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
Zemg Network spam
→‎Proposed additions: post additions .. will do in a sec, so consider 'done'
Line 757: Line 757:
*Yahoo ad ID: USYPN0028
*Yahoo ad ID: USYPN0028
--<font face="Futura">[[User:A. B.|A. B.]] [[User talk:A. B.|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] </font> 20:17, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
--<font face="Futura">[[User:A. B.|A. B.]] [[User talk:A. B.|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] </font> 20:17, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

== Assorted spamming ==

;Previous incidents
*[[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Aug#http://spam.canvasguru.com]]

;Sites spammed
*{{spamlink|economywatch.com}}
*{{spamlink|healthninsurance.net}}
*{{spamlink|getallinfo.com}}
*{{spamlink|mapsofworld.com}}
*{{spamlink|usamapxl.com}}
*{{spamlink|canvasguru.com}}
*{{spamlink|ethnicpaintings.com}}
*{{spamlink|craftsinindia.com}}
*{{spamlink|indiaedu.com}}

;Spammers
*{{IPSummary|61.247.238.182}}
*{{UserSummary|Moneywatch}}

(Crosspost from [[WT:WPSPAM]] ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam&oldid=164882136#Assorted_spamming permanent link]).
{{done}}--[[User:Beetstra|Dirk Beetstra]] <sup>[[User_Talk:Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">T</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">C</span>]]</sup> 09:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


=Proposed removals=
=Proposed removals=

Revision as of 09:34, 16 October 2007

Mediawiki:Spam-blacklist is meant to be used by the spam blacklist extension. Unlike the meta spam blacklist, this blacklist only affects pages on the English Wikipedia. Any administrator may edit the spam blacklist. Any developer may use $wgSpamRegex, another method to prevent the addition of spam links. However $wgSpamRegex should rarely be used.

See Wikipedia:Spam blacklist for more information about the spam blacklist.

There are 4 sections for posting comments below. Please make comments in the appropriate section. they are Proposed additions, Proposed removals, Troubleshooting and problems, and Discussion. Each section will have a message box explaining them. In addition, please sign your posts with ~~~~ after your comment.

Requests which have been completed are archived. All additions and removals will be logged.

Proposed additions


Jinge Zhu spam on Wikipedia

Spammed domains
  • woodfurniture.cc
  • curtainlive.com
  • office-furniture.cc
  • stainedglass.cc

Supporting data:

Google Adsense ID: 3719995789157785


Additional related domains recommended for blacklisting
  • 2moons-dil.com
  • 2moons-gold.com
  • 2moonsdil.com
  • 2moonsgold.com
  • 90520.com
  • aoc-gold.net
  • bilbuyers.com
  • buildingmaterial.cc
  • darkfall-gold.com
  • gggmm.com
  • gods-and-heroes-gold.com
  • gods-and-heroes-power-leveling.com
  • gods-and-heroes-powerleveling.com
  • gods-heroes-gold.com
  • gods-heroes-power-leveling.com
  • godsandheroesgold.info
  • gold-aoc.com
  • gold-lotro.com
  • gold-potbs.com
  • gold-power-leveling.com
  • gold-silkroad-gold.com
  • gold-vanguard.com
  • gold-war-gold.com
  • gold-warhammer.com
  • huxley-gold.com
  • huxley-power-leveling.com
  • internetgameauction.com
  • internetgameservice.com
  • internetgamingservice.com
  • leveling-power.com
  • lord-of-the-rings-gold.com
  • lord-of-the-rings-online-gold.com
  • lord-of-the-rings-online-power-leveling.com
  • lord-of-the-rings-powerleveling.com
  • lotro-gold-lotro.com
  • lotro-gold.net
  • lotro-power-leveling.com
  • lotro-powerleveling.com
  • maple-story-mesos.info
  • meseta-phantasy-star-universe.com
  • office-supply.cc
  • pirates-of-the-burning-sea-gold.com
  • pirates-of-the-burning-sea-power-leveling.com
  • pirates-of-the-burning-sea-powerleveling.com
  • potbs-gold.com
  • potbs-power-leveling.com
  • potbs-powerleveling.com
  • potbsgold.com
  • psu-meseta.com
  • silkroad-gold-silkroad.com
  • silkroad-gold.info
  • silkroad-power-leveling.com
  • silkroad-powerleveling.com
  • stainedglass.cc
  • star-trek-gold.com
  • starcraft2gold.com
  • sunpowerleveling.com
  • the-lord-of-the-rings-gold.com
  • the-lord-of-the-rings-online-gold.com
  • the-lord-of-the-rings-online-power-leveling.com
  • vanguard-gold.org
  • vanguard-power-leveling.com
  • vanguard-powerleveling.com
  • vanguard-saga-of-heroes-gold.com
  • vanguard-saga-of-heroes-power-leveling.com
  • vanguard-soh-gold.com
  • war-gold.net
  • wargold.info
  • wholesalecarpet.us
  • world-of-warcraft-power-leveling-gold.com

