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
Line 763: Line 763:


[[User:Yngvarr|Yngvarr]] [[User talk:Yngvarr|(t)]] [[Special:Contributions/Yngvarr|(c)]] 22:57, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
[[User:Yngvarr|Yngvarr]] [[User talk:Yngvarr|(t)]] [[Special:Contributions/Yngvarr|(c)]] 22:57, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

== lenr-canr.org ==
Long-term spamming and use to push fringe views in {{la|Cold fusion}}, see also [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Cold fusion]]. Links actively being promoted by the site owner (e.g. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cold_fusion&diff=prev&oldid=258425920]) in continued furtherance of a real-world dispute which has spilled over onto Wikipedia. Inappropriate as a source due to polemic and fringe advocacy, includes material hosted in violation of original publisher's copyright. Adding now, and listing here for transparency. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 21:12, 18 December 2008 (UTC)


=Proposed removals=
=Proposed removals=

Revision as of 21:13, 18 December 2008

    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 – 258846503 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.

    Proposed additions

    watchindia.tv

    This site is continuously being added, I have removed it on past ocassions and was added as recently as earlier today. ChiragPatnaik (talk) 04:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Can we have some IPs/users who are placing this please. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 18:28, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    ChiragPatnaik (talk) 18:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks - problematic I agree. Reflecting & looking to list. If they do place the link again once the block expires request blocking & I will link for sure. Regards --Herby talk thyme 19:04, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Stale ? MER-C 01:54, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I see no subsequent link additions.  Defer to XLinkBot in case they return. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:09, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Now monitored by XLinkBot. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:14, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    oldunreal.com

    Accounts that have re-added the link:

    Links to this website have been repeatedly added by IPs to the Unreal article since the beginning of July when the article was cleaned up. In addition, the following users are the site owners/contributors:

    They have participated in discussions on Talk:Unreal, in which they are not shy about admitting that they asked people from the website to come to sway opinion on Wikipedia. I've already given them ample policy reasons to stop adding the link, firstly because of WP:SPAM, which I believe is justified because the content of the website is not significant enough to meet the requirements of WP:V -- it is not documented by secondary sources. The website's proponents (who are all either from the website itself or related community sites who couldn't help but leave their own URLs also) argue that the usefulness or popularity of the website justifies inclusion, but again there is no objective evidence that the website is either of these things. They have continually reiterated OR-based arguments despite being told, repeatedly, that OR is not allowed on WP, and they apparently refuse to read or accept established policies, believing their own case to be exempt. In some cases the visitors have also vandalized the article, used article space to make personal attacks, or overwritten official game information with information about their own mod. I believe it is an attempt to promote the website or its work on Wikipedia. Ham Pastrami (talk) 01:48, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Note this off-Wikipedia thread:
    and this vandalism.
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:10, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Before any decision is made here, we should get some consensus among established editors. I have left a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Comments wanted re: disputed link for the Unreal article asking for comments. I suggest centralizing the conversation at Talk:Unreal#Unofficial 227 patch. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that oldunreal.com is not a reliable source, but I'm not sure if a spam blacklist addition is the right way to go here as it's only being added on a single page. In this instance it might be better to request page protection for a short while. Hope this helps, Gazimoff 11:27, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Stale ? MER-C 01:54, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    On reviewing this, I see things got worse, culminating in a threat to conjure up an army of angry meatpuppets to spam Wikipedia.[1]
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:44, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:49, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    searchmycampus.com

    I have reverted most of the spam adds by the above IP for searchmycampus.com. IP blocked for 24hrs. They may add the link again. Please blacklist the website -- Tinu Cherian - 08:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Not as far as I am concerned. I'd rather see what happens after the block expires. If they do repeat it then it should be blacklisted but blacklisting is a last resort. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok no issues.Considering the style of contribs of the this IP editor, they are likely to try again. Anyways let us wait for the block expire. I reported this here as it was a big pain reverting these all the large scale additions of this website.-- Tinu Cherian - 09:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I kinda agree but AGF for now I think. With rollback it only takes a moment? Cheers --Herby talk thyme 10:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Stale ? MER-C 01:54, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Tracking link: http://sss.searchmycampus.com
     Defer to XLinkBot in case they return. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:52, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Now monitored by XLinkBot. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:06, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    sermonindex.net

    While cleaning up the above, I came across this one: sermonindex.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

    Spammer

    I can't imagine how we missed one that blatant! I cleaned the links. Guy (Help!) 21:59, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Stale ? MER-C 01:54, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't see any subsequent additions.  Defer to XLinkBot for now. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:56, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Now monitored by XLinkBot. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:07, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Orthopedic cast page spam

    There was also this paragraph added to our Orthopedic cast article about the erotic use of "recreational

    casts" along with links to three more related web sites:

    These are addditional related domains:
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:20, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    plus Added additional domains -- kinky casts and all. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:10, 31

    October 2008 (UTC)

    The original whitelist request that led to these editor-blacklisted sites has already been denied/closed and nobody has suggested they be whitelisted or kept. So I created this Orthopedic cast topic thread in the blacklist area and moved these newly blacklisted site references to it to maintain a document of historic and ongoing vendor spam abuse on the Orthopedic Cast topic. I hope its the right editing protocol and apologize if not.

    The latest/newest vendor spam to be removed from the orthopedic cast page is:

    The Orthopedic cast topic has been spammed in the past with spoofed / proxy / dynamic IP's posting commercial pay sites -- so suggest that blacklisting the offending referenced pay sites (as the editor did with the sites above) is probably more productive in killing off this spam then tracking dodgy IP contributors who may or not be what they appear.

    In addition to the above blacklisted links, previous vendor spam references to this page, some by suspect IP posts, have included:

    Beetstar


    Thanks for the report.
    I've run link reports on those five domains and I am not seeing any persistent spamming in the recent past:
    Sometimes these reports miss things -- are there any additions I should be aware of?
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 06:13, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Will keep an eye out for others. They pop up as single entry citations by vendor sites now and again typical of the latest one.

    Beetstar —Preceding undated comment was added at 13:12, 4 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]

    Thanks!
    FYI, we normally look for 3 to 4 warning across all accounts before we consider blacklisting, so don't forget to give escalating warnings from the grid at Wikipedia:UTM. It also helps to put a live link (with the http://) to the spam site on the user talk page so we can find all the user accounts. Don't get indignant -- just give a warning an move on.
    I hope this helps. Thanks again for your work on this. We take help from all quarters. --13:24, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

    CDladders

    The CDladders.com website has been spammed repeatedly in the certificate of deposit article.

    Oct. 21

    Oct. 18

    Oct. 17

    Oct. 12

    Oct. 9

    It's had to be removed by myself several times, as well as a couple of other Wikipedia users. Having the site blocked would be welcome.

