Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut
Archive

Archives

List of archives (with sections)

workforall.net

Socks - all IP's resolve to SKYNET Belgacom ADSL in Belgium


Domains


Megasearch


Threads


So far the count is 144 workforall.net linkspams. Along with a few external links, the workforall.net spammer has been copying and pasting large blocks of duplicate text into multiple articles for the past year (see the "paste dup text" note above). Here are some examples of the duplicate text: [1] pasted four times, [2] pasted eight times, and [3] pasted seven times. This mass insertion of duplicate text back in the summer 2006 has propagated into a mess. The links have even worked their way into citations and references. The workforall.net spamming is one of the most intertwined cases I've encountered. Check out the threads, this user is now copying and pasting large blocks of text into talk pages. The situation is out of control. I request blacklisting. (Requestion 03:14, 2 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Before taking any action please read the debate on : User_talk:Requestion#Please_stop_indiscriminate_mass_destruction. thanks --217.136.93.7 16:00, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't call it a debate and that link was previously added above. (Requestion 19:40, 3 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
I agree its black and white and you are the white bit. --BozMo talk 19:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Monitored and blacklisted on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The final warning was violated [4] today. (Requestion 22:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
The workforall.net individual acquired the User:Bully-Buster-007 identity and appears to have a special purpose agenda. Some phony warnings were issued [5] [6] [7] and now the clock is ticking with a deadline. I have no idea what this means or what will happen next. (Requestion 22:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
More "inappropriate warning notices" today [8] [9] [10] [11] that resulted in a User_talk:Bully-Buster-007#One_week_block. Thanks User:BozMo. The warnings were issued to myself, User:A. B., and this project! (Requestion 20:33, 10 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
More bogus warnings today from a number of sock-hydra IP addresses. The one week block for User:Bully-Buster-007 has turned into an infinite block. (Requestion 23:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Before causing more destruction to the contributions of Workforall, please read debate on User_talk:Requestion#Please_stop_indiscriminate_mass_destruction. Causing more damage will be considered as vandalism. See: see WP:VAND Types of vandalism: Blanking Removing all or significant parts of pages, or replacing entire established pages with one's own version without first gaining consensus. --80.201.19.94 21:27, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklist request:
--A. B. (talk) 02:39, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Related domains:
--A. B. (talk) 03:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Another domain (not seen on en.wikipedia):
--A. B. (talk) 01:45, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

afif.ws, afifpoem.com, afif2.com, afifchat.com, afifup.com ... again

Still at it after an earlier series of warnings and spam link deletions. Conveniently called attention to back him/herself today by attempting to delete the archive record for our earlier discussion here.[12] Domains:


A sampling of cross-wiki spam accounts:

I've cleaned up dozens of links on probably 10 to 15 different Wikipedias.

Blacklisting request:

(Permanent link)

I love it when they attack our archives. --A. B. (talk) 15:19, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added the rule "\bafif.+?\.(com|ws)" to Shadowbot, which should cover anything following the pattern in the domain names. Shadow1 (talk) 15:51, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Monitored by COIBot (awaiting the blacklisting) --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.npost.com

Spam sock accounts

2bar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
63.229.24.245 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 18:28, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

monitored/blacklisted on COIBot --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:30, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.e-lab-book.com

Electronic lab notebook

Spam sock accounts

Midknightr (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
130.166.115.95 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
130.166.115.173 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
72.134.54.55 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 19:00, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

monitored/blacklisted on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:28, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requestion

