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
→EconLib: Declined using SBHandler
Line 242: Line 242:


:{{rto|Knight of BAAWA}} {{Declined}} - see lengthy discussions linked [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/econlib.org|here]]. It was added by editors in a paid-editing ring and where there is clear connection between said editors and people linked to the site. --[[User:Beetstra|Dirk Beetstra]] <sup>[[User_Talk:Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">T</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">C</span>]]</sup> 14:23, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
:{{rto|Knight of BAAWA}} {{Declined}} - see lengthy discussions linked [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/econlib.org|here]]. It was added by editors in a paid-editing ring and where there is clear connection between said editors and people linked to the site. --[[User:Beetstra|Dirk Beetstra]] <sup>[[User_Talk:Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">T</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">C</span>]]</sup> 14:23, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

==FiveBooks==
* {{Link summary|fivebooks.com}}

This domain is on the global blacklist, and I don't think it should be. It seems it was blacklisted in May 2011, as a spammer. The site is made up of interviews of well-known people, followed by their recommendations for books on the topic which is their specialty. I tried to add a quote from the Shakespeare scholar Stanley Wells to the King Lear page, and found that this site was blacklisted.

[[User:Kirkmc|Kirkmc]] ([[User talk:Kirkmc|talk]]) 14:34, 14 November 2017 (UTC)


=Troubleshooting and problems=
=Troubleshooting and problems=

Revision as of 14:34, 14 November 2017

"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 – 810314865 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.


    Proposed additions

    Torrent socks

    These are persistently substituted as alternative URLs on the respective torrent trackers. Please see User_talk:Ivanvector#More_torrent_sockpuppeteering for more information. Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 07:30, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    See this sockpuppet investigation. I've been doing this for years, and this is one very persistent person, particularly with the spamming of non-English language Wikipedias, seen here.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:17, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    @PaleoNeonate:  Defer to Global blacklist, cross-wiki problem. --Dirk Beetstra T C 23:43, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    @PaleoNeonate: Handled on meta. --Dirk Beetstra T C 23:44, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Super, thank you very much, —PaleoNeonate – 03:30, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, now that these URLs are on the spam blacklist it has put an end to fun and games with them. I only hope that our friend doesn't set up similar sounding domains to repeat the performance.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:20, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Torrent links - set 2

    Oh dear. As suspected, this game could be played with many different domains, and this one is not on the list:
    @Ianmacm: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:43, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Torrent links - set 3

    @Ianmacm: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:09, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Torrent links - set 4

    @Panu7: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:32, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Torrent links - set 5

    @Ianmacm: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:17, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, out of mild interest I had a look at thekickass.net to see why it is so important to our sockpuppet friend. It is a lookalike version of the old KickassTorrents and there are a lot of these around. It may contain malicious JavaScript or other code, so it should not be visited for this reason alone.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:23, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    remedyforu.us

    --Nothing encyclopedic can be sourced from this site; being spammed by two IPs, the second after the first was blocked for spamming. Jytdog (talk) 21:48, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Just spammed again by 49.14.249.46 (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) -- Jytdog (talk) 20:40, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. Feels like we should just blacklist everything with "remedy" in the URL at some point. Kuru (talk) 21:06, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Snooker fansites

    Four websites are to be considered for blacklisting:

    This has been discussed at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Persistent_use_of_fansites_at_snooker_player_articles and the general view is that blacklisting these four sites would help address the problem. Nobody has objected to blacklisting them. Betty Logan (talk) 13:42, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    @Betty Logan: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. Per discussion. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:35, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    billywr.com

    links
    pages

    List of street view services (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

    accounts

    Ongoing spamming by dynamic IP, ongoing for for over a month. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:15, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added MER-C 02:47, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    chinaguidedtour.com

    Links
    IPs

    Repeated spamming by multiple IPs to multiple articles. Deli nk (talk) 18:11, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added MER-C 02:21, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    crocels.org

    Please see the discussion WP:AN#Jonathan Bishop and comment there. GoldenRing (talk) 21:09, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    @GoldenRing: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 21:41, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    stockintrend.in

    Repeated spamming in Goods and Services Tax (India), continued after final warning. Anonymous "financial advisor" (it's a personal blog in broken English, registered in June 2016 - "About" page is at stockintrend.in/about-us/). No foreseeable encyclopedic usage. GermanJoe (talk) 12:29, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    @GermanJoe: You missed half of the accounts:
    plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:40, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I am not an admin and probably don't know half of the tools - so it's manual digging for me. Just saying ;). GermanJoe (talk) 12:49, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    @GermanJoe: just wait for the COIBot report ('COIBot' in the template) .. I was considering the 2 accounts with 3 edits you found a bit thin .. but 3 users with the same name, and an IP with same edit summary .. that should be enough. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:00, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    More?