Supporting data:


Accounts


Domaintools' public whois registration data for these sites:

Jinge Zhu
2114 Lynpark Ave
Dayton, Ohio 45439
United States
+1.9376431324
zhujinge@yahoo.com

--A. B. (talk) 15:16, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did not understand these odd "Silkroadgold" edits at first.[1][2][3][4] Now that I see he has a number of gaming-related sites, some related to this, I am concerned that he will start adding game spam in addition to the current list of decorating and office supply domains.
Also note that some of the additions are semi-vandalistic or, at a minimum, inappropriate and disruptive tests on real articles.[5][6]
The spammer ignored at least 6 8 warnings that I know of; I recommend locally blacklisting all of these sites at this point. --A. B. (talk) 15:27, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, game-spamming has started in the last several hours with 2 of the domains above:[7][8][9][10]
  • internetgameservice.com
  • bilbuyers.com
--A. B. (talk) 15:34, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also, could some admin speedily delete this watermarked, spam image uploaded as part of this campaign?
Thanks, --A. B. (talk) 15:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These guys are active again tonight with at least 3 IPs, I've already reverted almost half a dozen times.. Please blacklist soon, I've formatted them for blacklisting ease. 

\bwoodfurniture\.cc\b
\bcurtainlive\.com\b
\boffice-furniture\.cc\b
\bstainedglass\.cc\b
\b2moons-dil\.com\b
\b2moons-gold\.com\b
\b2moonsdil\.com\b
\b2moonsgold\.com\b
\b90520\.com\b
\baoc-gold\.net\b
\bbilbuyers\.com\b
\bbuildingmaterial\.cc\b
\bdarkfall-gold\.com\b
\bgggmm\.com\b
\bgods-and-heroes-gold\.com\b
\bgods-and-heroes-power-leveling\.com\b
\bgods-and-heroes-powerleveling\.com\b
\bgods-heroes-gold\.com\b
\bgods-heroes-power-leveling\.com\b
\bgodsandheroesgold\.info\b
\bgold-aoc\.com\b
\bgold-lotro\.com\b
\bgold-potbs\.com\b
\bgold-power-leveling\.com\b
\bgold-silkroad-gold\.com\b
\bgold-vanguard\.com\b
\bgold-war-gold\.com\b
\bgold-warhammer\.com\b
\bhuxley-gold\.com\b
\bhuxley-power-leveling\.com\b
\binternetgameauction\.com\b
\binternetgameservice\.com\b
\binternetgamingservice\.com\b
\bleveling-power\.com\b
\blord-of-the-rings-gold\.com\b
\blord-of-the-rings-online-gold\.com\b
\blord-of-the-rings-online-power-leveling\.com\b
\blord-of-the-rings-powerleveling\.com\b
\blotro-gold-lotro\.com\b
\blotro-gold\.net\b
\blotro-power-leveling\.com\b
\blotro-powerleveling\.com\b
\bmaple-story-mesos\.info\b
\bmeseta-phantasy-star-universe\.com\b
\boffice-supply\.cc\b
\bpirates-of-the-burning-sea-gold\.com\b
\bpirates-of-the-burning-sea-power-leveling\.com\b
\bpirates-of-the-burning-sea-powerleveling\.com\b
\bpotbs-gold\.com\b
\bpotbs-power-leveling\.com\b
\bpotbs-powerleveling\.com\b
\bpotbsgold\.com\b
\bpsu-meseta\.com\b
\bsilkroad-gold-silkroad\.com\b
\bsilkroad-gold\.info\b
\bsilkroad-power-leveling\.com\b
\bsilkroad-powerleveling\.com\b
\bstainedglass\.cc\b
\bstar-trek-gold\.com\b
\bstarcraft2gold\.com\b
\bsunpowerleveling\.com\b
\bthe-lord-of-the-rings-gold\.com\b
\bthe-lord-of-the-rings-online-gold\.com\b
\bthe-lord-of-the-rings-online-power-leveling\.com\b
\bvanguard-gold\.org\b
\bvanguard-power-leveling\.com\b
\bvanguard-powerleveling\.com\b
\bvanguard-saga-of-heroes-gold\.com\b
\bvanguard-saga-of-heroes-power-leveling\.com\b
\bvanguard-soh-gold\.com\b
\bwar-gold\.net\b
\bwargold\.info\b
\bwholesalecarpet\.us\b
\bworld-of-warcraft-power-leveling-gold\.com\b

