for Admins


    Quick Reference

    For Spam reports or requests originating from this page, use template {{/request|0#section_name}}

    • {{/request|213416274#Section_name}}
    • Insert the oldid 213416274 a hash "#" and the Section_name (Underscoring_spaces_where_applicable):
    • Use within the entry log here.

    For Spam reports or requests originating from Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam use template {{WPSPAM|0#section_name}}

    • {{WPSPAM|182725895#Section_name}}
    • Insert the oldid 182725895 a hash "#" and the Section_name (Underscoring_spaces_where_applicable):
    • Use within the entry log here.

    Have added a supplement, a general " how-to of sorts. --Hu12 (talk) 10:31, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: if you do not log your entries it may be removed if someone appeals and no valid reasons can be found.

    Addition to the COIBot reports

    The lower list in the COIBot reports now have after each link four numbers between brackets (e.g. "www.example.com (0, 0, 0, 0)"):

    1. first number, how many links did this user add (is the same after each link)
    2. second number, how many times did this link get added to wikipedia (for as far as the linkwatcher database goes back)
    3. third number, how many times did this user add this link
    4. fourth number, to how many different wikipedia did this user add this link.

    If the third number or the fourth number are high with respect to the first or the second, then that means that the user has at least a preference for using that link. Be careful with other statistics from these numbers (e.g. good user do add a lot of links). If there are more statistics that would be useful, please notify me, and I will have a look if I can get the info out of the database and report it. The bots are running on a new database, Eagle 101 is working on transferring the old data into this database so it becomes more reliable.

    For those with access to IRC, there this data is available in real time. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:41, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    poking COIBot

    I notice that sometimes people who are not active on IRC need some link reports. Admins here can now add {{LinkSummary|domain}} to User:COIBot/Poke, when COIBot picks up the edit to that page (and it should), it will put the domains into its reporting queue (high priority, which is, only behind waiting XWiki reports) and create a report on the link(s). The first report should be saved within about 5 minutes, if it takes longer than 15 minutes there is probably something wrong, and it may be useful to add the template with the link again (it reads the added part of the diffs (the right column)), or poke me or another person who is active on IRC personally. Hope this is of help. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 12:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    P.S. Please don't overuse this function, everything still needs to be saved .. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    It had some startup problems, but all seems to work fine now. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    archive script

    Eagle 101 said he had one running on meta, is it possible to get it up and going here?--Hu12 10:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Would be good - Eagle hasn't been working on Meta for a while though & I've not seen anything (there was supposed to be a logging script too!) --Herby talk thyme 12:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Great news, Ive written a script that can archive this page given the templates that we use, I can create a approved archive along with a rejected archive if people are interested. βcommand 06:51, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    "Interested" - bit of an understatement there :) Great news - please feel free to help/supply the script. I tend to leave stuff around a week in case anyone shouts or adds more (archives once done should be left alone). How would you handle the "discussion" type bits? Cheers --Herby talk thyme 09:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    First question, do you want approved and rejected request in separate archives? as for the discussions we could get Misza bot over here for things older than 30 days. βcommand 17:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I would think one archive, seperate sections, like it is currently[44], not sure if the script can do that, but if so, doubt there would be objections in implementation...--Hu12 (talk) 00:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    There is no simple way of editing sections using the bot. (section editting is evil). it would just be one large archive. βcommand 00:59, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    MySpace

    Is all of MySpace blacklisted? I just had a speedy deletion where a link could not be posted to the original copyrighted source because of a blacklist. Rmhermen (talk) 19:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    blog.myspace was blacklisted Per request by Jimbo. what page? --Hu12 (talk) 20:18, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I was able to follow the link posted on the page to get to the myspace page; however, a link to it couldn't be added to the speedy deletion template. This seems to be the opposite of the behavior I would expect from the blacklist idea. Rmhermen (talk) 01:14, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Blacklisting applies everywhere (including templates), its a blacklist. Next time remove the "http://" or use <nowiki> Tag.--Hu12 (talk) 01:23, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, that isn't how it worked - the link in the article worked fine. It was only when added to the deletion template that it didn't show up at all - just the this link is blacklisted text. Well I haven't been to recreate the problem. Rmhermen (talk) 13:04, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I see what you mean now. The filter will not trip if the link was placed prior to the blacklisting. However if it is removed, re-added or another blacklisted link is added, the filter is triggered. --Hu12 (talk) 13:18, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Walled garden of copyright violating websites

