Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam: 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
Hu12 (talk | contribs)
91,877 edits
+
Hu12 (talk | contribs)
91,877 edits
Line 279: Line 279:


: Correct me if I am wrong but is the Wiki not about trying to build encyclopedic content on various topics through contributions from users around the world?
: Correct me if I am wrong but is the Wiki not about trying to build encyclopedic content on various topics through contributions from users around the world?
::;{{Link summary|easypetmd.com}}
::;{{AdSenseSummary|4240102933333679}}
::{{IP summary|208.78.128.207}}
::{{User summary|Zeroyon01}}
::[[WP:REFSPAM]] {{duck}}
::--[[User:Hu12|Hu12]] ([[User talk:Hu12|talk]]) 01:28, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:28, 7 April 2012

    When reporting spam, please use the appropriate template(s):
    As a courtesy, please consider informing other editors if their actions are being discussed.
    Shortcuts
    {{Link summary|example.com}} -- do not use "subst:" with this template - Do not include the "http://www." portion of the URL inside this template
    • {{IP summary}} - to report anonymous editors suspected of spamming:
    {{IP summary|127.0.0.1}} --- do not use "subst:" with this template
    • {{User summary}} - to report registered users suspected of spamming:
    {{User summary|Username}} -- do not use "subst:" with this template

    Also, please include links ("diffs") to sample spam edits.

    Click here to start a new report
    Indicators
    Reports completed:
     Done
    no No action
     Stale
    Defer discussion:
     Defer to XLinkBot
     Defer to Local blacklist
     Defer to Global blacklist
     Defer to Abuse filter
    Information:
     Additional information needed
    information Note:

    spamming various China articles

    221.7.151.34 (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) for a travel website. LibStar (talk) 09:08, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    spamming on page Tenga (masturbation toy)

    Bfitzkie (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)

    The user continue to spam his shop site on the page. --67.163.68.77 (talk) 23:59, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Also;
    --Hu12 (talk) 12:43, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    User was recently banned for vandalism and is now spamming the same site using different IPs. --198.228.225.247 (talk) 18:14, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    MER-C 10:36, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Long term spam from 115.42.229.82

    115.42.229.82 (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)

    For almost a year, its only edits have been to add inappropriate exlinks. I'm removing the ones that remain (which is almost all of them). Never been warned, but fraudulent citations like [1] make me want to skip the formalities and just block it for a year. Your call. Kilopi (talk) 17:03, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Sites spammed
    These are all sites to amazon products. Essentially the same as Made for Adsense sites, but for Amazon. Since there are so many, and have been added multiple times, an IP block wont stop the user from using another IP or creating another account in order to add these links again. I'm blacklisting the sites.--Hu12 (talk) 17:47, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Continued;
    IP is now blocked--Hu12 (talk) 14:44, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    imagesandcameras.com

    Adsense google_ad_client = pub-9254673049129298 (Track - Report - reverseinternet.com • meta
    Track - Report)

    imagesandcameras.com: Linksearch en - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C Cross-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Local - COIBot-XWiki - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.org • Live link: http://www.imagesandcameras.com

    Spam accounts

    --Hu12 (talk) 20:01, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    dartsmad.com

    Adsense google_ad_client = pub-0587099499509082 (Track - Report - reverseinternet.com • meta
    Track - Report)

    dartsmad.com: Linksearch en - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C Cross-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Local - COIBot-XWiki - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.org • Live link: http://www.dartsmad.com

    Spam accounts

    --Hu12 (talk) 05:26, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    knowyourfilms.com

    Adsense google_ad_client = pub-5859424709240046 (Track - Report - reverseinternet.com • meta: Track - Report)
    Google Analytics ID: UA-24803384 - (Track - Report - reverseinternet.com • Meta: Track - Report)

    Spam pages
    Sites spammed
    Spammers

    MER-C 03:45, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    user-page = spam--Hu12 (talk) 04:10, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    health-tourism.com

    Please check the different links pointing to this URL: health-tourism.com --187.61.130.221 (talk) 01:49, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Tracking. MER-C 04:53, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Agartala

    Many articles on Indian villages, towns and cities seem to want to use their pages for commercial promotion. But sometimes it seems a thin line between describing the commercial set up and and outright spam. Please check out Agartala. It lists all major banks, newspapers, private companies giving their contact details. This seems to be the template for Indian towns, not at all an exception. Thanks Span (talk) 11:32, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    futureconsiderations.ca

    Linkspamming hockey prospect "scouting" website. Actually seems to be replacing spam from a competing website as well.