User talk:Requestion has taken some diatribe from IPs related to the workforall.net spam (see ↑) during the past few days. It's shifted from scapegoating this particular user to attacking Wikipedia's handling of spam in general. (The canvassing of that guy has attracted another 'victim', and if I was Requestion I'd feel pretty harassed by now anyway.) I'm terribly inefficient at this kind of quibbling, if anyone else wants help keeping another eye on this dispute, much appreciated. Femto 21:39, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm ... comments:
  • Proverb: if you wind up wrestling a pig, you might as well stop since the pig loves it and can go on forever
  • See this excellent essay: Diminishing Replies
  • I've learned the hard way that, with some folks, it's simpler to let them have the "last word" on a talk page if Wikipedia's rules have otherwise been upheld (i.e., the user blocked or a domain blacklisted). In this case, his domain i on the blacklisting request list.
    • I'm a very stubborn, slow learner -- it's taken me about a year myself to figure this out!
  • Even a casual reader of Requestion's user page will quickly conclude Requestion is not a vandal and that the workforall guy is seriously out of line. Further justification of our quite reasonable actions doesn't seem worth the time.
  • The workforall spammer seems to be working on a classic case of search engine de-optimization:
    • Wikipedia pages have high page rank
    • He/she's used so many IPs and incurred spam warnings on so many Google-trusted pages that he's further leveraging the Wikipedia page-ranking . (Note: our internal links are not coded nofollow!)
    • If he/she keeps at it, these discussions could float to near the top of a Google search for his web site/organization in a few days.
Sorry you had to suffer all the aggravation, Requestion -- it's not fun.
--A. B. (talk) 16:48, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The key with wrestling pigs is to make the pig do all the work! My strategy for the workforall.net spammer is it wear them out and indent them all the way to the right. It is better for this insanity to be localized on my talk page. Imagine the havoc that would be wrecked here or on meta? I deal with a lot of spammers so I'm not too bothered by the comments. The only thing that bugs me is the constant cleanup of workforall's sloppy editing technique and the edit conflicts on my own talk page! I don't think letting them get the last word will work since they just attack other threads. Asking an admin to lock my talk page to IP's might be a good solution if this goes on for a couple more days. (Requestion 19:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
The IP addr talk page lock solution isn't going to work since workforall.net finally created a User:Bully-Buster-007 account today. Looks like a WP:SPA and I don't particularly like what the special purpose is. (Requestion 16:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
User:Bully-Buster-007 has been indef blocked. Let me know of any socks which appear and I'll block them too. Life is too short to keep going with explanation: we've done the Matilda's Aunt bit with this one. --BozMo talk 10:20, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Serious spammage

This guy has inserted 1000's of links to his sites. Help in cleaning up after him would be welcome. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kreis_Bromberg and other articles. There is a serious problem with www.birchy.com :) Thanks ahead of time. —— Eagle101 Need help? 21:52, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

His link can be found on the following articles here. I've already started work on removing these... 550 links were removed on this article. —— Eagle101 Need help? 22:10, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Holy... 1191 links on one article. See this diff!!! —— Eagle101 Need help? 22:22, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
that was an amazing amount of spam!. --Hu12 22:30, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Monitoring and blacklisted on COIBot. User is not happy the link gets removed, judging from a post on my talkpage (good resource, removal is a great disservice to the readers, he does not make any money from it, etc. etc.). --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:52, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

vinnysa1store.com

vinnysa1store.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

Reposts freely available content from Project Gutenberg and elsewhere, but plasters it with Google Adsense.

IPs:

Nposs 02:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AOL-IPs. Link monitored on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

autocityindia.com indialens.com

Spam sock accounts

Autocity (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
74.129.200.219 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 16:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

monitored on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(unlocked phones).blogspot.com

Our unlocked cell phone friend from Virginia has violated the final warning after receiving multiple warnings from several different editors. This has been going on since September 2006. I request black listing. [13] [14] [15] [16] (Requestion 21:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

monitored on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Healthadel spam is back

From our April archives The Healthadel.com spammer is back. This time the account is Millyuop (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). That's at least 7 user accounts created just to spam this link.

I see that blacklisting was declined last time, presumably because these aren't IPs. Eagle101 - Is there anyway to get blacklisting anyway? This is health advice being posted by spammers from a domain that claims no affiliations and was created in January under a domains by proxy account. It doesn't seem like the sort of thing we ought to be having just popping up all over the place. -- Siobhan Hansa 18:45, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New blacklisting request:
--A. B. (talk) 19:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Those Spam accounts have been blocked--Hu12 19:46, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks A.B. and Hu12. -- Siobhan Hansa 19:55, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Monitored on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a matter of policy, domains such as tinyurl.com are routinely blacklisted since they not only can be used innocently as URL shorteners but also as a means of bypassing our spam blacklist. I keep the URL redirection article on my watchlist since someone adds another domain to the external links section every week or two that I then list for blacklisting. These additions are not necessarily spam -- some folks post them just to be helpful.

Today we had an editor add several links that, when linksearched across 57 Wikipedias, present major cleanup challenges:[17]
1. http://fd.tc

  • no links

2. freedomain.co.nr

  • 610 links

3. surl.co.uk:

  • no links

4. http://bravenet.com/webtools/redirect

  • 22 links
  • 13 links
  • 1 link
  • 1 link
  • 8 links
  • 9 links
  • 1 link
  • 2 links
  • 3 links
  • 32 links
  • 2 links
  • 3 links
  • no links
  • 3 links

Mindless blacklisting will create chaos across hundreds of gridlocked articles so the links need to be cleaned up for each domain before blacklisting. Mindless link deletion in turn will delete many useful links and references since most probably were added in good faith by editors using these domains for short URLs. The right thing to do is to find and substitute the actual site link for the redirect URL.