    Every year, I have to deal with the individual who posted here making "official sites" for every single actor who appears in the TV series mentioned in that link. I just checked several local articles today, and found the links on them. I even found a link at es.wiki, but the article was a hoax. Now, would it be improper to blacklist all of the links within locally, or could this be a global issue?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    If the links are being spammed to other projects, it should be blacklisted on meta. Frequently, however, links get added innocently on smaller projects by good faith editors who bring in article text from bigger projects and translate it; we don't blacklist on meta if that's all that's happening.
    I was hoping to look for other domains however I have not had time to finish. I will blacklist these when I get some time.
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Before I blacklist any of these, I need some diffs and/or contributions histories showing:
    • Spammer has received multiple warnings (they can be across multiple accounts) (admins typically blacklist after 4 warnings unless there's some egregious behaviour that justifies sooner blacklisting)
      • It needs to be clear that these warned accounts is truly a spammer and not just an innocent editor
    Alternately, if a site presents a clear threat to Wikipedia and/or its readers, we may blacklist immediately. Examples:
    • Blatant, willful copyright infringement (I need example comparisons)
    • Malicious code embedded in web pages
    • Phishing
    • Personal attacks
    • Hacked site
    Thanks for your help. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:02, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    PS, I looked for about 15 minutes and only found this one measly IP with 4 edits (15 months ago) and no warnings:
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, I have removed the links from our project, and removed one of the links from es.wp. It's not really a threat to Wikipedia, but the websites are constantly added and are generally galleries of screencaps (and some of the websites violate the GFDL from us).—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm, an old item that I did not see. I have been playing with some new stuff in COIBot, and there is some data, but not a lot:

    I have generated some link and user reports (COIBot). The sites do not share IPs (some do), but 208.113.215.57; 208.113.214.31; 208.113.214.38 seem to be one of them. Maybe this helps the trail further. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:01, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Why blacklisted?

    Is there a resource that reveals the reason a site was blacklisted? 72.70.248.185 (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Other than the page history, I wouldn't know. An admin who frequents this page might know of a centralized location, however. -Jéské (v^_^v Mrrph-mph!) 23:09, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Depending on which blacklist was used, you should be able to find the reason at one of these:
    Unfortunately, not every entry gets logged (however there's a concerted effort nowadays to follow-up with admins that forget to do this.)
    When looking at the logs, you'll note that many domains have been logged in the format \bexample\.com\b (where example.com is the blacklisted domain). For this reason, I suggest browser-searching the list for "example", not "example.com".
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 23:19, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Anontalk

    It seems that the spammers are able to evade the entries on the page. See [45]. NanohaA'sYuriTalk, My master 00:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    The link just goes to the current history page of Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous. Could you provide a diff to a blacklisted link that was left? Thanks -- SiobhanHansa 17:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Further information showed this to be the offending edit. Sadly plain text links cannot be caught by the blacklist so this is:
    Resolved
    (if not really very satisfactory). -- SiobhanHansa 22:48, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Question

    Hi. Why don't we either blacklist or "XLinkBot blacklist" all websites confirmed to contain harmful malware that attempts to be automaticly downloaded into the computer? Isn't it External link policy not to link to those websites? Or if this list is for abused spamming only then is there a list for suggested additions to XLinkBot's list? Thanks. ~AH1(TCU) 15:55, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    It is one of the things that get a site onto the meta blacklist without question/abuse or whatever. Very quick. Problem is that if there are sites which are already heavily linked from wikipedia, then the problem still persists. It would be great to have a way of 'disabling' such external links (turn them into plain text when they match a regex e.g.) for as long as the malware is on there. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Our spam filter is now blocking spam in edit summaries

    The spam filter now appears to block spam addresses in edit summaries even if the domain is not in the page text. I just learned this the hard way. It's probably a response to all the shock site spam recently left in edit summaries by vandals; some will crash browsers. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:46, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    aceshowbiz.com

    Why is this blacklisted, seems legit to me? Andre666 (talk) 13:07, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist&oldid=233997630"