    I mistakenly placed this in the discussion section earlier but am moving it up to the requests section now. Tiredofscams (talk) 17:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Accounts


    Domain
    Google Adsense ID: 4681729492103453


    I see only two warnings to date; normally we blacklist after more warnings.
     Defer to XLinkBot --A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:48, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Now added to XLinkBot's monitoring list. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    franzkafka.0fra.com

    franzkafka.0fra.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

    spammed to Franz Kafka by multiple IPs. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/franzkafka.0fra.com. This request was deferred from m:User:COIBot/XWiki/franzkafka.0fra.com as there's no reason to blacklist it globally at the moment. --Erwin(85) 10:41, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I see only one relevant warning; normally we like to see more warnings before blacklisting. Thanks for reporting this -- we'll keep an eye on it.
     Defer to XLinkBot --A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:51, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Now added to XLinkBot's monitoring list. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    injustice.info/jewcon.com

    injusticeusa.info: 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
    jewcon.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

    These appear to be anti-semitic hate sites masquerading as a "judicial misconduct" sites.

    Spammed to Proskauer Rose in place of its normal homepage (see this diff) by

    Update-- a previous diff shows that
    spammed the link "jewcon.com" to the same page, Proskauer Rose. This site is similar to the "injusticeusa.info" site, and I'm pretty certain it is run by the same people. --Eastlaw (talk) 05:44, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    There appears to be a lot more to this including previous accounts, hate sites and a number of other domains. I've been looking at this, but it may be Monday before I can wrap this up. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:42, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Also spammed


    Related domains


    Formerly related
    Now owned by opponents (possibly obtained through litigation?)


    Accounts


    Deleted material
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:07, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Another Update

    User 75.4.248.245 spammed this link to the Proskauer Rose article here. I will be requesting protection for this page. --Eastlaw (talk) 22:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 02:37, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    User 75.4.240.184 spammed this link to the Proskauer Rose article here. It was already reverted, but I'm reporting it anyway. How many domain names does this guy have? --Eastlaw (talk) 02:39, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    To answer your question, domaintools.com says he has at least 60 but I could only find the ones I've listed above.
    plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:43, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    neuralnation.com

    Accounts

    Still adding links after warning level 4. Please blacklist this site to prevent more time wasting. Aff123a (talk) 21:41, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:15, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    unclesirbobby.org.uk

    Link
    Editors

    There was a big effort to get this link included in several dream articles at the beginning of this year (see IPs with warnings). Editor has been back several times over the last year. Spamming is slow and almost always with a different IP address so blocks and protection are impractical as deterrents. Requesting blacklisting. -- SiobhanHansa 18:11, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added. Thanks for reporting. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:15, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Related domain that has also been spammed scarboroughphotos.org.uk :
    Thanks -- SiobhanHansa 18:12, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    buzz.igg.com

    buzz.igg.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

    buzz.igg.com is the referal spam version of links to the igg.com websites. While some articles properly link to various other *.igg.com sites, it is never appropriate to use the buzz version of the link that is supposed to earn the submitter money. These get substituted for the non-referral links quite often, for example twice on Myth War Online today:

    - MrOllie (talk) 00:37, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 14:01, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Now that I've got a Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/buzz.igg.com report, I can see this was x-wiki spammed. Can someone list on Meta then remove here? I've got to travel. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 14:22, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    thefitnesspersonals.com and thefloridadatingcoaches.com

    Sites
    Accounts

    All IPs have been warned and the 65.118.76.139 IP has been blocked once but the link continues to be re-added. -- SiobhanHansa 14:49, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 14:02, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    xn--12cm1c1bgj0d1a.net

    Sites
    Accounts

    IP have been warned, yet continued to add it every two hours, occasionally changing the IP. andy (talk) 16:52, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    markets.com

    Sites
    Accounts

    IP has been blocked for excessive linkspamming. See initial report at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#markets.com. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:12, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Related domains
    On the same server:
    Google Adense ID: 008155416638014
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:22, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:27, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    4dasoul.com

    4dasoul.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

    See WikiProject Spam report/See WikiProject Spam report. MER-C 10:49, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:39, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    plwha.com

    This commercial site has been added to multiple HIV/AIDS-related articles by the single-purpose account (and now banned) User:Plwha and sockpuppets, including

    Sufficient warnings have been made, but the editor appears to IP-hop to avoid the possibility of blocks. The webpage itself contains a small amount of partly inaccurate travel advice for HIV-positive travelers and nothing of relevance for any of the articles to which it is repeatedly added.

    By User Plwha: [3], [4], [5], [6].

    By 86.121.195.144 on 10 November: [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]

    An edit by 86.121.193.176 replaces a relevant and functional Wikilink.

    Examples from IP 86.121.193.29 include: [15]

    This edit by 86.121.193.7 replaces multiple bona fide links with the plwha webpage. Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 17:43, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Defer to Global blacklist It's now been blacklisted on the meta blacklist per meta:User:COIBot/XWiki/plwha.org --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:06, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    quick-guide-usa.com

    IP only additions, often reverted, used as a 'reference':

    --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:31, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Additional account:
    Google Adsense ID: 2328670394474814
    Cross-wiki spam:
     Defer to Global blacklist--A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    londonroad.net

    Please consider blacklisting of londonroad.net. The URL was reported to m:User:COIBot/XWiki/londonroad.net, but I don't think there's a need to blacklist it globally.

    londonroad.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

    It's been added from multiple IPs to Peterborough United F.C. . Please see the report on meta for diff links. --Erwin(85) 09:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I think the editors need to get (and ignore) several warnings before we blacklist this. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:08, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Tracking link: http://londonroad.net --A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:10, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for reporting this -- we'll keep an eye on it.
     Defer to XLinkBot --A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:52, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Now added to XLinkBot's monitoring list. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    dnabaser.com rnabaser.com and sequence-assembler.com

    See also DNA Baser history and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/DNA_Baser

    Somewhat sophisticated attempts to promote these related products by:

    appear now to have devolved into simple spamming by SPAs:

    Since requests not to spam to the other accounts appear to have lead to the use of these throwaway accounts am requesting blacklisting. -- SiobhanHansa 12:31, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    IP 85.16.163.218 (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) continuing to spam. -- SiobhanHansa 13:54, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:16, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I have just added \bcubic\.3x\.ro\/free-dna-tools\/index\.html\b, a page on a free server that redirects to these sites. Some records:
    • 55 records; Top 10 editors who have added dnabaser.com: Fedra (29), ClueBot (10), Madrigal12 (7), 85.16.163.218 (2), SiobhanHansa (1), 85.16.167.231 (1), Yard05er (1), Mirc007 (1), Wk master editor (1), AVBOT (1).
    • 7 records; Editors who have added rnabaser.com: Fedra (4), Madrigal12 (2), SiobhanHansa (1).
    • 1 records; Editors who have added sequence-assembler.com: Applyalert1 (1).
    • 11 records; Editors who have added cubic.3x.ro: 85.16.163.200 (5), 85.16.162.33 (3), 85.16.163.181 (2), 85.16.163.194 (1).
    I suggest immediate blacklisting of any other domains/links used to circumvent blacklisting here, and that IPs in this range (85.16.0.0/16 - EWETEL-DYNDSL-POOL9 - DE) who edit unconstructively on the page Sequence_assembly are blocked. --Dirk Beetstra T C 00:04, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Forgot to mention that I yesterday added '\bdownload3k\.com\/Install-DNA-BASER-sequence-assembling-tool\.html\b', as it was used to lead again to (this time a download site for) DNA Baser. --Dirk Beetstra T C 21:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Link forwarding sites

    An anon user has been using multiple sites to forward those who click on the links to a site using a referal tag, and edit warring to add these links.