    TerminalPreppie (talk) 20:17, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    competing site...hockeyprospect.com: Linksearch en - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C Cross-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Local - COIBot-XWiki - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.org • Live link: http://www.hockeyprospect.com TerminalPreppie (talk) 20:21, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Adsense google_ad_client = pub-2244949209000976 (Track - Report - reverseinternet.com • meta
    Track - Report)
    Google Analytics ID
    UA-26010934 - (Track - Report - reverseinternet.com • Meta: Track - Report)
    --Hu12 (talk) 20:33, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    watermanpublications.blogspot.in: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
    watermanpublications.blogspot.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
    datelineagartala.blogspot.in: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
    datelineagartala.blogspot.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
    bodhjungschoolalumni.blogspot.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
    bodhjungschool.blogspot.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

    Publisher Owner Editor - Anjan Banik - anjan.writer@gmail.com / anjan_writer@yahoo.co.in [2]

    P.O. Dhaleswar, Road No 08, Agartala, Tripura, India - 799007
    Spam accounts

    --Hu12 (talk) 04:07, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    www.fusioncharts.com

    This company appears to have employed a single purpose user user:Hjoharat via [3] to pepper WP liberally with external links to its site and create WP articles about its products. This has been going on for some time.--Aspro (talk) 21:25, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Spam accounts
    --Hu12 (talk) 22:45, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Another--Hu12 (talk) 13:53, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    Weights and Measures Conversion Site Linkspam

    83.253.202.78 (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)

    This user has made 15 edits over the last 9 months, all of them links to the same site, which user apparently owns.

    This issue was discussed 6 weeks ago at Talk:Pound_(mass)#Spam_alert and resulted most or all previous edits being deleted by various users. New edits have just started popping up again. Zyxwv99 (talk) 17:52, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    integersystem.com

    integersystem.com have been spamming Mehsana persistently

    It started with a user who soon got blocked :

    Since then it's been IPs

    This is a typical diff FlagSteward (talk) 09:08, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    marketpublishers.com

    User appears to be dedicated to adding facts sourced to a website which is presumably equally dedicated to selling its reports. I haven't done anything yet (severe AGF). Any thoughts? Johnuniq (talk) 23:59, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    easypetmd.com

    easypetmd.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

    208.78.128.207 (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)

    Zeroyon01 (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)

    Both accounts used primarily for adding references to easypetmd.com. Look at http://www.easypetmd.com/(archive). The last four articles were published there less than ten hours ago and he has been active on all four wiki articles.Cirneco_dell%27EtnaCane_CorsoBasset_HoundAkbash_Dog. Some edits do expand on the content so we could assume good faith but I think it still falls under citation spamming. Take this addition to the Norfolk Spaniel article. It was reverted by the wiki user who brought it up to GA standard as he thought that it was based on his article and not independent.

    Google analytics ID for easypetmd.com is the same as that for pawsdogdaycare.com. Clickbank ID for pawsdogdaycare.com is zeroyon.[4] And here's pawsdogdaycare working their page ranking

    Me asking him to declare conflict of interest and note that his source doesn't meet WP:RS standard, plus his replies.[5] His reply is that the source is reliable because the articles are high quality("You are more than welcome to read through the texts before making a declarative judgement without properly evaluating the source and quality of the source of its entirety"), and they contain excellent original research.("(the articles) kicks back to and references the great authors of the past; Shaw, Kimble, Cauis etc. using their arguments, observations and assertions to formulate excellent theories and make previously overlooked connections") And also Wikipedia:Other stuff exists.--Dodo bird (talk) 04:13, 5 April 2012 (UTC)'[reply]


    I'm sorry I'm going to have to defend myself on this one. Especially in light of the fact that Dodo Bird took it upon himself to present his case in as negative and incriminating a manner as possible. I'll try and go point by point so it is clear for dodo bird, and he does not have to spend hours fretting about who is improving the wiki.

