Jump to content

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
No edit summary
Line 242: Line 242:
[[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Republicair&diff=prev&oldid=730474024]], [[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Business_Jet_Traveler&diff=731420292&oldid=729577916]],
[[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Republicair&diff=prev&oldid=730474024]], [[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Business_Jet_Traveler&diff=731420292&oldid=729577916]],
[[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=James_A._Rice&diff=732061965&oldid=708782313]]. . . [[User:Mean as custard|Mean as custard]] ([[User talk:Mean as custard|talk]]) 08:37, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
[[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=James_A._Rice&diff=732061965&oldid=708782313]]. . . [[User:Mean as custard|Mean as custard]] ([[User talk:Mean as custard|talk]]) 08:37, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

==final.cbstv.online==
* {{LinkSummary|final.cbstv.online}}

Spambot. --[[User:Beetstra|Dirk Beetstra]] <sup>[[User_Talk:Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">T</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">C</span>]]</sup> 08:03, 31 July 2016 (UTC)


= Proposed removals =
= Proposed removals =

Revision as of 08:04, 31 July 2016

"Wikipedia:Spam-blacklist" redirects here. Not to be confused with Wikipedia:Spam blacklist or Wikipedia:Spam-blacklisting.
    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 regular expressions — 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 – 732336825 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.



    Proposed additions

    sukhumcity.ru

    sukhumcity.ru: 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

    The above domain has been edit warnings and sock puppetry on adding link on edits users [1] revisions. --Mtherwjs (talk) 11:22, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Mtherwjs: admin add spam sites. 31.220.110.89 (talk)
    Add links MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist in \bsukhumcity\.ru\b # adding link again our spam-links. 5.9.156.151 (talk) 06:34, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Talk page. --BasBibi (talk) 13:43, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Support blacklisting. --Nasrussian (talk) 10:09, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Mtherwjs and Nasrussian: - this seems to be focused on one page (with, as far as I can see, one hit on one other page). The page protection that is in place should stop this (together with aggressive blocking of any socks that get confirmed). So unless you have other concerns that I have missed,  Not done for now. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:05, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Beetstra: whitelist for now on blacklist. Nasrussian (talk) 12:20, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nasrussian: that makes just as much sense as the comments by BasBibi above. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:34, 17 April 2016 (UTC) (Nasrussian now blockeD). --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:34, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra: that links MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist. --Manfpsc20 (talk) 11:54, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Support for spam-blacklisting. It is really looks like that this web-site is a spam.--g. balaxaZe★ 13:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    hilltribe.org

    www.hilltribe.org/othertribes <- This subpage triggered malware warnings from Windows Defender and my ISP. Miniapolis 21:03, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

     Done Miniapolis 23:21, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Not actually  Done - you only logged the addition, not actually added it. If it is only a subpage, is it then not an advert triggering the warning, or is it the whole site. It sounds strange to me that only ONE page on the site triggers this (and may even suggest a false positive). --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:01, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    fulltvshows.org

    The site provides copyright-violating links to TV shows. It was added to General Hospital by Vishnu58 in this edit. I'm not sure if it was added elsewhere earlier. nyuszika7h (talk) 17:22, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    • Is there any evidence of spamming? I don't even see any links presently. This is supposed to be a spam blacklist, not an I'm-not-sure-about-their-licensing-so-let's-make-sure-nobody-can-ever-use-it blacklist. Wnt (talk) 21:40, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    hongkongescortservices.com

    Pesistent addition of commercial spam to article Prostitution in Hong Kong (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) by likely same person. - DVdm (talk) 20:32, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Semiprotected for one month. MER-C 05:27, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Still at it. plus Added MER-C 12:48, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    viralnewstopic.com

    being spammed by a spammer. Useless content aggregating site. I've removed all instances. Jytdog (talk) 19:05, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    s155239215.onlinehome.us

    This is a mirror address of [2] (main domain), A personal, nationalistic and pseudo-scientific website/blog related to Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Tirgil34. I don't know if the main domain is in blacklist or not, but users still can use the mirror domain links in WP articles, an example. The long-term abuser and his related accounts plagued many articles and talk pages with the content of that website. Also, the nationalist spammer revealed why he uses WP (as a battleground, to promote his POVs).[3], [4] --Wario-Man (talk) 05:20, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    EthniCelebs.com

    As noted at the Reliable Source Noticeboard here, EthniCelebs.com in its own Terms of Service says:

    The information on Ethnicelebs is provided for entertainment purposes only. Although we may vet information to ensure its accuracy, we make no assurances that all information on our Site is accurate. You agree that you will not rely on our Service for any purposes which could result in a loss to you if our Service did not perform as expected and, in any event, you hereby release Ethnicelebs from any liability relating to our Service.