    Links
    Related accounts

    None of the listed sites are used for legitimate links. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:09, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    play-chess.net

    This URL has been spammed to various chess articles, please see m:User:COIBot/XWiki/play-chess.net for more information. This has mostly been targeted at enwiki, so I don't want to globally blacklist it. --Erwin(85) 20:45, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I see only one spam warning; I've given another one. I think the site-owner needs more warnings before we blacklist this domain.
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:17, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Thanks for reporting this -- we'll keep an eye on it.
     Defer to XLinkBot --A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Now added to XLinkBot's monitoring list. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    TheMovieDB.org

    Travisbell

    Travisbell (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)

    TheMovieDB.org

    themoviedb.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 Editor's sole contributions have been to promote this website. —Erik (talk • contrib) 05:12, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    crediblemusicreviews.com

    Multiple IPs (probably the same person) continually add these reviews to articles about albums and try to pass them off as professional reviews. The site is a WordPress blog, as seen on the site. Diffs: [16], [17], [18], [19], [20]

    They usually always revert edits, disrupting the article to include these reviews, and it becomes tiresome, really. DiverseMentality 05:59, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Blacklisting is a big step and potentially carries implications off of Wikipedia. We like to see the user get several warnings before we blacklist. If that doesn't stop the person, then we're happy to blacklist. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:11, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Domains


    Spam accounts
    • warned multiple times
    I will give these IPs final warnings
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:32, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Alright, if I see anymore additions of this site, I'll bring it right back with diffs. DiverseMentality 18:06, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Defer to XLinkBot for now. I've added these 2 domains to XLinkBot's revert list. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:01, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    swfinvestments.net / acquisitionreport.com

    85.201.148.183 (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), editwarred with user:Versageek and complained to AN when his spam was reverted again. Sites are of no obvious use and the user is clearly determined. Adding. Guy (Help!) 22:45, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Domains
    Reference
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:28, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    plus Added --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    hosuronline.com

    hosuronline.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


    An anonymous user has been restoring this link on Mehndi for quite a long time now, from lots of IPs. Warnings and explanations haven't made a dent, and last time the article was semi protected he just waited it out, so now I think we need to take this step. Partial lists of IPs below.


    Thanks for your attention. - MrOllie (talk) 13:40, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:55, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    clickwrestle.com

    This site was mass added today even after warnings. The site promises video clips of particular professional wrestlers. However the links lead to a subscription site which requires payment and membership to view the videos. I think most all of the links have been removed but they do seem to come back.

    clickwrestle.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

    Thank you for your time. JodyB talk 02:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    I did some checking. Black Pants Productions also owns these domains:
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 03:31, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    visataxes.com

    Spam domain


    Spam accounts


    Spam-only user page

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:56, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    1000misspenthours.com

    See m:User:COIBot/LinkReports/1000misspenthours.com - IPs adding links and citing "Scott Ashlin of 1000 misspent hours" - who he? Google gives only 67 unique hits [21], so I don't think he is a widely cited critic like, say, Roger Ebert. I am adding this. Guy (Help!) 16:55, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    anontalk.com

    IPs are adding things like this to talk pages. The IPs above are the ones I've seen so far, there might be more. Also, as I searched on Google, Wikipedia is definitely not the first site to get spammed. DiverseMentality 23:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    noveleros.com

    Please, consider blacklisting "noveleros.com" per m:User:COIBot/XWiki/noveleros.com. (22 additions here and no enciclopedic content). Thank you. Dferg, T ES 21:50, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Added. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:51, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    taiwanimpression.blogspot.com

    Repeatedly being added to Vietnamese people in Taiwan and Peter Nguyen by sockpuppets of User:Nipponese Dog Calvero. Blocking the user doesn't help since he just comes back with another name or an IP, and he hasn't given up in months, so protecting the page for a few days is pointless and just interferes with legitimate editing. No legitimate reason for linking to this non-notable blog. Diffs: [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33]. Thanks, cab (talk) 01:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done Y. Ichiro (talk) 22:48, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    chinatravel.com

    Long-term extlink problem on many China-related pages. XLinkBot has been tracking it for a few weeks, but apparently can't keep up or is missing some of them. For examples, see en linksearch for the list of users warned by XLinkBot. Many different registererd SPAs and anon IPs, all essentially one-time-use so warn/block not useful. Interesting pattern to many of the accounts involved but not all, so checkuser and blocking of the underlying IP likely to be incomplete solution. DMacks (talk) 22:21, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Yep, added. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:48, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    extremetube.tv

    Added, listing here for transparency. Guy (Help!) 20:29, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    clubevfrportugal.com

    clubevfrportugal.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 link has repeatedly been added to a number of motorcycle articles by different IP editors all from the same ISP in Portugal. Each time the IP editor has been banned and he/she has come back with a different IP address. After semi-protection expired on the articles, another vandal attack took place today adding this link repeated time to the same articles. Listed below are the IP addresses involved:

    The following IP addresses were not banned but were involved in adding the same link earlier:

    Thanks. --TimTay (talk) 21:16, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    amazonkindlecheap.com

    Periodically appears on Amazon Kindle, although when I looked at it just now, it was a deadlink. Still, no reason for such an obvious (to me) spammy link.

    amazonkindlecheap.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

    Yngvarr (t) (c) 22:57, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    lenr-canr.org

    Long-term spamming and use to push fringe views in Cold fusion (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), see also Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Cold fusion. Links actively being promoted by the site owner (e.g. [34]) in continued furtherance of a real-world dispute which has spilled over onto Wikipedia. Inappropriate as a source due to polemic and fringe advocacy, includes material hosted in violation of original publisher's copyright. Adding now, and listing here for transparency. Guy (Help!) 21:12, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals

    aceshowbiz.com

    Why is this blacklisted, seems legit to me? Andre666 ([[User talk:Andre666|talk]]) 13:07, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Kingcomp (talk) 08:07, 18 September 2008 (UTC) I manage aceshowbiz.com, I need to know when did our website spam prolifically ? Did it happen lately or many years ago ? We have many worth suggest article such as exclusive interview with Demi Lovato (Celebrity News, Sep 18, 2008). Please consider unlisted our website from your spam list as there is no such action for years. Many years ago aceshowbiz.com just a small website, right now we've already doing partnership with many big / reliable company. There is no time for us thinking for spamming. Just quality. Please take a visit to our website an consider. Thank You.[reply]


    Domain blacklisted on meta
    Google Adsense ID: 5315453046799966
    servedby.advertising.com: site=72134


    Related domains
    These should be evaluated for blacklisting as well.