    208.78.128.207 (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)

    Zeroyon01 (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)

    Why yes, that is my work IP and my username, since I enjoy reading about the breeds and adding to them, often times I will arrive at work and flip on the computer and compare my research to what is on the wiki. I am action oriented and I will instinctively hit the edit tab and go right to editing an article. My apologizes if I have not logged in under my username prior to making every edit that I have made, it actually annoyed me as well as I am trying to get to a thousand edits by the end of the year and by failing to log in I lost those edits for my username.


    "Both accounts used primarily for adding references to easypetmd.com. Look at http://www.easypetmd.com/(archive)."


    As I stated to Dodo bird previously, if I am able to utilize a good source I will continue to use it. If everything that I needed was in the Ency Britanica that would be awesome, as I could just reference that material, however it is not. Additionally, many breeds are hundreds if not thousands of years old and it requires the ability to competently sift through and interpret a wide range of factors to determine their origin. Migratory patterns of early man, places and times that the wolf was domesticated, first to eighteenth century trading routes, migrations, climate changes, Geo-political events etc. Determining were many of these breeds actually originate is more a matter of putting forth the best theory with the best evidence as is possible and even then some of their origins shall remain strictly a theory. As to the jab about both being used primarily for adding reference, "both accounts are used to edit and improve the wiki".
    Gotta head to work but will be back on in an hour or so (from there) to continue this rebuttal.
    Alright back to it.


    The last four articles were published there less than ten hours ago and he has been active on all four wiki articles.Cirneco_dell%27EtnaCane_CorsoBasset_HoundAkbash_Dog.


    This falls into the category of one trying to ass-u-me to much. Anytime the site he refers to notes a change in the page, comment, cache clear, edit etc. it updates the main page and places it back on the front page as recently added/modified. An example would be as I compare the reference material to that which is on the wiki in order to improve the latter. Thus it makes sense that there is going to be a correlation reflected between the two in the form of both pages being accessed. In actuality the articles he is referring to were all written over a year ago. Specifically the dates of their original posting to the WWW are as follows:
    Akbash Dog- 03/09/11, Cane Corso -05/02/11, Basset Hound - 05/15/11, Cirneco dell'Etna -07/07/11


    Some edits do expand on the content so we could assume good faith but I think it still falls under citation spamming.


    I find it to be a bit offensive that Mr. Dodobird, is trying minimize the improvements I have made in the form of relevance, content, format, cleaning out the junk etc. with the statement that "some of the edits do expand on the content..." Every change that I have made improves upon and/or expands upon the reliability, credibility and content of the article. I also take solace in the fact that as incriminating and overbearing as he is trying to be he is still forced to make the admission that the edits did improve the content of the articles. Also you as Dodo stated, it is Wiki Policy to Assume Good Faith. Additionally the "I think it still falls" has no place in encyclopedic content; nor does "I feel", "my opinion is" etc. It is or it is not, it improves or it does not, you stated it improves the articles case closed.
    Expanding further on that, take a look at my edits, look at the before and afters on the breeds I have worked on, look at the time stamps, as in most cases I spend an hour or more working on each page I come across. I am not simply jumping onto a page and dropping a non-relevant citation and moving on in a reckless or haphazard manner which could be done in seconds. I am actually taking the time to look at every external link, every reference link, the layout of the page, the content of the page, the facts or assertions presented and make the changes necessary to improve the overall end product. I add missing sections, delete erroneous ones, remove links to sites in the external links sections, reference sections, or further reading sections etc. that are strictly there to sell a product (puppies is one that I came across- posted by a breeder), another one to a foreign language porn site etc. I also add references from other sites and take my time to completely write entire sections of material for certain breeds.
    As to my reference style I tend to place a ref tag after every solid stand alone sentence that conveys a solid fact or idea. In the past (years ago) I wrote entire breed articles on the wiki, paragraphs and paragraphs of text (at the end of which I would ad a "ref" tag) only to have another user come in and add a one sentence blurb at the end and remove my ref tag and insert another one (thus depreciating my work in creating the entire paragraph that preceded it). I was a bit scorned by the wiki because of that and made no further contributions for a few years. I recently found myself with a lot of time on my hands and began to get back into reading the articles and can say I am pretty well appalled at some of the information presented in the articles. Dogs are my passion, they are how I have chosen to spend my lifes work and I am passionate about making sure the information about them on the wiki is correct and not a junk compilation of random thoughts, and speculation. So yes my contributions have improved the wiki as DoDo already admitted.
    Additionally as I explained to Dodo, he wants me to take a circuitous journey to find regurgitated references for citation variety when I can simply find them all in one place, which to me is ludicrous. I apologize if I like my fishing spot, and don't feel the need to cast my line haphazardly about to catch the same fish in a different spot.