    Despite this, Wikipedia has many links to, by its own admission, a non-WP:RS site. There doesn't seem any reason to ever use it. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:11, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Tenebrae: is this being spammed, or just being used in good faith as a reliable source? In the latter case, the spam-blacklist is generally not used for material that is not a reliable source but used in good faith. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:41, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    It's hard to tell — most of the citations in individual people's articles are written and cite-formatted in highly similar fashion, but since they were added over the course of some length of time it would be a huge task to go through the article histories for a pattern of who inserted them. I'll try a random few now. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:29, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    It seems like different editors at different times throughout the years. Still, would there be any possible reason to allow what's clearly a tempting yet wildly non-RS site? It can't ever be used, as it's such a WP:BLP vio. So leaving off the blacklist just addsTenebrae (talk) 18:36, 30 June 2016 (UTC) to the workload of more experienced editors who have to chase these cites down and remove them. --[reply]
    I'd say put this in XLinkBot, which has a mode where an edit is reverted the first time a link is added. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:03, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm — unfamiliar with that ... but I'll give it a try!--Tenebrae (talk) 19:06, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    trendstvshow.com

    Our house-movie-spammer. Waiting for report. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:41, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Beetstra: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:47, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    123moneysystem.com

    Spam link added here at Email marketing. General Ization Talk 18:46, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @General Ization: one user (which is blocked), but typical marketing spam without use. plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:28, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    yourstory.co

    This site is an alternate URL of yourstory.com, and yourstory.in, which have already been added. See MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/October 2015#YourStory.com and MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/March 2016#yourstory.in for details. Grayfell (talk) 20:53, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added MER-C 05:00, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Great, thank you. Grayfell (talk) 07:42, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    pakistanviews.org

    I'm hoping to get some input from the anti-spam community on this one. The site looks like a typical cookie-cutter blog like the stuff we see every day. Circa early June 2016 I found this guy Hirahussain110 adding the blog to a number of pages, which required me to remove the pollution. He was also just copy/pasting content from the blog to articles, so that was disruptive as well. Since then, I've noticed Hirahussain110 create Draft:Pakistan Views - National & International News Portal, which looks like an attempt to either legitimize the source, or to straight-up promote it. After poking around a bit I also noticed Draft:Pakistan Views was declined three times. It might be time to blacklist this site. Thought I'd get some feedback first before I did it, though. Thanks. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:29, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Sixsigma-institute.com

    Spam. Same diploma/certification mill as these guys: MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/July_2015#sixsigma-institute.org. First link is being persistently added to their old stomping ground List of Six Sigma certification organizations again, with deceptive edit summaries. Second is the same company which is using the same boilerplate website template, so I'm proposing it as a preventative measure. Grayfell (talk) 08:18, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Grayfell: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:18, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Nice, thanks! Grayfell (talk) 07:42, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    woodworkingplanspro.weebly.com

    Spam, sales of woodworking plans. Persistently added to Carpentry and other woodworking topics. General Ization Talk 03:05, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    The spam blacklist will not prevent edits like this. The user has been blocked, if this continues please ask for semi-protection. MER-C 04:58, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    cksdsolutions.net

    cksdsolutions.net: 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

    • Spamming by multiple single-use accounts, e.g.:

    [[5]], [[6]], [[7]], [[8]], [[9]] Mean as custard (talk) 15:53, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added MER-C 03:06, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    roadrouteindia.com and contactnumber.in

    Spammed to multiple articles by multiple IPs. Deli nk (talk) 20:02, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Adsense google_ad_client = pub-5280971397416210 (Track - Report - reverseinternet.com • meta: Track - Report)
    Google Analytics ID: UA-78770694 - (Track - Report - reverseinternet.com • Meta: Track - Report)
    plus Added MER-C 10:32, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    rppart.com

    spam. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:44, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Beetstra: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:44, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    chiefelectronics.net

    Used by a spammer, awaiting report to see if this needs blacklisting. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:46, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Beetstra: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:32, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    pickdup.com

    This link is being added to pages in a spammy way. Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Certainly suspicious. MER-C 10:36, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    topfreedownload.xyz

    Spam socks. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:33, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Beetstra: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:37, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    cammotc.com

    Spam socks. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:38, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Beetstra: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:38, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    myifsccodes.com