    References


    Comments for the site-owner
    Kingcomp, we typically 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 encyclopaedic value in support of our encyclopaedia 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. You'll note that we've already whitelised some of your pages on such a basis.
    The global blacklist is used by more than just our 700+ Wikimedia Foundation wikis (Wikipedias, Wiktionaries, etc.). All 3000+ Wikia wikis plus a substantial percentage of the 25,000+ unrelated wikis that run on our MediaWiki software have chosen to incorporate this blacklist in their own spam filtering. Each wiki has a local "whitelist" which overrides the global blacklist for that project only. Some of the non-Wikimedia sites may be interested in these links; by all means feel free to request local whitelisting on those.
    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/.
    no Declined --A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:17, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd like to request why this is blacklisted still. Any site can be spammed by a crazed editor that thinks they are doing the site a favor. It does not appear to get its information from "users", like some of the other sources we continue to allow to exist. Theoretically, IMDb is "spammed" on every Wiki page related to film and TV, and they are not considered "reliable sources of information".  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Bignole, once in a blue moon we see the crazy uninvolved editor that spams a site, but that's very rare. In this case, all the spam edits traceroute to a location in Indonesia, unlike our zillion IMDB links that have been added by established editor from around the world.
    Even though you're an established user, I'm reluctant to remove the entire domain from the blacklist since, based on this domain's history, I lack confidence the site-owner won't go back to persistently spamming us. Are there particular aceshowbiz pages you'd like to see whitelisted? --A. B. (talk • contribs) 16:29, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm slightly confused. You said the site-owner is the spammer, but then said you traced the spamming to a location in Indonesia. I cannot find any indication that the website's homebase, or any base, is in Indonesia. Did the site-owner admit to being the spammer or something?
    Regardless, the only reason I care is because I was trying to find sources to verify the Teen Choice Award nominations for Kristin Kreuk for the Lana Lang (Smallville) article, which is currently under GAC. People do not tend to report on general award nominations, so finding any reliable mentioning of it has been extremely difficult. I cannot use IMDb, because it is currently snubbed from usage completely (which I generally agree with, but not entirely, as such, there is a current proposed guideline for citing IMDb in the works that would allow editors to cite things like Awards, and other information that is less controversial). I came across this link--http://www.aceshowbiz.com/celebrity/kristin_kreuk/awards.html--where AceShowBiz actually has a profile for Kreuk's awards. It takes care of all that I need. Since AceShowBiz does not get its info from users, at least as far as I can tell from their page and which is a big issue with why we typically don't use IMDb (because we cannot tell exactly who it is coming from), AceShowBiz won't be criticized as much as IMDb would be.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    SermonAudio.com

    I am requesting that the domain sermonaudio.com be considered for removal from the local black list. I tried to update the entry about Giuseppi Logan with a reference to the page (blacklisted domain/sermoninfo.asp?SID=10180811720)that houses a recent interview that proves what is said about him being found by a mission group in New York. The article currently states that it is not know if he is alive. This is a good reference to prove that he is. Evidently someone in the past has abused the use of this site as a resource but I believe this is a valid use. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.155.163.233 (talk) 17:17, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Is that final? Is there a way for a blacklisted domain to be used in case like this. The article says that the guy may be dead! This is proof that he is not.72.155.163.233 (talk) 13:12, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined as stale. MaxSem(Han shot first!) 10:23, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    scififantasyfiction. suite101. com

    I want to use this article [scififantasyfiction. suite101. com/ article.cfm/ nicola_griffith] as a reference is an article about Homosexuality in SF. It looks like a reliable source, and the interviewee is notable. I assume it was blacklisted for a spamming reason, but it remains a useful reliable source (this interview is not hosted elsewhere).Yobmod (talk) 13:59, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Ah, i see this site has much spamming, therefore i requested white-listing of just that page instead.Yobmod (talk) 14:14, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    holocaustresearchproject\.org

    Why´s that!? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.189.231.6 (talk) 05:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Note this site was blocked on Meta (a central admin site for Wikimedia Foundation projects) not simply at the English Wikipedia so questions about it are likely to be answered more quickly and accurately at the blacklist page there. If you just want to see the reasoning for the block see this link. -- SiobhanHansa 15:18, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I went to the referred discussion on the blacklisting of this site and was surprised to find that the concerns about it cited were primarily someone's blog -- which seems to raise some issues about the credibility of the concerns. Issues cited also seem to be with individual entries on the site rather than the site itself -- which appears to be comprehensive and backed by some academics. I understand the concerns originally raised had to do with the site's self-referencing. The question is if someone else referenced it as a credible resource would it be cited or does someone's blog about its credibility automatically disqualify it?

    Possumldy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Possumldy (talk • contribs) 18:24, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    The primary concern - the reason why it was blocked - was the spamming by this account and this one. The rest of the comment is just a user shaking his/her head in disbelief at the (in his/her opinion) low standard of the link. URLs aren't generally blacklisted for content (with a few extreme exceptions), only when they have been abused. If there is a page on the site that is necessary as a reference for an assertion in an article that particular URL could be whitelisted if the circumstances warrant it. -- SiobhanHansa 15:44, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Why wasn't that user warned and then blocked instead? --Apoc2400 (talk) 14:54, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    They were and it didn't work. -- SiobhanHansa 10:27, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I wish it was not blacklisted, too. While the quality of some contents seems disputable, the site also contains lots of valuable information. --Lysytalk 17:16, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined due to persistent spamming. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    aluminiumleader. com

    I propose to remove this website from the black list as it is a highly educative and informative resource on the aluminium production. It was added only to articles which can profit from the website as their subject is explained there in more details or users can find daily news about them - aluminium, alumina and bauxite (bauxite is first processed into alumina and then into aluminium and after that foil or alloys or parts of things (plains, cars, furniture etc) are made from aluminium ingots as a final product). The website contains extensive information on the history of aluminium, aluminium production and ways of using aluminium - in design, transport, construction.LOscritor 16:10, 27 October 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.248.20.6 (talk)