    Take this addition to the Norfolk Spaniel article. It was reverted by the wiki user who brought it up to GA standard as he thought that it was based on his article and not independent.


    Again Dodo is trying to ass-u-me to much. Additionally he is once again trying to put forth a jaded and incriminating proposition by hunting and pecking through the facts and choosing only the evidence he feels best suits his personal crusade. So yes lets look at the link he provided, more specifically lets look at my response to the "wiki user" who brought it up.

    ''The content does not reference wikipedia and the article as a whole is considerably more detailed and provides a great deal more information than the wiki blurb.
    The source list for the article is as follows (none of which are the wiki, and no the article is not based off the wiki as you so boldly asserted).

    : Sources http://www.spanielsinthefield.com/library-05.asp http://chestofbooks.com/animals/dogs/British-Dogs/Chapter-XXVIII-The-Norfolk-Spaniel.html http://chestofbooks.com/animals/dogs/British-Dog-Shows/Chapter-XXVIII-The-Spaniels.html http://books.google.com/books?id=Pj8DAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA109&lpg=PA109&dq=norfolk+spaniel+stonehenge&source=bl&ots=IMfkglsFZ_&sig=f5AU-aWfvAOmVlZ_BlFyVCIab58&hl=en&sa=X&ei=SHtrT6HAE9OmsAKAxsXyBQ&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=6EI8K_udJwIC&pg=PA477&lpg=PA477&dq=history+of+the+norfolk+spaniel&source=bl&ots=HjjS4BTHGa&sig=33Xc3TbRmwChvtidDDiZThhDyLc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lHtrT9W4PK_ksQKizqj_BQ&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=history%20of%20the%20norfolk%20spaniel&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.78.128.207 (talk) 13:45, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


    Additionally it should be noted that my edit has stood and the user who commented on it has conceded the point that it is not based off the wiki as I was kind enough to provide a source list for the article. This is nothing more than an attempt by Dodo to dig dirt, and try and cast an insidious light upon a good faith edit and one that has already been discussed and closed out by two other individuals.


    Google analytics ID for easypetmd.com is the same as that for pawsdogdaycare.com. Clickbank ID for pawsdogdaycare.com is zeroyon.[6]

    Not sure what the point of this is, other than trying to build a non existent case. I mean seriously if we could all spend this much time and effort trying to improve upon the wiki instead of trying to out people it would be a much better information repository. Congrats, Dodo you have established that I am associated with a pet care business, (I already stated that in my little wiki bio page, although I did not put the name of the business for the sake of anonymity). Thank you for confirming that I work day in and day out with dogs. Additionally before you pull my credit report, or have a private investigator tail me I also tell you I'm a Pisces, a 10 year veteran of the United States Marine Corps, entered initially as a Combat Engineer and later laterally moved to EOD where I worked with the State Department as part of Colin Powells Secret Service detail. From there I went into training dogs for explosive detection, I'm married, no kids, 8 dogs, have a bachelor’s degree in Canine Studies, have worked at the community college level, have worked with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, on the board for the Animal Welfare League,etc. Additionally you can use your sleuth skills to gimme a call if you like.