--Versageek 02:42, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - That's a lot of spam.
From the looks of it more is sure to pop up, add aditional related urls below as needed--Hu12 13:36, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bhutantimes.com

NN website (simple Google News scraper and forum with negligible editorial content) being spammed for a year now by various IPs and single-purpose accounts: 202.144.139.*, 202.144,138.*, User:Atakhawjey, User:Gasailamaisingye, User:EdentheSpatUpon, 24.61.222.132, User:Darana (presumably all sockpuppets of the same person). See revision history of Bhutan Times, an article about an unrelated notable newspaper. The user now even tries to paint the website as the "headquarters for the Bhutanese pro-democracy movement" which is not backed by any independent source. Bramlet Abercrombie 20:19, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like there's some history here:
--A. B. (talk) 21:29, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Bramlet, I'm not related to the others. Don't link me to the other users. --Darana 17:56, 1 October 2007 (UTC) (dyn ip 24.61.222.132)[reply]

wikicrime.net

 Done -- entry made for the record:

This was added to the blacklist[11] a few days ago but no record was left of the specifics of the case. That sort of supporting detail is needed for any blacklist removal request that later comes up. I dug around after the blacklisting and here's what I found:

Domain:

Accounts:

--A. B. (talk) 01:43, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ilasabba spam on Wikipedia

Blacklisting request
  • automotiverepair.co.nr
  • autorepair.netfast.org
  • maligant-mesothelioma.co.nr
  • freetutes.com
  • tutes.webng.com
  • realdownload.webng.com
  • webng.com/tutes
  • rhapsodydownload.webng.com
  • friendfinder.com/go
  • resellerspanel.com
  • geocities.com/cooltutorials
  • dedicatedhosting.com
  • cureacne.koolhost.com
  • 8xhost.com/automativerepair
  • systemanalysis.freehostpro.com
  • visualbasic6.tekcities.com

Be careful while blacklisting these -- some are subdomains of large hosting services. --A. B. (talk) 01:52, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Supporting details (some of these domains are redirects to other domains)

Google Adsense ID: 0204262978948879 Yahoo Ad ID: USYPN0028


Accounts

References:

--A. B. (talk) 01:52, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: the entire freehostpro.com and tekcities.com domains are already blacklisted on meta, probably as a result of this user's spam. Since such blacklisting is overly broad, one or both of those domains may get removed from meta's list someday. I suggest adding the corresponding subdomains to this list now in case the larger domains leave meta's blacklist. --A. B. (talk) 02:11, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Still spamming today:
  1. 124.43.194.100 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
  2. 222.165.158.25 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • what links to user page • COIBot • count • block log • x-wiki • noticeboards • LinkWatcher search || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • CompleteWhois • ippages.com • robtex.com • tor • Google)
--A. B. (talk) 19:42, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Still spamming eight days later.[12] --A. B. (talk) 19:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10 October[13] --16:37, 10 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by A. B. (talk • contribs)

 Done --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:07, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

uffnet/uffgle spam

Per suggestion (appears to be .en only, so requesting on en.wp) after the latest in a string of semi-protection requests, the following sites:

The latest set of semi-protections have just expired, link-insertion vandalism has resumed. Again. Endless pool of one-use anon IP accounts keep adding links to these sites (one a redirect to the other) to several en.wp pages desipte apparent consensus from all (modulo these IP spammers) that the links are not appropriate. The pages get semi-protected for a while, the pp expires, the rapid-fire spamming resumes within an hour. The sites are self-promoting bloggish or vandal/attack pages best I can tell, the links are added with no assertion of notability or real relevance. DMacks 05:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    • Graffiti.net is used on multiple pages here including the source for a few images (is also on de.wiki as well). This either needs to be restricted to a subdomain or all the the links have to be evaluated for spam-ness. Mr.Z-man 05:30, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • home.graffiti.net/webfaqs/blacklist.htm is the specific link that appears to be added (it's a redirect to uffnet). Is graffiti.net based on user accounts, and thus webfaqs/, which is not linked from WP in any other way) is the "bannable thing", or if instead need to ban only this exact URL (at risk of playing whack-a-mole with other webpages in webfaqs/). [Looks like http://www.aboutus.org/Uffnet.com uffnet is the home domain of the organization being promoted by these spamlinks. DMacks 12:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NextEnergy (Canada) spam on Wikipedia