    • In other words, when you spammed it you only spammed it to places you thought it might stick. But it's not blacklisted, this is simply a case of reversion by someone who did not think the links met WP:EL (and I agree). Guy (Help!) 07:16, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • [16:39:30] <Beetstra> whoadded aluminiumleader.com
      • [16:39:31] <COIBot> 102 records; Editors who have added aluminiumleader.com: 213.248.20.174 (73), LOscritor (19), 213.248.20.6 (3), GLGerman (2), ClueBot (2), 81.200.28.29 (1), Paszczakowna1 (1), LittleOldMe (1).
      • [16:41:48] <Beetstra> whereadded link aluminiumleader.com

    [16:41:48] <COIBot> 102 records; Top 10 wikis where aluminiumleader.com has been added: ru.wikipedia (55), en.wikipedia (11), de.wikipedia (10), it.wikipedia (9), es.wikipedia (6), lt.wikipedia (2), et.wikipedia (2), pl.wikipedia (2), fr.wikipedia (2), lv.wikipedia (1).


    merekavimitra.blogspot.com

    [use above link before tis path] search/label/shaheed%20bhagat%20singh . I think only one example helps my standing... this links contain research works in Hindi over Bhagat singh. I know that wikipedia is not a place of advertising, but a place where user can get more valuable material.. all the material should not be placed here.. so, linking is not a bad option.. I think you should give one more chance to this URL

    This domain and the one below (hindyugm.com) were blacklisted on meta because of this. MER-C 01:55, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    For the record, no Declined --A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:29, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    podcast.hindyugm.com

    Due to one mistakes which was done on 30th Oct.. this URL series is blocked.. This website comprises fantastic Hindi article over music.. u people can see this website one more time.. it may be possible that owner of this website would not gone through terms and conditions properly, you should a more chance . thanks

    • One mistake?:
    • whoadded podcast.hindyugm.com
    • 55 records; Editors who have added podcast.hindyugm.com: 210.18.185.114 (14), 125.63.122.6 (11), 203.122.61.29 (11), 125.63.122.8 (9), 125.63.122.11 (5), ClueBot (3), 125.63.122.4 (1), 125.63.122.3 (1).
    • whereadded link podcast.hindyugm.com
    • 55 records; Wikis where podcast.hindyugm.com has been added: en.wikipedia (50), q:en.wikiquote (3), hi.wikipedia (2).
    • 72 records; Top 9 editors who have added hindyugm.com: 210.18.185.114 (20), 203.122.61.29 (14), 125.63.122.6 (11), 125.63.122.8 (9), 125.63.122.11 (5), ClueBot (4), BryanBot (3), 125.63.122.3 (3), 125.63.122.4 (1).
    • whereadded link hindyugm.com
    • 72 records; Wikis where hindyugm.com has been added: en.wikipedia (66), hi.wikipedia (3), q:en.wikiquote (3).
    • I guess this one is for meta. But for here no Declined --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:46, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    www.cosmoetica.com

    Don't know why it's blacklisted. Useful source of interviews with authors and commentaries.

    pheon (talk) 02:08, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    The site was spammed as part of an extensive campaign to promote writing by Dan Schneider. It covered more than the English Wikipedia so the URL has been blacklisted at Meta. See [35] [36] and [37] If you really need a particular link for a particular article you can request whitelisting of the link at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist. -- SiobhanHansa 20:49, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Case closed here,  Defer to Global blacklist --A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    kickme.to/lightningstalker

    I use this redirect service for my website because my hosting changes periodically, so it gives me a more or less stable place to link to. It has some electronics schematics and detailed descriptions of their operation that are useful to those who want to learn about electronics. The Lightning Stalker (talk) 09:31, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    badastronomy.com

    I suspect this was added by mistake. I don't see anything particularly spammy about it. —Steve Summit (talk) 13:44, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    mapsofworld.com

    Why is this site blacklisted? I was going to use http://finance.mapsofworld.com/company/i/idemitsu-kosan.html for a reference. Is it a spam site? --Apoc2400 (talk) 21:57, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Background:
    If you just need to reference a specific page, then you can request it's link be "whitelisted" at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist.
     Defer to Whitelist--A. B. (talk • contribs) 21:54, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's a lot of links and many of them are to bot-generated pages full of even more links. It seems that somebody unrelated to mapsofworld.com was persistently adding links for that and other sites to many articles over a year ago. If there is no indication that mapsofworld.com was behind the edits, can we just unlist the site? The person who added all the links is probably gone by now. --Apoc2400 (talk) 19:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, there is whitelisting, but that is quite bureaucratic and troublesome. I couldn't find any evidence of one user persistently spamming this link. It has been added here and there, but probably by unrelated people. Am I missing something in the above report? There a really too many links to make much sense of it. --Apoc2400 (talk) 19:47, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I've personally done mass rollbacks on spamming campaigns of this site (at least a year ago). The obnoxious pop-up advert doesn't help it's case either. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, I didn't notice because of Firefox, AdBlock and NoScript. Looking at it in IE, it sure looks like a spam site. I wonder if they stole the text I'm referencing from somewhere else. --Apoc2400 (talk) 19:59, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I have the same setup, except I don't use noscript (though Firefox warns me about the popup before it loads it). AdBlock is handy for letting you see quickly what ads have been blocked. A few of the folks here are diligent about correlating AdWord id with other sites, which often turn out to be spam targets as well. OhNoitsJamie Talk 00:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    toowoomba.org

    How did this site get blacklisted? This site is non-commercial in nature, and provides useful information to the people of the City of Toowoomba. This site has never been used for spam activity. Can it please be removed from the blacklist. Thankyou. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.121.80 (talk) 09:31, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I think was mistakenly blacklisted on the meta blacklist (not this one) based on the fact that this domain was sharing a server with some unrelated domains that were heavily spammed. See:
    You can request removal from the meta blacklist at meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#Proposed removals --A. B. (talk • contribs) 22:07, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    zuguide.com

    I believe this site was blacklisted by mistake. I am a fan of the site, and notice it kept on that external links to the site kept on getting deleted. zuguide is a movie trailer website with a lot of rich media. As such, since it was linked in wikipedia to particular movies and actors/actresses this is appropriate according to the guidelines.

    The guidelines state: Direct links to documents that require external applications (such as Flash or Java) to view the relevant content, unless the article is about such rich media.

    Movies, actors, and actresses today are not just referred to by still photos but by video. Since movies can't be referenced (licensing issues) it seems appropriate that movie trailers be referenced if they are licensed.

    The zuguide.com help pages state that the content is licensed by the Cinema-Source. I looked at cinema-source.com, they are subsidiary of hollywood.com, and this is one of the things that they do, i.e. license movie trailers. I have to assume that therefore the licensing is legit, because I'm sure that otherwise, Cinema-Source would know about it, and challenge zuguide.com

    Other issues that have come up are that you need to login - you don't I've used the site a lot and usually don't log in.

