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
new
→‎Davincivaporizer: factor8scandal.uk
Line 108: Line 108:
:{{rto|Jim1138}} {{Added}} to [[MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist]]. --[[User:Beetstra|Dirk Beetstra]] <sup>[[User_Talk:Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">T</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">C</span>]]</sup> 03:57, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
:{{rto|Jim1138}} {{Added}} to [[MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist]]. --[[User:Beetstra|Dirk Beetstra]] <sup>[[User_Talk:Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">T</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">C</span>]]</sup> 03:57, 9 October 2018 (UTC)


== Davincivaporizer ==
== factor8scandal.uk ==
* {{link summary|davincivaporizer.com}}
* {{link summary|factor8scandal.uk}}


;Spammers
;Spammers
*{{User summary|Alexy00123}}
*{{User summary|JJEv810}}
⚫
+ others. Please blacklist. - [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 03:31, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
*{{User summary|Ahmedraza20}}
*{{User summary|MoeezKh}}
*{{User summary|Malikawais00712}}
*{{User summary|Masterawais}}
*{{IP summary|101.53.253.108}}
*{{IP summary|103.245.194.205}}
*{{IP summary|72.255.8.30}}
*{{IP summary|58.65.207.7}}
⚫
+ others. Please blacklist. -[[User:KH-1|KH-1]] ([[User talk:KH-1|talk]]) 12:12, 9 October 2018 (UTC)


= Proposed removals =
= Proposed removals =

Revision as of 03:31, 10 October 2018

"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 – 863331576 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.


    Proposed additions

    famousbirthdays.com

    Perennial at RSN (e.g. [1]), unreliable, frequently proposed by well meaning but mistaken editors. I think this should at least go on the revert list. Guy (Help!) 08:57, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @JzG/help: plus Added to User:XLinkBot/RevertList. --Guy (Help!) 20:04, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Beetstra as with "celebritynetworth.com" could you add this also to User:XLinkBot/RevertReferencesList for the same reason? Thanks Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:03, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @JzG/help and Galobtter: plus Added to User:XLinkBot/RevertReferencesList. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:36, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    breitbart.com, occupydemocrats.com

    Deprecated sources in the same vein as the Daily Mail. Adding to XLinkBot. Guy (Help!) 10:19, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Galobtter: Makes sense. Guy (Help!) 13:37, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @JzG/help: plus Added to User:XLinkBot/RevertList. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:26, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @JzG/help: plus Added to User:XLinkBot/RevertReferencesList. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:27, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    celebritynetworth.com

    Per Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#celebritynetworth.com, requesting addition to XLinkBot revert list Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:37, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Galobtter: plus Added to User:XLinkBot/RevertList. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:52, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Galobtter: plus Added to User:XLinkBot/RevertReferencesList. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:53, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    gspchem.com

    Repeatedly spammed by multiple IPs and one account. It's been ongoing for several months:

    plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:26, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    academicwritingpro.com

    Persistent addition of inline "easter egg" links to a provider of "essay writing services". General Ization Talk 19:19, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @General Ization: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:43, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    breitbart.com

    And others. JarlaxleArtemis socks apparently. Guy (Help!) 12:15, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist to control ongoing abuse. --Guy (Help!) 13:32, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    schick-sa.com

    This is added as promotional content "Inventor of the parking guidance system". Added to:

    by an IPv6. The anon's IP changes with each edit/revert and communication is difficult to impossible. I did add a note on talk:Parking guidance and information#Addition of promotional content which I doubt has been read by the anon.
    This website is not used elsewhere as a link or in any reference. Jim1138 (talk) 19:50, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Jim1138: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:57, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    factor8scandal.uk

    Spammers

    + others. Please blacklist. - Jytdog (talk) 03:31, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals

    spine-health.com

    spine-health.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 Spine-health is a website that provides credible, highly-detailed information about the symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment of musculoskeletal conditions. I have not found a single source that provides the level of detail that this website provides regarding back pain, herniated disc, sciatica, and many other spine conditions. The information on Spine-health is written by doctors and peer-reviewed by a medical advisory board before it is published. I have found that the information provided on Spine-health is not available from other sources.

    Spine-health appears to have been blacklisted 11 years ago based on (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2007_Archive_Dec_1#spine-health.com). However, the highly-complex and detailed information that they provide would be a valuable addition to this community.

    no Declined. No evidence this would be useful, it is not a reliable source (e.g. it promotes chiropractic), and the requesting IP has few or no other edits, and does not propose any article or content for which this would constitute a valid source. Oh, and the IP is registered to "Veritas Health", the publisher of the website. --Guy (Help!) 09:01, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    This thread was removed by an IP: diff. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:27, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    artofliving.org

    artofliving.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

    Found this while trying to undo a change on the art of living page. I couldn't understand why the website is added to spam. Its not redirecting, using url shortner, doing any suspicious activity, serving ads or opening pop-ups once you go to the website. The bot report also seemed unalarming. The reported vandal in proposed additions section above seems to have used it for citation. Not sure if mistakes of some user can be attributed to the website.