Spam domain
  • nextenergy.ca
Related domain
  • nextenergysolutions.com
Domain details
Account

There are likely more, but I don't have time to search and several of our tools are down. --A. B. (talk) 21:25, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sunnymonkey returns

I just love it when a spammer tries to tamper with our records or his own talk page -- it tells me he may still be spamming here. Sure enough, sunny monkey is back with his socks;[14] please blacklist this new domain:


Previous discussions


Additional domains I recommend blacklisting

When we blacklisted spammed domains at meta in April 2007, we held off on blacklisting the other domains this guy owned[16] that had not been spammed. I suggest that we go ahead and do this now since this guy did not take the hint, has not gone away and has a lot of domains:

  • aairconditioner.com
  • air-conditioning-directory.com
  • autohacks.net
  • BrightonParty.com
  • bird-feeder-directory.com
  • callcenter-software-directory.com
  • carpcspecialist.com
  • chocolatecakerecipes.net
  • condomtext.com
  • conservatoryzone.com
  • cubecartthemes.com
  • dateburner.com
  • diamond.co.uk
  • drawananimal.com
  • drupalarena.com
  • dwgmobile.com
  • ensembleanddesire.com
  • fishyshoopthemes.com
  • free-junk.com
  • grabacondom.com
  • guinchoguy.com
  • holidayutopia.com
  • hypehole.com
  • hyundaisportsclub.net
  • kartforums.com
  • katewalshfanclub.com
  • letsbegay.com
  • lifetidy.com/
  • loansbymobile.com
  • MobJog.com
  • mizzwatch.com
  • mobilemarketingwatch.com
  • myspacebits.com
  • netdosh.com
  • new-york-city-accident-lawyers.com
  • organicfoodhub.com
  • ourholidayproperty.com
  • pet-urine-removal.com
  • petneighbourhood.com
  • phentermine-directory.com
  • rightpad.com
  • scruffynews.com
  • searchgrub.com
  • stuffthatglows.com
  • sunnymonkey.com
  • teenutopia.com
  • textanonymous.com
  • textbritain.com
  • thegoodcreditguide.com
  • travelinsurancequoter.com
  • ukcreditrepair.net
  • ukpokerhub.com
  • understand-lemon-law.com
  • unpluggedmarketing.com
  • urmycrush.com
  • wholesalerextra.com
  • window-tinting-directory.com
  • womancarinsurances.com


Details of additional domains

Thanks! --A. B. (talk) 19:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

currenttimeindia.com

Original Report here.

currenttimeindia.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

Multiple IP's have been adding this link to articles about India, the last few have started making minor and often unnecessary changes to the text of the article when they insert the link, presumably to reduce the likelyhood of getting reverted.

Spamsocks:

They added ~80 links over a 2 day period (most in the last 24hrs). I've cleaned them all, however, this domain should really be blacklisted --Versageek 06:32, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please check the discussion at the following link : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:External_links#Tossing_currenttimeindia.com_up_for_additional_opinions Opinion have been presented and seem to have agreed upon the fact that having a local time information is good for a places wiki. Please remove the link currenttimeindia.com from blacklist, since its presence in a places wiki is considered to be actually useful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.7.17.90 (talk) 03:55, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not so fast. Please (re)read that thread carefully. While people agree that having local time information available is useful, they also agree that providing local time via an external link in each article is not how it should be done. In addition, they DO agree that links to currenttimeindia.com were spammed. --Versageek 12:44, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Versageek summarizes the conversation well. There was no support for the currenttimeindia.com url and several editors condemned the additions as spamming - I can only think the request above is so that the link can be spammed again. Please leave it on the blacklist. -- SiobhanHansa 13:39, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is agreed that local time information should be present in a place wiki. It should be added in the template of the wiki itself. How will this be done. Can the HTML of a wiki modified directly ? Unless that happens, i don't foresee this happening any time soon. Also if it is useful piece of information how can it be spam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.7.17.240 (talk) 05:09, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, the html can not be changed directly, you will have to ask for (or write yourself) an extension to the software (see m:Main Page, section with Code & Technical issues. For the definition of spam, as it is used here at least, we define spam as the mass addition of links, it does not concern what is being linked to. If you see WT:WPSPAM, you will see even reports of university sites or library sites. Wikipedia is (a.o.) not a linkfarm. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:57, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

dervish-yoga.com, sufidervish.org and whirlingdervishes.ca

Spamming, vandalism and more spamming. dervish-yoga.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
sufidervish.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
whirlingdervishes.ca: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com

Spammers

See WT:WPSPAM#dervish-yoga.com, sufidervish.org and whirlingdervishes.ca. MER-C 09:40, 8 October 2007 (UTC)  Done --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:54, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

surftofind.com

surftofind.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

Multiple IPs to multiple articles. Most content appears to be copyvios.