    As a wikipedia user, I like using external links because I assume they have been vetted and won't bring me to spam. By adding zuguide link to a wikipedia article, I believe I am doing other users a service. I don't think zuguide.com has a lot to gain, as wikipedia articles are nofollow

    Actor links of the form: Cate-Blanchett.html show a page of pictures of the actors in the various movies.

    Movie links are of the form: Babel.html

    I can't type the url in because it has been blacklisted

    The person that asked for a deletion said that the users were new. I have actually been doing wikipedia articles on and off for a few years, but it is this particular kind of witchhunt where every article one has ever contributed to becomes suspect, that I decided to start a new wikipedia id coming to the aid of this website.
    Movietrailerfan (talk) 12:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Comment Looking at A.B.s spam report, I see a pattern of single purpose accounts canvassing these links, which suggests an advertising campaign. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:51, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • no Declined Yes, there was a mistake, the mistake was spamming. That's what the blacklist is for. There's no suggestion that these links would be useful within the Wikipedia external link guidelines. Guy (Help!) 22:20, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I think you are focusing on the wrong issue here. This is a site with thousands of pages and a few users (maybe they were even associated with the that website) put in a few links. I don't think that is the issue. I am asking to add an external link to a few of my favorite actor's wikipedia articles with a link that I find useful. I think Wikipedia editor should be focusing on the utility of the links. In my discussion above, I make multiple suggestions as to why links to zuguide are useful. The author above chose to respond to none of them. I would appreciate if some other wikipedia editors would reconsider this denial.
    Movietrailerfan (talk) 05:41, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Movie trailers are quite easy to find with a simple web search. It's obvious that there was a campaign to get hits to this link. OhNoitsJamie Talk 06:16, 17 November 2008 (UTC
    Actually, they are not so easy to find. Most of the links are to youtube, which is often not a reliable source. I have found that movie trailers often have 15 seconds of movie trailer and then a video of somebody's kid, or worse, somebody's girlfriend. Also, those trailers are not licensed by the studios. On other movie information sites, I might need to go through 4 or 5 clicks to finally watch a trailer. Zuguide brings me right to the trailer. Furthermore, the link that I added for Cate Blanchett on zuguide was a link to trailers of all of her movies, which would entail a lot of searching.
    Also, I'm not sure that the argument that "easy to find with simple web search" washes here. A lot of the information on Wikipedia is easy to find using web search. But it's also easy to find lots of junk. My point in adding anything to Wikipedia is to share with others from my knowledge and experience, much of which has come from "simple web search".
    I don't know if others were involved in a campaign to get hits to the site. But my campaign is less about zuguide, and more about the fact that every time I add something to wikipedia, somebody turns around and deletes it a few minutes later. Usually, I just take it, but this time I am fighting that trend.
    Movietrailerfan (talk) 10:30, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Typically, we do not remove domains from the spam blacklist in response to new editors' or site-owners' requests. Instead, we de-blacklist sites when trusted, high-volume editors request the use of blacklisted links because of their encyclopaedic value in support of our encyclopaedia 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 this site listed there, I encourage you to do so -- it's a more appropriate venue for this link than our encyclopaedia. Their web address: http://www.dmoz.org/. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 14:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, the first constructive comment here, but I still disagree. Someone might add www-zuguide-com (I can't even type the url here because of the blacklist) to dmoz.org website as a Movie trailer website, which would be a description of the site as a whole But I wanted to do was to add a particular page in zuguide, i.e. www-zuguide-com / Cate-Blanchett.html that refers to Cate Blanchett's movies. This is similar to imdb on the same wikipedia article, the point is not to point imdb.com but imdb's entry regarding Cate Blanchett.
    Movietrailerfan (talk) 16:10, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    You're welcome to disagree, but the matter is closed. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:16, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    So rather than respond to my argiments, you just say the matter is closed, and that's it?
    Could someone describe to me what my options are now?
    Movietrailerfan (talk) 22:10, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Your options are (a) like it or (b) lump it. Sorry, those are the only options. We heard what you have to say, and we disagree with yoru assessment of this site and its value to this project. Guy (Help!) 11:42, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    AnimeNfo.com & anidb.info

    Hi, I was trying to update the external links for The Bush Baby. Currently the AnimeNfo link is pointing to a spam site that's not animenfo.com. I've noticed animenfo.com & anidb.info URLs are blacklisted, while animenewsnetwork.com is not, is there a reason for this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.91.167.74 (talk) 12:36, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    holocaustresearchproject.org

    This website did not spam wiki. Holocaust Revisionists and some "nutjob" bloggers spammed wiki posting links to the Holocaustresearchproject.org website with the sole intent to have it blacklisted for spamming.

    Wiki should have known better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.243.106.77 (talk) 21:39, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Perhaps you could talk to your ISP then since at least one of them (IP 71.243.87.210) seems to use the same service provider. -- SiobhanHansa 00:46, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Hmm, so is it enough to spam wikipedia pages with links to a source in order to get it blocked ? Seems an easy way to discredit any disliked site. --Lysytalk 17:21, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Yes it is. And in this case the spamming was not the only issue, I believe. Guy (Help!) 11:43, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    WikiJob.co.uk

    I am requesting the removal of the domain www.wikijob.co.uk from the domain blacklist. The domain was originally blacklisted when the wiki page for WikiJob.co.uk was removed - however, the wiki page went through a discussion process and the wiki page removal was overturned (although the domain blacklisting was not). The domain would be useful as a link for the current wikipedia page on "Interns" as WikiJob.co.uk provides info on internships for graduates in the UK. 86.0.221.59 (talk) 08:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    • no Declined It was removed because you spammed it across multiple pages. The fact that you succeeded in persuading some soft-hearted people to allow you (at the umpteenth attempt) to keep your article on your website does not negate the fact that you are a spammer. Guy (Help!) 22:32, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    americageo.com

    www.americageo.com no is spam, only offer information about places in map google. Only have banner of my enterprise and google advertises. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcomedina (talk • contribs) 19:12, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    fleetstreetinvest.co.uk

    Our domain has been added to the blacklist when (as far as I am aware) nobody has ever even posted a link to this site, the ban I believe is due to other Agora websites (Our parent company) posting links. The website has nothing to do with the other Agora websites that have been spamming we are all run as separate businesses so no shared spamming techniques so looks like we have been tarred with the same brush which is a little unfair.

    "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."

    None of this has been done as far as I am aware ... a straight blacklist for doing nothing.