    While the information about the website is available on the page in form of the domain name, adding the link to spam seems like an error. Could this be corrected please? Thanks.

    PS: I'm only a visitor to the page, not someone getting paid by anyone for this. 122.178.206.30 (talk) 03:46, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined,  Defer to Whitelist for specific links on this domain per instructions there. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:50, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you at least share why this domain is in spam? It doesn't violate Wikipedia:Spam or Wikipedia:ELOFFICIAL in my newbie understanding. Also, not sure if discussions like these need to happen on the article's talk page. Guidance welcome. Thanks. 171.76.114.124 (talk) 05:57, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    First, the domain is not spam, editors were spamming the domain. And that has been noticed since 2009 (see e.g. User_talk:Post.amit, User_talk:Shaileshjgd, User_talk:27.106.41.93, User_talk:Sunakshitejwani). Some of the spammy material still remains, e.g. User:Wcf2016/sandbox. Edits clearly suggest coatrack edits and likely conflicts of interest (which is also suggested in the tag on Art_of_Living_Foundation). Please ask for whitelisting for the pages where this is primary source or official link type material. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:48, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Found this domain is blocked under spam list. I couldn't understand what made the website to fall under the section. It didnot violate any wikipedia terms since the domain has high authority and reputed organization involved in many social activities to report with valid proof of article link for reference. Requesting to remove the domain from the blacklisted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.93.187.58 (talk) 08:34, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    galatta.com

    galatta.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 site was writing about cine news and recently they have grown so much and conducting awards for actors and aired in You Tube and TV's in 2018. This is not spam site. I was trying to add the reference in a page and didn't allow me to do. Please remove the spam for us to reference.— Preceding unsigned comment added by vibe21 (talk • contribs)

    @Vibe21: no Declined per User:Beetstra/Long-term spamming/Galatta. --Guy (Help!) 13:48, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    breitbart.com (removal request)

    breitbart.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
    Breitbart has been, and is currently, used in many articles. It is true that there are some recent socks which are inappropriately adding links to Breitbart. But I would argue that such disruption can be better handled by adding it to XLinkBot to block new users or IP users from adding such links. None of the socks banned is more than a week old, and as such XLinkBot should be able to handle this. Per what this page says when adding a blacklist Please ensure all links have been removed from articles and discussion pages before blacklisting.. That was not done, and it would be inappropriate to do so as Breitbart is still a valid RS for its own opinions on many WP articles. Instead, when people are updating pages that already have links to Breitbart, they will get caught in this blacklist. -Obsidi (talk) 21:46, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Looks like I'm not the only one that is concerned if this is a long term blacklist [2] -Obsidi (talk) 22:48, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    This is on the blacklist to control massive spamming and disruption by JarlaxleArtemis socks. If you have consensus on a talk age that a link to Breitbart is appropriate in an article, you can request whitelisting. I understand that you object to Breitbart being deprecated per WP:BREITBART, but that's not an excuse for you falsely stating that there is a consensus that it is RS for its own opinions "on many WP articles". There are in fact very few where Breitbart is cited as a source for its own opinions, and that is a good thing, because per WP:UNDUE we should not be deciding that an unreliable source is reliable because we are presenting its opinions about something. I don't think you'd want the opinions of far-left websites included from the primary source on articles about far-right people like Trump or Bannon just because some editor decides it's a significant dissenting view, and I suspect you'd be doubly indignant if the source had a history of spreading fake news. Guy (Help!) 08:20, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    You have not shown that XLinkBot cannot handle that. All of the socks you have pointed to are less then a week old. The blacklist can only be used if there are not other means of preventing the problem. Breitbart, whether you like it or not, is a RS for its own opinions, let me remind you from the RFC close It can still be used as a source when attributing opinion/viewpoint/commentary. You are highly WP:INVOLVED here, you personally started the RFC against Brietbart, and now you are using your tools to prevent even opinion/viewpoint/commentary of Breitbart which is a recognized valid reliable source for that. Sometimes it is good to have both far-left and far-right viewpoints discussed, that is what WP:NPOV is all about. -Obsidi (talk) 14:05, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    More and more independent and uninvolved editors are objecting to your actions here. -Obsidi (talk) 14:23, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Obsidi: no Declined. 10 months of XLinkBot did not stop the abuse. It has been shown not to work. And note that the existence of links does not stop editingto the page. The rest can be whitelisted. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:42, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Troubleshooting and problems

    Logging / COIBot Instructions

    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

    I would like to report secresystems.net. If anyone can figure out how to contact them and get assurances they are working on their problems, they are welcome to. Otherwise, my virus protection was disabled. This happened after I got a message saying it had expired and I should download again, which I ignored.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 14:29, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Update: The tech support person, in trying to do something else, told me to restart my computer. My virus protection was working again. No one was able to explain why. She suspected it was updating, but it seems strange it would just disappear. — Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:06, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist&oldid=863331576"