I'm posting a similar note in the discussion section at meta:Talk:Spam blacklist

If you delete links on other Wikipedias, I suggest you just use the meta disucssion link as your edit summary: 

  • [[meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#700 URL redirection links to clean up]]

As each domain is cleaned up, I suggest then listing it at meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#Proposed additions. --A. B. (talk) 23:16, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Second opinion on user contribs

Infoart (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Seems to be an article and spam campaign. --Hu12 05:27, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.artfacts.net

Adsense pub-2034470246393760

Spam sock accounts

85.178.108.210 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
212.91.253.83 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Suspected established accounts

Xyzzyplugh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
--Hu12 05:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:25, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion please, EL spam or not?

These appear to be marginally useful and possibly good faith additions, but still stink of spam to a linked group of Hindu philosophy sites. I'm awfully busy to check this out. Can I request a member here look? 203.197.81.194 SchmuckyTheCat 06:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.gr8click.com

Adsense pub-4210558012255973

Spam sock accounts

59.95.27.244 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
59.95.39.172 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
59.95.34.84 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
59.95.18.180 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
59.95.32.245 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
59.95.32.87 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 10:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IPs resolve to an internet backbone of India (59.88.0.0 - 59.99.255.255; 59.88.0.0/13), monitored on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

criterion.com

User Myrmidon3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is adding a massive amount of links to criterion.com (a good link as such, but it gets spammed now). I have earlier argued on the wikipedia:WikiProject Film that the link should not be in external links sections at all, they should be used as references, but Myrmidon3 is only adding them to external links sections. I started reverting these additions (could use some help though). I also reported the case to Wikipedia:WikiProject Film. --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:52, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I rolled back quite a few but I have to tend to other things right now. There shouldn't be too many left. IrishGuy talk 20:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The link is now on the monitorlist of COIBot, and the user is blacklisted against the link. --Dirk Beetstra T C 21:10, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
removed Myrmidon3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) spam contribs only, however there are still 450+ links at large--Hu12 21:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The link is not really bad, though I have argued on the film wikiproject that it should be used as a reference, and hardly ever as an external link. Now I am not a specialist in fims, but it took me time to see with many of these essays (and explanation from a wikiproject film member) to see why these links are indeed suitable (and it helped me appreciate the contents offered). I recall that I first saw an IP add/change this link (change from criterionco.com to criterion.com), now it was a massive addition. Ah, there it is user:199.231.146.254 (CIDR: 199.231.128.0/20, 199.231.144.0/22, 199.231.148.0/23, 199.231.150.0/24 on hosting.com). COIBot will keep an eye on it, I hope the spamming stops. --Dirk Beetstra T C 21:42, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a little curious about the line you are drawing about these links being spam. With regard to the filmmakers, I can see how the links would constitute "spam" given that they relate to the films and not so much to the filmmakers directly. That said, they seem like excellent external links for the films themselves, as they are directly related to the topic and completely appropriate in scope (perhaps there's no disagreement here? I noticed that those links still appear to be there). Also, I would make an exception for a few of the filmmakers that actually have essays relating more to them than to individual films, such as Stan Brakhage or Paul Robeson.
In any case, rather than simply deleting some of them and marking them as spam, it strikes me that it would be more useful to set a guideline for the resources on criterion.com and for linking to them. That way people won't have to worry about whether the links are forbidden as spam (as it's far from clear how those rules apply, depending on the article in question). After all, the site has useful content for hundreds of Wikipedia articles and this issue will probably never be buried, so it's much better to settle a place for having an ongoing discussion about it (rather than a transient and soon-to-be-archived discussion in the annals of WikiProject Spam and WikiProject Film) to keep the matter under control and people's blood pressures from getting too high. That way, people can hammer out the best approach, and anyone found violating that approach too strongly can be pointed to that ongoing discussion and contribute to making the micro-policy work. Jun-Dai 08:03, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the situation has been handled quite OK. The wikipedia definition of spam (WP:SPAM) does not include whether the link is good or bad, it is the way the link gets added. This link is not spam in the way of 'bad link with purpose to sell', still it was a mass addition, and that is better discussed first (see also WP:SPAM#How not to be a spammer. Also, the spammer did not react to messages on his talkpage. The way of adding also gives a feeling of WP:COI, though that is here hard to proof.
On the movie pages it may indeed be good as an external link, though still, it is better as a reference. When I was reading the first linked documents on criterion, I had difficulty understanding why these links were directly linked. Sometimes the links do not have any clear connection to the movie, and only an understanding of the movie would give you an understanding of why the link was there; hence, if the film is explained in the document, and the link was used as a reference in a point in that discussion and the link would not be needed in the external links sections, and I have suggested that would be done for the links. But I will leave that to the wikiproject film. Hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:07, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