    —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fleetstreetinvest (talk • contribs) 12:42, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    (ec)I confirm, I have no linkadditions of this domain in my database. Although we generally don't unlist when site owners request unlisting (conflict of interest and such), I would say that delisting of this domain should be done in this case. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:52, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    (+) We also blacklist sometimes to prevent abuse (if a number of sites on one server get abused, then this is the next step). --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:52, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • On the other hand, there is no suggestion that the site is of any use to the encyclopaedia, and it's hard to see how the user would even know it's blacklisted unless there was some attempt to add it. Guy (Help!) 22:32, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Agora mounted a massive spam operation on Wikipedia; see the complete record at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2008 Archive Oct 2#Agora Publishing spam on Wikipedia. We don't try to sort out the internal politics of domain-owners when blacklisting their domains; we have no way of telling who we're dealing with or verifying what they're saying. I suggest you speak to your owners about their Internet business practices; they seem pretty spammy from this end.
    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 encyclopaedic value in support of our encyclopaedia 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/.
    no Declined --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:42, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Additional comment:
    Also, in researching this, I turned up additional Agora domains overlooked previously:
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:11, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
     Done, thanks. Guy (Help!) 16:38, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    www.petitiononline.com

    Wikipedia shall be neutral in political topics. When I quote some bojections to Bill Richardson III, the link was in black list. Surprisely, not all the whole petition site is blocked, only the link to the objection of Richardson is blocked.

    The link provides only a openion and doesn't lead to the submission of petition. I don't understand why it's in black list. Please remove it.

    Nextop (talk) 00:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Myself and other users have attempted to add meaningful PetitionOnline URLs to articles (for example, a citation for a reference to a petition for Rick Rescorla, but all PetitionOnline.com URLs have been blocked due to "spam". I realize there are several meaningless petitions hosted there but, unless there is something we're missing, I believe the value of the site is such that it should be removed from the blacklist. Thanks for your consideration. 66.253.47.250 (talk) 15:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    This section originally posted in the Discussion section and referenced www.petitiononline.com/GovBillR however the section title was changed to request the unblocking of the PetitionOnline.com domain, as it is currently blocked at the domain level. Additionally, it was moved to the Proposed removals section, as we are petitioning for its removal from the blacklist. 66.253.47.250 (talk) 15:15, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia is not a soapbox. There is no reason to link to petitions on petitiononline. If they are notable, there are third party sources backing that up (and there is no need for a direct link), otherwise they don't need to be mentioned. For the few that need to be linked, I would suggest whitelisting of the specific petitions. As such, no Declined. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:56, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    tinyurl.com

    was added just a few hours ago: [38].
    but that is fully redundant for it is blocked on meta already by 

    \btinyurl\.(?:co\.uk|com)\b

    -- seth (talk) 11:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    That block isnt working - the URL was used successfully on AN. ViridaeTalk 12:06, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you give me the AN-diff, please? Perhaps someone just put a link to the main page. That's still possible because its on your local white list. see: [[39]]. -- seth (talk) 12:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    The diff is here, that is not a working link, Viridae, and this is possible anyway. I am going to remove the rule from the blacklist again to avoid further confusion. Marking as  Done (don't we have {{removed}} here?) --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:04, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    stencils.ch

    for some reason stencils.ch has been blacklisted, although it does indeed provide viable information (that is, stencils. lots of them)... now corretct me if i'm wrong, but there are no ads/spam either, so i'm not really getting why it should be blocked?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.61.103.4 (talk • contribs)

    Persistent link additions to Stencil (7 times) by IPs only. I actually hope that this is on meta (it is, I just checked). By the way, you are one of the 3 IP editors who have added this link. You may want to review our external links guideline and what wikipedia is not policy. As such, no Declined. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:53, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Dogs.info

    Should be removed from the blacklist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Borwnhear (talk • contribs) 11:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC); This template must be substituted.[reply]

    Dogs.info partial spam history:
    Spam accounts
    Partial list:


    Domains spammed
    Google Adsense ID: 6526704738187586


    Related domains
    Active sites
    Inactive or parked domains:
    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:56, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    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 encyclopaedic value in support of our encyclopaedia 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/.
    no Declined --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    PS, these other domains were overlooked and should be also added. --A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
     Done, good work. [40] Guy (Help!) 15:48, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Whitehat.servehttp.com

    I have no idea why this was blacklisted. I used it quite only on my page, and once as a link for some article on different radixes in math, cause i have a base converting applet. --Deo Favente (talk) 22:26, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    the whole domain servehttp.com is blacklisted on meta, see [41]. -- seth (talk) 02:02, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh i see, its blocked cause its a free domain name. I guess ill still use this site in talk pages if i need to i guess. Well in this case there are still domains missing from the same provider. --Deo Favente (talk) 18:09, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Is it possible to get it whitelisted? And where should i sugest the removeal of the other free domain names? Here or on meta? --Deo Favente (talk) 18:09, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Individual pages may be whitelisted on the application of an established user at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist. If you want to apply for a domain to be removed from the meta blacklist, see m:Talk:Spam blacklist. Stifle (talk) 14:30, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    freeforums.org

    Madhops360 (talk) 10:33, 07 December 2008 Why is freeforums.org blacklisted? I run an online game forums for FreeStyle Street Basketball for North America, Thanks.

    Per WP:EL#Links_normally_to_be_avoided, forums are rarely (if ever) appropriate external links on Wikipedia. OhNoitsJamie Talk 06:40, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    sveti-stefan.net

    This is very educatible, full of information web site and helpfull becouse it can be used like a tourist guide. End it's the only one wich a point is exactly that place from topic. I propose to remove this website from the black list because it's good to have such site offer in wikipedia story about Sveti Stefan and this site is not a spam site for shure. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pdjuras (talk • contribs) 17:26, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    • no Declined. Your only contributions to Wikipedia are linking this site and then asking for it to be removed from the blacklist after it was blacklisted due to spamming. I think you may be looking for DMOZ, which, unlike Wikipedia, is a link repository. Guy (Help!) 20:48, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Dear Sir, I didn't know that I have to be a big contributor to get opportunity to offer that one site can be removed from the black list. I didn't expect to get an answer in a pejorative manner like this one. I am serious man and I don't like that someone speak with me like this. That is not nice, that was just my opinion that this site is very proper for the topic (Sveti Stefan) especially when I sow other links. Thanks for your advice, it's not necessary. Good by! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pdjuras (talk • contribs) 21:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Troubleshooting and problems



    performance

    Hi!
    1. Some (>100) of the entries are fully redundant and may be removed. This would shorten the list and so increase its performance. For example, at present there exist the entries 

    \banontalk\.com\b
\bAnonTalk\.com\b
\b'''AnonTalk\.com\b

    But all links matched by the second or third entry are matched by the first one, too. The spam extension uses the i-modifier, i.e., patterns are case-insensitive. And because between "'" and "A" there is a word boundary \ba will match here, too.
    So if those entries are replaced by just the first one 

    \banontalk\.com\b

    there would be no difference.
    2. Furthermore it would increase the performance to use regexp grouping, e.g. 

    ourworld-top\.cs\.com\/ceoofamcolso
ourworld-top\.cs\.com\/ckelly6447
ourworld-top\.cs\.com\/jcshul
ourworld-top\.cs\.com\/latintexts

    could be replaced by 

    ourworld-top\.cs\.com/(?:ceoofamcolso|ckelly6447|jcshul|latintexts)

    (btw. the slash does not need to be escaped, because this is done by the spam extention) just like we do it at meta and de-wikipedia.
    Of course one can say that this will make the list more difficult to read. But that's not a real problem, because nobody exept some admins really reads the list itself. It needs to be read by the spam extension only. The important part for human beings to read is the spam log. What do you think about that? -- seth (talk) 11:12, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    wrong syntax and useless escaping

    Hi!
    there are some wrong entries in the list and some which have useless escaping inside.