    Repeated linkspamming/refspamming to this site by Mazharuddin77. - Brianhe (talk) 02:33, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Brianhe: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:16, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    kosakchiro.com

    kosakchiro.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

    • Spamming by multiple single-use accounts, e.g.:

    [[10]], [[11]], [[12]], [[13]], [[14]], [[15]], [[16]] . . . Mean as custard (talk) 18:14, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added MER-C 02:40, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    MyPayDesk.com

    Spam. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:00, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:44, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    t7melat.com

    Spambot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:29, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Beetstra: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:29, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Sci-Hub

    The Sci-Hub scholarly Russian pirate site has gone through a few domain name changes. Its sole purpose is to republish scholarly papers that are normally behind paywalls, without permission of the copyright owners. I recently had to block one persistent Russian IP address who kept re-adding a sci-hub link to a citation in violation of WP:COPYLINK. That IP address is hopping now, so I'm playing whack-a-mole.

    While doing that, I looked at what links to those three sites and found numerous examples. I have corrected all the main space ones, leaving links on other pages alone. I cannot say that they resulted from any sort of coordinated effort, probably they were good-faith link additions.

    Per the WP:COPYLINK policy, Wikipedia doesn't permit links to copyright violating content. If the IP hopping Russian editor(s) resume their activity, I'll seriously consider adding the sci-hub domains to the blacklist. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:29, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Amatulic: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. I've gone through the COIBot reports, and there are only few additions here, some in good faith. All are however accompanied with a DOI which is sufficient. The only place that needs to go through a whitelisting is a landing page for the subject article (index.htm, about page or similar). --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:56, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, thanks. I was going to wait a while, since, as you observed, the past additions were likely done in good faith. But now that it's blacklisted, I have removed semi-protection for the article that was under attack.
    We may want to consider an entry like \bsci-hub\.[a-z][a-z]\b to cover future sci-hub domains. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:13, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Resist.com

    IP-hopping vandal editor on Judeo-Masonic conspiracy theory sourcing material from a PDF of Pike's Morals and Dogma. The work itself may or may not be under copyright (it depends on which edition it is, I think, but I'm not inclined to go look at the site to find out), but there's no way we should be sourcing material of questionable copyright from a white supremacist website. MSJapan (talk) 00:34, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @MSJapan: no Declined for now, considering reference reverts on XLinkBot. Page protected for a month. However, there seem to be more pages under attack if I see the COIBot report ..?? --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:02, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    bizjetsjobs.com

    bizjetsjobs.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

    • Spamming by multiple single-purpose accounts, e.g.:

    [[17]], [[18]], [[19]]. . . Mean as custard (talk) 08:37, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    final.cbstv.online

    Spambot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:03, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals


    siu.edu.bd

    How can the site be useful To create an article of the founding Vice-chancellor Sadruddin Ahmed Chowdhury ({domain}/founder-vice-chancellor/). He recently died.

    Why it should not be blacklisted Sylhet International University is a notable private university in Bangladesh. It is their official website.

    shaded-relief.com

    How can the site be useful Terrain map for https://tools.wmflabs.org/geohack/geohack.php currently in use at {{GeoTemplate}}

    Why it should not be blacklisted Any attempt to edit {{GeoTemplate}} (for instance, to correct OpenStreetMap's licence from CC-BY-SA to ODbL) fails as shaded-relief.com and pro-gorod.ru are blacklisted links, despite being in use on the GeoHack page. K7L (talk) 15:45, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    @A. B.: You added this to the blacklist in 2012 as part of a large group associated with a Fox spamming incident, but the log entry cases linked don't show this domain. Please shed some light. Do you have an objection to removing it from the blacklist? Alternatively we could whitelist the GeoTemplate URL. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:15, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    @A. B.: ping! ~Amatulić (talk) 22:56, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    This thing has really been under "consideration" for two years???? There have been multiple edits at GeoTemplate in 2015 and 2016, yet I see OpenStreetMap is still listed as CC-BY-SA (looking at the site, I actually think it is though). Still, is there any plausible reason to blacklist a map site we use??? Wnt (talk) 21:53, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    The problem here is that the admin who blacklisted it appears to be retired. I was going to go ahead and just de-list it myself until I actually went there and was unable to make the site do anything useful. All links go to the same place except for one advertisement about shipping containers. The site seems to be abandoned or hijacked. So no Declined unless further information comes to light. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:13, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    data2gowireless.com

    data2gowireless.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

    Please remove data2gowireless.com from the blacklist. This company is a valid MVNO with wholesale carrier agreements with Sprint, Verizon, T-Mobile, and AT&T. Iamdavidbruce (talk) 03:03, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Rejected -- bad faith request. MER-C 04:29, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    cbronline.com

    cbronline.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

    Useful historical resource, legitimate business periodical, used in multiple articles about computers. Blacklisted for vague, unclear reasons possibly as a part of an IP rangeblock. Argyriou (talk) 06:29, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