    Poking this one, maybe related to one in main section (same spammers). --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:40, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Akinpelu1990/jimiwriter sockfarm

    Here are some domains they are spamming on Swahili Wikipedia.

    I've emailed off-wiki evidence to functionaries. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:44, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    This will need to go to the global blacklist, it wasn't just the Swahili and English Wikipedias that were spammed. Please make sure the evidence gets to a steward. MER-C 03:06, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bri: per MER-C,  Defer to Global blacklist, cross-wiki problem. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:12, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Meta wants "evidence of spamming on several wikis and prior blacklisting on at least one" wiki. Is this possible? ☆ Bri (talk) 05:25, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bri: We have the COIBot reports (bluelinked 'COIBot' in the LinkSummaries, see e.g. Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/what-to-do-in.co.uk#Additions), bring it there, I'll pull the trigger (you can basically copy-paste the report, point it here, and I will just pull the trigger. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:29, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay done. Hope that was correct, the formatting looka different on meta ☆ Bri (talk) 06:40, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bri: Handled on meta. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:25, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    xerago.com

    Long-time spamming domain, latest additions by:

    Pure marketing with no foreseeable encyclopedic usage. For a detailed report by Ronz with additional related users and other links, see CVM Platform's user talkpage (I haven't done an in-depth check of these additional incidents myself). GermanJoe (talk) 11:38, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Stormfront

    There are 430 links to Stormfront on Wikipedia. The appropriate number may be as high as three. have removed most uses of Stormfront as a source in article, over the months and years, but it is regularly proposed on talk pages. I think it's time to end that. Guy (Help!) 00:32, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals

    waremakers.com

    waremakers.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 This domain is on the global blacklist and I request it be removed. I am unsure why this domain was originally added but suspect it has to do with the domain being linked to multiple times over 2 days in 2016: [2]. I am associated with the owner of the domain and was not even aware of this blacklisting until yesterday.

    After some investigation I found the linkreport above yesterday. Checking company records, in August 2016 a very keen student interned for the owner. It seems this person added content found on the domain as a Wikipedia source no less than 13 times. This makes the blacklisting understandable.

    I ask the domain be removed at this time as this undesired behavior was solely the work of an overly keen intern spread out over two days. The domain is home to a reputable business covered by media such as Financial Times, The Guardian and Forbes. The business produces journalistic content that may be valuable to use as a future source. Henk Sluipert 14:42, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    @Henksluipert: not blacklisted locally,  Defer to Global blacklist to request global removal, or  Defer to Whitelist to ask for local whitelisting of specific links. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:39, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    homelesshub.ca

    In 2014, User:Onshisan wrote in the Stephen Gaetz talk page that "the external link to "Canadian Homelessness Research Network is broken (top-level domain is dead). Preliminary searching suggests that homelesshub.ca is the new home for this content. homelesshub.ca/content/about-us seems to be an appropriate link; however, when I try to update it I find that homelesshub.ca is blacklisted. Will update later." Why is this invaluable resource on homelessness in Canada still blacklisted?Oceanflynn (talk) 00:47, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    @Oceanflynn: no Declined,  Defer to Whitelist for specific links on this domain, specifically 'homelesshub.ca/about-us'. Regarding why this is (still) blacklisted?: because there was a whole sockfarm that was spamming this site, while there is only limited use for it (as the official website of the subject, and a few references). When sockfarms and/or multiple vested editors are getting involved, we tend to control, basically per wmf: Terms of Use. By the way, homelesshub.ca is not the homepage of the subject Stephen Gaetz, it is the homepage of the Canadian Homelessness Research Network, with an official website of a subject we generally mean a site that is about the subject, controlled by the subject (which for some subjects does not exist, or could boil down to a personal twitter). In this case, I would remove the link to homelesshub.ca or whatever, and I would decline the whitelisting for such a request. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:14, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Note, homelesshub.ca is not the homepage of the Canadian Homelessness Research Network, it is http://homelessresearch.net/. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:15, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you Beetstra for all of your work on black and whitelists. I was unable to locate the Wikipedia items that archive the original problem with the sockfarms and/or multiple vested editors. When did this happen? It had to have been before 2014 but after 2007 when the hub site was created. Are these vested editors still active on this largely academic we hub which provides sources on homelessness in Canada? Are current valid researchers being punished for something that happened years ago? Was it a case of students who were overzealous and who are no longer involved? Was it a case of academics who are still involved but overly passionate at the time? Have they been "reformed" to comply with Wikipedia standards? This site is not a commercial site. It is a site for academics and researchers looking for reliable sources for reliable content. The name associated with homeless hub is still listed as Stephen Gaetz. His work is supported by SSHRC grants in Canada which is the leading federal government funding agency for postgraduate/academic grants. SSHRC and NSERC are highly competitive so only top researchers on the most topical questions receive these grants. What were these puppets trying to promote? Ideas? Where can we see this discussion about homelessness that was so one-sided? I would like to request input from other editors who will take the time to investigate this fully. I have never worked for, have any connection to Gaetz, the university he works for, his organization, homelesshub.ca. However, I am interested in issues related to poverty, homelessness in general. Did you actually take time to revisit this site in November 2017 and examine its content?
    I respectfully and formally request more investigation into this from other administrators. In this case it performs the function of gatekeeping, blocking access to Wikipedia readers (and editors) to a gateway of current, valuable Canadian federally SSHRC-funded academic research on a topic that is so often overlooked. Kind regards. Oceanflynn (talk) 15:54, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Punished? Do you have any homelesshub.ca */ evidence to the contrary? How many cases we have where editors where considering to use it? Our normal practice is to first go through whitelisting to assess need and scope. Second opinions are, of course, welcome. —Dirk Beetstra T C 18:05, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    You asked, it was blacklisted in December 2009. It did not take me long to find a very clear COI account in 2013 (both old and new username are clear). Another in late 2014 is suspect (10 edits to become autoconfirmed, then editing only in this subject area). An account in 2011 is also a clear COI. (I earlier found a student project as well, can’t find it back now. Maybe there is more)
    For now, lets say that it is confirmed that editors more than 3 years (and maybe 5 years) after blacklisting still did not get that their COI should restrain them. —Dirk Beetstra T C 19:51, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    The students, albeit Canadian, seem unrelated. —Dirk Beetstra T C 20:14, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, I was just going to post here regarding the Homeless Hub as I want to link to a page on the site and was surprised to find it blacklisted. I'm an editor and not associated with the HHub in any way, though I do work at the academic institution where it is housed. I have not encountered blacklisting before so please excuse any ignorance on my part. I have been reading through the history and trying to understand the issue. The site does contain useful and unique research materials and is a major research centre on homelessness in Canada. It is unfortunate that there were COI incidents, but there is good content there. Are there any further actions that can be taken to shift this situation? Smallison (talk) 03:24, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    @Smallison: for now I stand with my earlier decision (seen some 7 years worth of COI editors editing, even while it was blacklisted):  Defer to Whitelist for specific links that are needed. I understand there are pages that would benefit from this, but in number of links and number of pages that is going to be just a few. —Dirk Beetstra T C 04:04, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    aluminiumleader.com