WikiProject Spam report.

-- SiobhanHansa 15:02, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

netteyiz.biz

WT:WPSPAM report is here. Pure copyvio site, non-English (though curiously, not spammed cross-wiki so far as I can tell). Being added by more than one IP/account, all SPAs. Videmus Omnia Talk 15:52, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

itdatahouse.com

Spamming and vandalism, see WT:WPSPAM#spam.itdatahouse.com. Adding that many links to a page cries out for blacklisting. MER-C 11:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2-clicks-stamps.com 2-clicks-outdoorfurniture.com all-about-seashells.com

Defying blacklisting on AntiSpamBot ( previous incident). See WT:WPSPAM#spam.2-clicks-outdoorfurniture.com spam.2-clicks-stamps.com. MER-C 10:27, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zemg Network spam

References


Spammers


Blacklist request
  • automotiveoilchange.net
  • bulldog-designs.com
  • buymenscologne.com
  • buymp3musiconline.net
  • candlemakingshop.com
  • carracinggame.net
  • crexweb.com
  • dmozkiller.com
  • dotcomwill.com
  • downloadyoutube.net
  • eymt.com
  • hottdating.com
  • howtopickalock.blogspot.com
  • kennelpage.com
  • lockpickingstore.com
  • monopolystamp.com
  • myspacefeen.com
  • pitbull.wordpress.com
  • pitoogle.com
  • profileslayouts.com
  • robinsonoutfit.com
  • soulja-boy.net
  • spywaretoolbox.com
  • stuntdevils.com
  • turnkeyarcade.com
  • wwwking.biz


Supporting data


Ad commission IDs
  • Google Adsense: 3171671439017964
  • Yahoo ad ID: USYPN0028

--A. B. (talk) 20:17, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assorted spamming

Previous incidents
Sites spammed
Spammers

(Crosspost from WT:WPSPAM (permanent link).  Done--Dirk Beetstra T C 09:34, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed removals

blog.myspace.com

In a recent edit to Dead Like Me, I had to remove a citation to:

http://blog DOT myspace DOT com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=148913492&blogID=282378780

that a previous editor had included, since blog.myspace.com was on the blacklist. Since the citation was legitimate (the myspace page is used by an actress from Dead Like Me), I am wondering if it's a good idea to blacklist blog.myspace.com.

I was able to reintroduce the citation through a workaround: apparently the blacklist isn't enforced when you do section-specific edits, something I did a minute later. As someone who often contributes without logging in, I had noticed that external links aren't checked for in section edits, but this is the first time that there was a reason to take advantage of that loophole.

67.100.122.237 09:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

 Not done This is blacklisted at the Meta level, so needs to be addressed there. There are currently no English Wikipedia-specific blacklisted sites. - BanyanTree 09:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
blog.myspace.com is whitelisted locally.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

www.belarussolidaritycampaign.co.uk

This was blacklisted form the Alexander Lukashenko page by an administrator, who termed the site as 'having no content' It clearly does. Now, if the link is deemed to be unsuitable then it ought to be discussed on the talk page. In my opinion the link in question, whilst granted is still a site under construction, is still a site that has relevance to the discussion of Lukashenko and Belarus. I propose that it be removed from the blacklist, so it may be linked to in the future if agreed in discussion on the talk page, but its dismissal by one administrator (zscout370) is at least a stifling of debate and objectivity, and at worse is censorship.

The website was just established and it has "Under construction" notices on the main page. The links that work are stating the goals for the group and begging people to join. This is pure linkspam, thus why I added it to the black list. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply! The point I'm making is that the site is being updated and now does have information too. I concede that at the moment the site is not complete and as such is not worthy being a part of the current external links, however the blacklisting means that when that changes, or if wikipedia wishes to link to an article there in the future this will not be possible. I politely ask that the site be removed from the blacklist, (and also promise to refrain from adding it to the current list of external links).