dontforgettotakeyourvitamins.com

For the archives, dontforgettotakeyourvitamins.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

Shadowbot has been given this vitamin, so this particular URL will be killed on sight. --Versageek 06:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Answers.com

Answers.com has an article on WP and relies heavily on WP input to create its own articles.

  • "Answers.com displays commercial encyclopedia data, along with information obtained from Wikipedia in its status as a mirror site"

It contains heavy Google Adsense advertising. It also lists WP as a competitor in its article. There are currently 4216 external links to answers.com on WP, most listed under "External links" sections. Some have no descriptions and link to articles that contain nothing but a copy of the WP articles. Here's the stats:

*.Answers.com

Calltech 14:58, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That circular reference is an infinite loop! I had no idea there that were 4216 answers.com external links. Other than the Answers.com article should there be any answers.com links on Wikipedia? (Requestion 19:22, 10 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
I think I removed a few a couple of months ago - i agree - if they just have a copy of WP data then there is no value in having links to it. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 20:53, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Take care to read the linked article. I removed references from one article which simply linked to clear Wikipedia copies, but in 7-Dehydrocholesterol, a reference to answers.com turns out to be them mirroring a medical dictionary from Houghton Mifflin. This may not be a great reference, but it can't be simply removed on the grounds of being a Wikipedia mirror; it is a reference and unless we suspect answers.com made up the stuff, it is certainly better than nothing. Notinasnaid 10:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's true of a few of the image links I found too. A lot of the links are on talk pages too: my guess is that 500 is nearer the real figure --BozMo talk 10:34, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Answers.com aggregates a lot of different sources, some of which are licensed. What's the duration of the licensing terms and will how long will they continue being functional links to what was originally intended? We don't know and this brings up the reliable sources question. Another problem I have with Answers.com is the self referential part. WP:SELF doesn't say anything about external links to Wikipedia itself but linking to Answers.com definitely seems to violate the spirit of this guideline. (Requestion 18:12, 11 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
If they quote their source, then why wouldn't be linking to the source itself? That gets rid of any licensing issues. If they are not providing a source, then we have no way of knowing whether that article is reliable or not. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 20:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.freedomworks.org

FreedomWorks

Spam sock accounts

Bstein80 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
74.8.97.18 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
66.251.110.50 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 20:34, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both IP's resolve to ranges from "CITIZENS FOR A SOUND ECONOMY" (66.251.110.48/29 and 74.8.97.16/29). I have blacklisted the ranges and the user against the link and the pagename, and put the link on the monitorlist of COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 21:52, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COI http://spam.prepmasters.com

Train-the-Trainer

Spam sock accounts

Prepmasters (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
--Hu12 21:32, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coibot already caught some of these, link monitored on COIBot. User blacklisted against 'train-the-trainer'. --Dirk Beetstra T C 21:55, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.trainingjournal.com

trainingjournal.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

Spam sock accounts

Hame22 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
80.177.112.19 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 22:00, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored/blacklisted (80.177.112.0/20) on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:34, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.curiouscountrycreations.com

Just reported on ANI

Top three are all registered to the same person.