    aluminiumleader.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

    Unfortunately, I do not know why the site was blacklisted. Search in blocking logs returned no results; neither did the "tracked" and "advanced" links or any other links mentioned in the header box. This site is run by a major aluminium producing company, Rusal, and I intend to use it for the article aluminium and possibly a few related ones. I would greatly appreciated if someone removed the site from the blacklist or at least explained by it was added there in the first place and what could be done to remove the site from the blacklist.--R8R (talk) 12:39, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    @R8R: not blacklisted locally,  Defer to Global blacklist to request global removal, or  Defer to Whitelist to ask for local whitelisting of specific links. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:00, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I see; thank you for your response and suggestions.--R8R (talk) 13:02, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Handled on meta. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:53, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


    Myshoesguide.com

    Unfortunately, im newbe here and dont know why the site was blacklisted. Maybe, due to spaming on some pages! sorrrry for that! i'll appreciated if someone removed the site from the blacklist. i Never ever gonna do this again!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alamin333 (talk • contribs) 07:40, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    @Alamin333: not blacklisted locally,  Defer to Global blacklist to request global removal, or  Defer to Whitelist to ask for local whitelisting of specific links. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:57, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    China Highlights

    Probably best treatment of Shanhaiguan on the internet. No good reason for it to be blocked afaict. — LlywelynII 01:38, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    @LlywelynII: I think that 110+ spam socks is a darn good reason. —Dirk Beetstra T C 03:45, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Obnoxious Chinese posters aren't really a reason to block good material from the website. Just block the obnoxious posters' ISPs. — LlywelynII 03:50, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    @LlywelynII: 110 named accounts (and a couple of IPs), all blocked. Reason enough.
    Thanks for pointing me here, it looks like they continued after 2009 with other websites. Blacklisting their links and blocking their accounts was apparently not enough--Dirk Beetstra T C 04:27, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    EconLib

    Offers a lot of known-publisher (not self-published) essays and books about economics and sociology, such as Malthus, Hayek, and Mill. - Knight of BAAWA (talk) 13:53, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    @Knight of BAAWA: no Declined - see lengthy discussions linked here. It was added by editors in a paid-editing ring and where there is clear connection between said editors and people linked to the site. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:23, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

    FiveBooks

    This domain is on the global blacklist, and I don't think it should be. It seems it was blacklisted in May 2011, as a spammer. The site is made up of interviews of well-known people, followed by their recommendations for books on the topic which is their specialty. I tried to add a quote from the Shakespeare scholar Stanley Wells to the King Lear page, and found that this site was blacklisted.

    Kirkmc (talk) 14:34, 14 November 2017 (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=810314865"