--Belaruski 14:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The blacklist isn't permanent and I don't intend for this link to stay here forever. But right now, I think it should stay. I will go back to the site, lets say, weekly and look at it. But we get so many external links about Belarus and we got so many campaign sites from the UK, Poland that me and others just remove them all. I am starting to clear out other Belarusian links too, so your site isn't the only one seeing removal. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:46, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance the link can be un blacklisted now? We recently held a demo in London, are a legally recognised body with international members and would like to set up a page of our own. A bit embarrasing when we can't link to ourselves! Thanks.--Belaruski 21:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done per Zscout370--Hu12 15:59, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but why not?--79.65.196.5 21:05, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reference data:
  • Accounts adding these links:
--A. B. (talk) 21:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting guidelines if they are applied accross the board. However if you will look at the site in question and argue that none of the articles are relevant, or may in the future be relevant as external links then you are in effect allowing censorship on wikipedia. I agree that it is very easy for just anyone to link to themselves on Wikipedia, but the site in question is clearly not spam. --79.65.244.108 22:37, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it from the blacklist, but I still do not think the site should be added to Wikipedia. We get many Belarusian campaign sites and this is just one out of many that look and feel the same. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 13:51, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

perpignanfr.com myperpignan.com (removal)

www.myperpignan.com www.perpignanfr.com Every time I added my information I also added my email address in the comments section. I had no idea who was removing me so did not know that my sites were an issue. When notified I immediately stopped adding them. However did receive some rude, insulting swearing emails from people with admin. authority at Wiki. Was not very nice. To top it off they were sent from hotmail accounts. I am not being asked to be put back on. Just removed from this spam list. I have asked in a polite manner. More than I can say for the two who emailed me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.47.129.235 (talk) 14:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any reason to swear in an e-mail, so I apologize for the rest of us if another volunteer here swore at you.
Having said that, normally sites are only removed from the blacklist in response to requests from established editors who see an encyclopedic value in linking to them. Admins don't normally accede to site-owner requests, especially after they have violated our Spam Guideline. I'm not an admin here, but I don't see much chance of your site's removal, given the history of these links
and their nature ("Perpignan Accommodation Vacation Holiday Apartments" and "Perpignan Tourist Information").
You may wish to add your links to the DMOZ directory if they are not already listed there; it's a better venue for your stuff:
--A. B. (talk) 16:11, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invisionfree (removal)

I request InvisionFree be taken of the blacklist. -King SweaterHead 01:33, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There has been some postings on the talk page of the Meta blacklist related to invisionfree.com links. Could you please remove or strip the links if you are going to keep it blacklisted? There seems to be quite many articles with invisionfree links in them here, and editors gets problems when the links are blocked.
Reference:
--Jorunn 09:15, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It appears to have been added last week by User:JzG, quoting "WikiProject:Spam Investigation" (see [17]). However I cannot find any discussion on WikiProject:Spam in the July, August or September archives.
There appear to be about a hundred links on article pages. I've checked out 15 instances and only one of those (the actual InvisionFree article) seems to be appropriate. Given that our guidelines consider forums to be external links to be avoided, I don't know that the one article where it is appropriate is significant reason to remove if it has been spammed. Worryingly links to these forums are even being used as citations. Blacklisting may even have the side effect of lifting the quality of some articles slightly. -- SiobhanHansa 12:00, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, actually. The ZetaBoards article's HOMEPAGE is invisionfree. Why exactly do they have an article about something that is blacklisted exacly? -King SweaterHead 14:18, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent) I've done a little more research since unfortunately JzG appears to have retired. I looked through JzG's contributions around the time he made the addition. I couldn't find any explanation documented but he did remove a bunch of the links just after he listed it and he edited the ZetaBoard article. I looked into several of the links he removed, and while I can't fault their removal (they were all either inappropriate external links or inappropriate references), when I looked at the history of who added each link I didn't find anything I would consider to be evidence of a spam campaign, it looked more like individual enthusiasts making good faith but poor judgement additions (see a selection of the additions:[18][19][20][21]. However, I still tend to think the link should stay blacklisted with maybe the homepage only white listed for the ZetaBoards article. -- SiobhanHansa 18:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Infodriveindia.com (removal)

Pls revert Infodriveindia.com links, and take infodriveindia.com of the blacklist.