Seems to have been at this for a while. All edits are to add links. -- Siobhan Hansa 23:13, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

166.70.0.0/16 blacklisted against links, and links monitored on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, I guess I'm out of touch... when did we get a bot? --SB_Johnny|talk|books 12:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am just comparing edits with usernames, and monitoring and watching what user:Beetstra (or other people at irc://chat.freenode.net:8001/wikipedia-spam-t are telling me). --COIBot 12:51, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http:// spam.best-cartuning.com

Spam sock accounts

DerimoRoss (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
PamelaZolo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Piersano (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
AngieLoss (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Creates a single account for each instance of link insertion. Expect more at some point to auto related articles.--Hu12 16:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

monitored and blacklisted on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 23:30, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
COIBOT caught:
--Dirk Beetstra T C 08:11, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spamming is ongoing:

Reported to meta for blacklisting. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:33, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just had to break the live spam.best-cartuning.co link in the section title. Blacklisting must of been approved. (Requestion 23:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

toolbase.org

NAHB Research Center

Spam sock accounts

ToolBaseWebsite (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
--Hu12 17:04, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

now also monitored on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:43, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

excitesearch.info

This user tried to change numerous search engine links to point to his domain. When he got blocked, he'd change IP addresses until he was blocked again...and so it continued for a number of IP addresses in the 83.4.*.* and 83.27.*.* ranges. He finally created a bogus user name User:JFreemen (note the similarity to mine), which our admins took care of pretty quickly. All his edits are currently reverted on en., but I wouldn't be surprised to see him come back.

Additional info, including some examples of IP addresses used:

--JFreeman (talk) 00:19, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This was blacklisted on meta earlier this afternoon. However, given that you were able to post the URL in this post.. it isn't working, perhaps it needs a \b in front of it? --Versageek 00:29, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

blog.yourseoconsulting.com

blog.yourseoconsulting.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 guy thinks he's funny.. I reverted his spam on Web traffic and he reverted me with a comment of "Removed LinkSpam", then left a copy of the warning I gave him on my talk page. He also hit PageRank and Nofollow, they have been reverted. --Versageek 04:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another one:
This last IP also added a link to a microsoft subdomain (adlab.microsoft.com, diff --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And I now find that this IP also added a link to adlab.microsoft.com. Hmm. I think I've got them all now, though. KrakatoaKatie 09:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also blacklisted this range (207.6.0.0/16) against yourseoconsulting.com. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(country)chat.net/(country)chat.com

Pakchat (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is adding links to chat-sites, every page a new domain, all starting with the country of the page, then 'chat.net' or 'chat.com':

User is blacklisted against 'chat.net' and 'chat.com', which should catch most of the linkadditions by this user (Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/UserReports/Pakchat). COIBot unfortunately can't monitor this. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:57, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Asian models and ethernet hubs

Hi, I removed the same spam link from Ethernet hub twice and warned the most recent spammer, but could someone please look at the rest of these links? An odd collection I'd rather not tamper with. --CliffC 15:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The additions all appear spammy, I have removed a couple of them. Additions by:
All fed to the bots. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Active at this very moment: 60.54.36.14 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ChrisMorris.ws spam on Wikipedia

Domains:

Articles:

Account: 72.204.221.226 (talk • contribs • links • count • user logs • user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search)

Continuing to spam past final warning -- can someone please block? Thanks, --A. B. (talk) 19:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked. --A. B. (talk) 19:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Monitored/Blacklisted on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More porn linkspam

Remember the discussion that was done here? Well the guy's back with a new batch of URLs. I've posted his latest IP address (205.212.76.160) to the open proxy project page as he's been known in the past to use them, but that still leaves me with these new sites which need to be blocked. I'm not going to post all of his latest additions as he added 30+ links today, but with the exception of the edits between 13:23 (to Druze) and 13:37 (to Sikh), all of Special:Contributions/205.212.76.160 were spam. Some example links for you to work with: 

www.heatherrenesmith.org
www.alanasoares.net
www.alenaseredova.org
www.brittanydaniel.net

Suggestion: if you could rerun this search and compare the results to what's already been blocked, you should get all of the newest links. In any case, thank you in advance. Tabercil 22:48, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spamsock 64.85.161.254 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) was active tonight with more of this kind of spam. --Versageek 05:02, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Here are all the domains spammed by these two IPs:

--Versageek 05:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Scientology Linkspam www.truthaboutscientology.com

We have a lot of WP:COIN reports related to Scientology. It might help to clean up some of the spam circulating around this topic on both sides. For instance, why does Wikipedia have 47 links to the anti-scientology advocacy site www.truthaboutscientology.com? Jehochman (talk/contrib) 02:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