       \sweet4ever-forum\.de\.tc\b 
-> \bsweet4ever-forum\.de\.tc\b
   \bdeath\-camps\.org\b
-> \bdeath-camps\.org\b
   \bcreateforum\.com\/phpbb\/?mforum\=reenactor\b
-> \bcreateforum\.com/phpbb/\?mforum=reenactor\b
   \bforums\.zoomshare\.com\/viewtopic\.php\?id\=15507&Reenactor%20Entertainment%20Tech%20Support\b
-> \bforums\.zoomshare\.com/viewtopic\.php\?id=15507&Reenactor%20Entertainment%20Tech%20Support\b
   \bforums\.zoomshare\.com\/viewtopic\.php\?pid\=113522
-> \bforums\.zoomshare\.com/viewtopic\.php\?pid=113522
   \bstores.\ebay\.com\b
-> \bstores\.ebay\.com\b
   \bweddings\-readings\.info\b
-> \bweddings-readings\.info\b
   \bpitbull.\wordpress\.com
-> \bpitbull\.wordpress\.com
   \bccpro2008.\wetpaint\.com\b
-> \bccpro2008\.wetpaint\.com\b
   \bmycincinnatiohiohomeinspector\.com \b
-> \bmycincinnatiohiohomeinspector\.com\b
   \bnepaeuropa2006\.blogspot\.com \b
-> \bnepaeuropa2006\.blogspot\.com\b (anyway, this entry would be redundant, so just delete it completely)
   and so on, there are many of those cases: " \b"
   \bdonmade.ytmnd.com/\b (if you wanted to block subpages only, then leave it like it is.)
(->\bdonmade.ytmnd.com\b)
   there are many of those cases: "/\b"
   \bz7\.invisionfree\.com\/Beyond_Computing\/index\.php?\b
-> \bz7\.invisionfree\.com/Beyond_Computing/index\.php\? (probably this is, what you wanted)
   \bz9\.invisionfree\.com\/Trollz\/index\.php?\b
-> \bz9\.invisionfree\.com/Trollz/index\.php\? (similar as above)
   \bpenis-*enlarge[0-9a-z\-]*\.[a-z]\b to catch the syntax "penis-*enlarge"
-> \bpenis-*enlarge[0-9a-z\-]*\.[a-z]+\b # to catch the syntax "penis-*enlarge"
   or even just
   \bpenis-*enlarge
   because the long one won't match any plain domains.
   \bastore\.amazon\.com\b affiliate Amazon products stores
-> \bastore\.amazon\.com\b # affiliate Amazon products stores
   is\.gd\b malicious redirect
-> is\.gd\b # malicious redirect (anyway, this entry would be redundant, so just delete it completely)
   \bsupermodels\.nl\b malware reported
-> \bsupermodels\.nl\b # malware reported

    -- seth (talk) 14:19, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello?
    I'm not admin in en-wiki, so I can't do the corrections by myself.
    Perhaps I was not clear enough. Just look at this: links removed. magic? no, just above mentioned bugs. -- seth (talk) 16:56, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
     Done all corrected. Thanks for pointing out the mistakes in the spam list. I do agree we need someone to actually maintain the list itself, it can get really messy and could use some maintainance. Y. Ichiro (talk) 23:10, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I see two possibilities:
    1. I become enwiki-admin (restricted to spamlists, because my enwiki editcount is <100), I'm already admin at dewiki and temp-admin at meta.
    2. We keep on maintaining the list like this, i.e. per request and per copy&paste like User_talk:XLinkBot/RevertList#regexp_speed-up.
    Because the reaction time here ist *sigh* not the best, it would be great, if I could edit the spamlist by myself. On the other hand, after one big reconditioning, perhaps there wouldn't be much more need for permanent maintenance. -- seth (talk) 00:15, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Try WP:RFA ;) Stifle (talk) 14:34, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I tried a few minutes ago, but failed already. ;-)
    And now? -- seth (talk) 23:12, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm, not yet failed: [42]. -- seth (talk) 23:29, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Discussion

    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.

    Have added a supplement, a general " how-to of sorts. --Hu12 (talk) 10:31, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Note: if you do not log your entries it may be removed if someone appeals 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 do add 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. The bots are running on a new database, Eagle 101 is working on transferring the old data into this database so it becomes more reliable.

    For those with access to IRC, there this data is available in real time. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:41, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    poking COIBot

    I notice that sometimes people who are not active on IRC need some link reports. Admins here can now add {{LinkSummary|domain}} to User:COIBot/Poke, when COIBot picks up the edit to that page (and it should), it will put the domains into its reporting queue (high priority, which is, only behind waiting XWiki reports) and create a report on the link(s). The first report should be saved within about 5 minutes, if it takes longer than 15 minutes there is probably something wrong, and it may be useful to add the template with the link again (it reads the added part of the diffs (the right column)), or poke me or another person who is active on IRC personally. Hope this is of help. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 12:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    P.S. Please don't overuse this function, everything still needs to be saved .. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    It had some startup problems, but all seems to work fine now. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Um, help...

    I have no idea how to make a request, nor link to my profile, but I am Soulen and can you revert the text I added to the Dragon Ball Z Tenkaichi back in, and just not the link to Youtube?


    Backlog at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist

    If you can, please pitch in and help whittle this down. We have editors who've been waiting several months.

    Thanks, --A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I've cleared most of this. Stifle (talk) 15:19, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Archiving

    Looks like this page could use more frequent archiving. As a non-admin I see that as a task I could help with. There don't seem to be any standards so I propose moving any section that has been completed "denied", "done" or query answered with no further discussion) for 7 days and any that has been marked as "defer to..." for 14 days. Hopefully this will make the list easier for admins to see what needs doing. Let me know if there are any objections otherwise I'll go ahead with this in a day or two. -- SiobhanHansa 18:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist&oldid=258846503"