     Defer to Whitelist. Usefulness and legitimacy isn't a valid reason for de-listing. They were pretty clearly identified in a pattern of spamming as far back as 2009, and were finally blacklisted the next year for continued infractions. It also isn't clear to me that this would be considered a reliable source regardless of how often it's currently used. According to the discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 166#Computer Business Review from 2014, I don't really see a consensus there about reliability other than an agreement that it was a good source in the past until the new owner started spamming it on Wikipedia.
    That said, because the person making this request is a well established and trusted editor, I don't have an objection to removing cbronline from the blacklist if a consensus emerges in a new discussion at WP:RSN. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:58, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussions of spamming didn't include the plethora of links which such discussions usually include; a quick scan through contributions by a user mentioned in the 2009 incident might be link-spamming, but might also be someone who'd read a bunch of news articles there and decided to add links to to appropriate articles, just like people do with other trade magazines. The WP:RS discussion had no consensus, just one WP editor who decided without evidence that the publication didn't have editorial control, and was therefore not a reliable source. Those are awfully thin reeds to blacklist a publication which is used in a good number of articles (NEC V60, MicroVAX, etc.), and would likely be used in more if it weren't such a pain in the ass to use it as a source.
    I've submitted a request to whitelist the links I've used, but really, the evidence of linkspamming is awfully thin. Argyriou (talk) 01:07, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @Argyriou: This is part of a massive spamming campaign, which has been going on for years (the -business-review.com and -technology.com sites were spammed in similar ways / by same editors / are related by address or owner). Many of the sites related to this site are blacklisted (and more should be as they were actively spammed). The original 2009 report maybe only shows one editor, later reports on these sites show many more SPAs and IPs. It is a 'legitimate business periodical', though a lot of its data is regurgitated from company originals (sometimes with minimal rewriting) - it basically is a primary source, not a secondary source. In many cases the originals can still be found, and/or can be linked through archiving sites. The need of this is minimal, while the spamming (by many accounts) is significant (the original findings were of 2009, we had a long list added in 2010, and have been discussing another set in 2014 - that is 6 years worth of spamming that likely did not end 2 years ago). --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:11, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    sphoorthi.guru

    sphoorthi.guru: 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

    I've submitted a request to whitelist the link specified above because it belongs to a spiritual organisation and the followers of guruji may have tried to create multiple wikipedia pages out of respect or as they feel they have to do something to popularise guruji. This is not the case of spamming or something else. It's clearly a mistake. Thanks. Rakesh1703 (talk) 09:15, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rakesh1703: no Declined, the whole TLD '.guru' is blacklisted as there were too many domains on the TLD that were abused. As such, we can't do anything here, just request whitelisting for the domain.  Defer to Whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:44, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    bmihealthcare.co.uk

    bmihealthcare.co.uk: 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

    This is the official website for BMI Healthcare, a major private hospital chain in the UK. I can't find any mention of this URL at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/log/Full list, and the only other references I can find are some plausible COI editing back in 2010, some refspam from 2015 dealt with via SPI, and a single possible COI edit from 2015.

    The valid use as a source seems to me to outweigh the relatively limited spam.

    —me_and 15:07, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Edited the above to make clear it's the official website for the company that's been blacklisted. —me_and 12:40, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    aerospace-technology.com

    aerospace-technology.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

    No reason seen for including this domain as blacklisted.

    217.250.176.171 (talk) 16:56, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @217.250.176.171:, see the conversation here for why the "$$$$$$-technology.com" websites are on WP:BLACKLIST. I believe it should remain on the blacklist. Scotteaton92 (talk) 19:52, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Troubleshooting and problems

    Logging / COIBot Instr

    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.
    Note: If you do not log your entries, it may be removed if someone appeals the entry 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 who adds 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. This data is available in real-time on IRC.

    Poking COIBot

    When adding {{LinkSummary}}, {{UserSummary}} and/or {{IPSummary}} templates to WT:WPSPAM, WT:SBL, WT:SWL and User:COIBot/Poke (the latter for privileged editors) COIBot will generate linkreports for the domains, and userreports for users and IPs.


    Discussion

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist&oldid=732336825"