Hello , I am Rakesh Saraf , Director InfodriveIndia. InfodriveIndia is a free International Trade Resource with huge statistical and database driven content of around 200,000 pages. Our website has been reported as spam. [4]. I and my colleagues have added few links of main categories of our content in the most appropriate and related categories of wikipedia. I admit we are just learning how to use wikipedia and may not be very familiar with wikipedia technical terms, but we have certainly added value to wikipedia in a ethical manner.

a) Links added meet the guidelines in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:EL#What_should_be_linked.

b) links added don't have links on similar subject almost all the time.

c) The content we have on our website is the most comprehensive and upto date then even the Govt sources.

d) Any user with exposure in International trade is welcome to check the above.

e) We have been warned only Once , and it was very technical warning. We didn't knew terms like "socks puppets" and that "creating a External Links section is not allowed". I still don't understand what is wrong in my colleagues adding a link , as long as it is related and adds value to the page ?

f) I have read in talk pages about Wikipedia not being a linkfarm and I appreciate the idea, however our content cannot be added directly in Wikipedia as a article ..as it is database driven and voluminous and WP:EL point 3.1.3 mentions that such links "Should be added". Can anybody guide us ..? In case we have done any technical mistakes ...can somebody advise what we need to do ?

g) I could not find any Wiki Project related to International Trade to ask others to judge this.

h) What is the criteria of judging such issues ? basis of "links being added" or " value being added" ??

i) Whom should I contact in Wikipedia, who can check our links and content and certify that they do "ADD VALUE " to the Wikipedia article where they were added and confirm to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:EL#What_should_be_linked

More details of this discussion could be had here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WT:WPSPAM#infodriveindia.com

Thanks & Rgds, RakeshRakesh999991 08:14, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I will reply to each of the points:
a) as an example, the link http://www dot infodriveindia dot com/India-Exports-Trade-Data.aspx got added to Balance of trade, the added link gives access to India specific data, for some companies, over 2004 only. That is certainly WP:EL#Links normally to be avoided (point 14, not directly linked to subject; otherwise we could also add links for all other countries over all other years). Seen the specificity of the data, it is better used to make a point (and the link used as a reference, see WP:CITE, and intro WP:EL) about a company's trade in 2004, but I expect the data to bee too specific for that. Same things can be said about some other link additions.
b) As point a, the specific trade of India is not directly linked to business of trade, it would be to Trade of India, but this data may be too specific even for that page. Moreover, we are not a linkfarm.
c) The page in the above example is 2004. Would not call that up-to-date. And again, it is then better as a reference.
d) I will leave that to an expert, indeed.
e) You were indeed warned only once, for a pretty blatant addition. Blacklisting occured after user:Jon007 ignored a {{uw-spam4im}} (final warning) for 5 days, and was given 3 other warnings in the meantime. As Jon007 has not reacted until now, it is difficult to ask him why he ignored the warnings.
f) Well, as I said above, I disagree. This data (over a previous, closed year) is certainly suitable as a reference, or can be used to write content which can be attributed by the data.
g) see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Directory/History_and_society#Business_and_economics, guess that should be a more specific search point.
h) If there are concerns they are expressed by contacting people on talkpages. If people continuously ignore these warnings, it is either put on autorevert (see User:AntiSpamBot) or blacklisted here. The wikipedia is a cooperative project, and when there are concerns then it is best to first discuss on talkpages or with a wikiproject. Unfortunately, Jon007 ignored these warnings completely.
i) I guess, some established editors. You can try talkpages of pages where you want the links added, posting there, or see if there are editors who are frequently editing the documents and contacting them on their talkpages.
Hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:58, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Here are the warnings:
Typically, we do not remove domains from the spam blacklist in response to site-owners' requests. Instead, we de-blacklist sites when trusted, high-volume editors request the use of blacklisted links because of their encyclopedic value in support of our encyclopedia pages. If such an editor asks to use your links, I'm sure the request will be carefully considered and your links may well be removed.
Unlike Wikipedia, DMOZ is a web directory specifically designed to categorize and list all Internet sites; if you've not already gotten your sites listed there, I encourage you to do so -- it's a more appropriate venue for your links than our wikis. Their web address: http://www.dmoz.org/.
Regards, --A. B. (talk) 16:58, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Troubleshooting and problems

Discussion

guidelines?