    And here's pawsdogdaycare working their page ranking


    Really? look at the date in the URL, additionally it showed page not found when I clicked on it, and every other blog entry there is likewise dated in the 2007 range with nothing more recent. Dodo stop digging for the smoking gun in something that is 5 years old and trying to push it to the for front of this debate like it's relevant ..


    Me asking him to declare conflict of interest and note that his source doesn't meet WP:RS standard, plus his replies.[7] His reply is that the source is reliable because the articles are high quality("You are more than welcome to read through the texts before making a declarative judgement without properly evaluating the source and quality of the source of its entirety"), and they contain excellent original research.("(the articles) kicks back to and references the great authors of the past; Shaw, Kimble, Cauis etc. using their arguments, observations and assertions to formulate excellent theories and make previously overlooked connections")


    Why yes I did say the above and I stand by the statement, not sure what Dodo is trying to get at here. Also in the referenced conversation Dodo also contends that each referenced article should have the personal information of the author posted prominently by it so he or somebody can judge their credibility and/or run a background check I don't know. I can tell you the site DOES NOT allow user submitted articles, that each article is reviewed by more than one professional editor, that the content is written by someone who is an "expert" on the topic matter. I mean would Dodo be this upset if Stephen Hawking started making edits to pages pertaining the universe and using his previous lectures and such as references? He's an expert in his field, Cynology however, does not tend to carry the clout that figuring out the mysteries of the universe does. Additionally this is not a criminal trial and there is no I have to step down as it is "a conflict of interest". I am improving the articles not depreciating them or damaging them in any other way. I am also attentive and have made edits to a few articles (Akita Inu) "requested by other wiki admins" who saw no problem with the reference material. I have also had users thank me for providing useful information.
    Additionally as I told Dodo I could spend hours going through and pulling all the junk links, and garbage references out of every breed article and post them in one place for him to compare to the refs that I have submitted. If we want to compare apples to apples and judge the quality of the sources presented in the breed articles lets start lining up citations from articles and deleting all (and the accompanying text) that Dodo feels are suspect. The result would be half the articles would be gone. I have even come across breed articles with NO CITATIONS at all, which according to wiki policy, based upon a complete lack of references, the article should not even exist. Some of which have been that way for years, pure unreferenced speculation. I find it odd that I take an interest in the breeds and spend a ton of time fixing them and improving upon them and it really upsets Dodo. I don't know why, I tried to be civil and discuss the issue with him but he chose to escalate it here and is the only person out of the millions of wiki users that view those pages that has chose to make an issue out of it. As I stated other wiki editors (admins) have viewed the changes, suggested changes, and accepted them and the source. So again I don't know why Dodo seems so hell bent to run me away from the Wiki. Promote me, I'll be a dog breed expert on here.
    To Dodo, not sure what I did to miff you, but whatever it was I apologize and I'm sure it is not so egregious that it is going to justify the time spent bantering back and forth in here over the issue. So for, however, I wronged you I apologize and if you would ever like to collaborate on an article or have dog breed related questions I would be more than happy to help you out with them. But this whole issue here is getting blown out of proportion and wasting a ton of my time, and again souring me to the wiki. --Rick ( Zeroyon01 (talk) 16:42, 5 April 2012 (UTC) )[reply]
    Correct me if I am wrong but is the Wiki not about trying to build encyclopedic content on various topics through contributions from users around the world?
    easypetmd.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
    Adsense google_ad_client = pub-4240102933333679 (Track - Report - reverseinternet.com • meta
    Track - Report)
    208.78.128.207 (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)
    Zeroyon01 (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)
    WP:REFSPAM  Looks like a duck to me
    --Hu12 (talk) 01:28, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam&oldid=486006002"