It may be worth being pro-active and outlining how this will be used locally, e.g. what modifications are needed to m:Spam blacklist/About? Does someone who pays attention to how this works on meta have an opinion? - BanyanTree 09:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First we should make this talk page look a little more like m:Talk:Spam blacklist I think. I will work on that. :) FunPika 17:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am going to change Wikipedia:Spam blacklist from a soft redirect to a page similar to m:Spam blacklist/About. FunPika 18:47, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
One guideline that immediately jumps to mind is Do not add an entry without discussing it on the talk page first. It's one thing if an admin accidentally adds a catch-all regex to MediaWiki:Usernameblacklist; it is another when an admin adds it here. Another possible guidelines: entries added without discussion may be removed (unless it's a Foundation action), not only because the admin adding them may not know what he/she is doing, but because each entry should ideally require consensus (not the silent kind). An exception for this should possibly be set up for tentative entries due to link spamming. One more guideline to consider is, The burden of proof is on the person who suggests the addition. These do seem a bit restrictive, but a blacklist is not something to be taken lightly. GracenotesT § 05:31, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Let me point out one thing to you folks from my experiance with the meta blacklist. If you don't know regex, please don't modify this list, as even simple formatting screwups have a nasty tendency to a) enable the blacklist for all links or b) disable the blacklist for this site. (on meta its disabled for everyone). That is why you see the nice header on the blacklist page. I will be working to get our blacklist on meta caught back up, and I would advise that spam be brought there *first*. This list is great for en wiki only attack sites, ect, things that we don't need to blacklist across all wikis. —— Eagle101Need help? 03:19, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, also, if you guys format the archives for this blacklist like the archives on meta, I already have a script that does the archiving, drop me a message if you would like me to file a bot request to run that archive script on this page as well. —— Eagle101Need help? 03:21, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also I highly suggest that you guys have a spam blacklist log, so that you know what happened 3 months down the road. see the WP:WHITELIST for an example of what a log looks like. The log should contain why the admin blacklisted a site, (preferably with a link to a permanent version of the discussion on this page). From that you can tell why a link was added 3 months later when the original admin might not be around. I'm sorry if I keep posting here, but I've had plenty of experience with this :) —— Eagle101Need help? 03:25, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(outdent) MediaWiki:Bad image list put a restriction on the use of certain images. Is that where Spam-blacklist is going? -- Jreferee (Talk) 21:31, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adding entry without discussion

I note that User:JzG has just added a Wikipedia-criticism site to the spam blacklist without discussion, despite the general guideline that such things need to be discussed. This seems to be yet another of the many attempts to get some spawn of WP:BADSITES to be treated as policy regardless of failure to ever get consensus for it. *Dan T.* 17:54, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's been some discussion on the mailing list about this. Having had a look over the site, I for one think it most certainly belongs on the spam blacklist and I can't see any reason why anyone would want to link to it. Whether the process was appropriate, the result is correct. Sam Blacketer 20:48, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The mailing list is not onsite, and doesn't allow everyone to say their piece - especially because it is moderated. I have removed it until such time as a proper discussion has taken place. Especially because there is an outstanding arbcom request involving links to this site. ViridaeTalk 02:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
General comments based on lessons learned the hard way at meta:Spam blacklist:
  • There should be a log for this list such as there is at meta:Spam blacklist/Log. (Spam_blacklist/Log is currently a red link but maybe I'm missing something). If we're not logging stuff now, we're going to really regret it in a few weeks or months. Whitelist requests come in now at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist or at meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#Proposed removals about older stuff on the meta blacklist and nobody knows how a particular domain got on the list. Look at the older entries on the meta log to see what I mean about confusion. Every blacklist entry should have a blacklist log entry linking to an explanation of the blacklisting.
  • The intended audience for a spam blacklist log are the admins of 2012 that have to understand why stuff's blacklisted. Believe it or not, today's hot spam topics may be curiously passé by then: Viagra may be off the market and current wikidrama sites may have gone the way of beanie babies and lava lamps.
  • After just 3 years, requests to whitelist stuff at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist seem to default to whitelisting if there's not an adequate explanation in the meta log. Today's admins and editors must fully document their reasons if they want blacklisted stuff to stay blacklisted in the future.
  • Terse, generic log entries like "[[WP:NOT#SOAP]]" or "[[WP:EL]]" are insufficient.
  • Stepping through histories of several hundred edits/month to figure out 3-year old entries is an enormous pain in the neck. (I've done it before). Please don't just rely on edit summaries or future editors and admins will hate you when they finally find your entry.
  • I think off-wiki mailing lists, IRC, etc are not very transparent and make for poor documentation. This is true even of official and semi-official channels. There doesn't necessarily need to be a discussion here on this talk page, but spam blacklist log entries should permalink to some explanation of the blacklisting decision on en.wikipedia.org, for example WP:AN/I.
These comments are not directed at JzG or any other editor or admin in particular.
--A. B. (talk) 03:26, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist&oldid=164918652"