COIBot is monitoring this link, to see if they are added from specific accounts. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From a Google search of Veinor's link count pages:
Totals:
This does not capture:
  1. Link additions before this year
  2. Link additions of less than two per day
  3. Very recent link additions (Google hasn't indexed yet)
--A. B. (talk) 19:48, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
PS I did most of the above by hand -- a Veinor-link-page search tool would be great if someone can develop it! --A. B. (talk) 19:50, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I leave it to someone else to figure out what to do about this -- it looks more like a POV/COI dispute than a classic commercial spam operation. --A. B. (talk) 19:52, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. The editors most familiar with these topics will need to deal with these. --ElKevbo 20:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There was a huge Scientology debate that raged on for about a month recently at WP:VPP. The discussion has since been periodically purged from the archive. I didn't want to get involved in the debate so I just watched. What surprised me was the size of both the pro- and con-Scientology lobbies. Trust me, these people (both sides) can police their own spam. I'm not sure that a neutral spam fighter entering the combat zone would help the situation but if you do enter remember to put on the blue helmet! (Requestion 20:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

User:Alex Ramon is back

Please add to COIBot

From February's archives. Alex Ramon was back today posting at least one link to this new site of his, but mainly links to youtube groups that promote his own sites (see [18] for an example). Reported at AIV. Not sure how we'd watch those youtube groups. -- Siobhan Hansa 12:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Links monitored, user Alex Ramon blacklisted against links. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I recommend adding them to the spam blacklist on Meta-wiki, given the persistence and use of multiple accounts. Note that there are 3 links on other wikis that need removal before blacklisting (none were spammed by Ramon). I'd do this myself but I don't have time.
Also, one of the user talk pages for the earlier spam IPs shows this additional domain was also spammed previously:
It has a different Adsense number and the IP used was at a public library. Is it connected to Ramon (it's a music site)? if so, it should also be blacklisted. --A. B. (talk) 13:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll monitor the linkadditions of ronatron.net. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:09, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*.megawebpages.com

..for the archives, hybrid-cars.megawebpages.com was being spammed, and when I visited the main domain - I was presented with the following list of other sites hosted there. Shadowbot has megawebpages\.com and COIBot has the user/domain pair.

Rostau989 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

--Versageek 16:11, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vacantlips / themilkcarton.com

Vacantlips (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) was spamming links to themilkcarton.com. Shortly after an anonymous user (75.180.16.225 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log); Road Runner HoldCo LLC; 75.176.0.0/13, 75.184.0.0/15; this IP has no other edits in wikipedia) complained about this removal of links.

The link has been added to COIBot for monitoring. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:25, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see now that shortly after my removal one was reverted by an IP.

User:Acrilico

Is this an appropriate Userpage?--Hu12 23:09, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That does look like a crazy link farm but I'm not sure it was meant for public consumption. I think this user is just treating their homepage as a sandbox or an archive for the AfD'd List of stock photography archives article. Many newbies don't realize that they can create articles in their User: space. On the topic of inappropriate User: pages, check out User:Jdh30. He is a topic of the ffconsultancy.com spam report below and 21 of those links are to his domains. (Requestion 06:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

ffconsultancy.com

It all began March 2005. A total of 44 Flying Frog Consultancy related external spam links have been added by the socks below. Many of these links have been added, deleted, and re-added multiple times. This medium spamming of ffconsultancy.com links then transformed into a conflict of interest (WP:COI) problem with the Hilbert-Hermitian wavelet article which was being used as a promotional tool (WP:NOT#SOAPBOX). These issues spawned a WP:SCIENCE notability discussion that lead to the AfD.

This exciting saga has spamming, sleuthing, vandalism, incivility, talk page blanking, blatant commercial promotion, sock puppeting, meat puppet canvassing, and ?wikipedia tracking tags. It's classic WP:GRIEF with an added flair of drama and suspense. Note that Jon Harrop is User:Jdh30.


Domains


Socks

Legend:

The numeric value represents the number of external spam links that were added. A zero value represents a that a self-referencing name or product was mentioned. The m value stands for "modify" which represents the nuturing and cultivation of an existing spam link.


Articles spammed


Blanking coincidence


Notes

  • Jon Harrop reported me to the AIV as a vandal and has since called me a vandal many times.
  • Jon Harrop reported User:Pjacobi to the AIV as a vandal .
  • Jdh30's contribution log has recently exhibited a flury of activity. It is important to look at Special:Contributions/Jdh30 before March 29 2007 which is when the final {{spam4}} was awarded. Jdh30 only had 34 edits at that point and many of those were the source of this account's 11 link spam additions.
  • Jon Harrop refers to the {{spam}} warnings as spam and considers the removal of spam as vandalism. This basic difference in POV has generated a great deal of conflict.
  • Mild incivility [22] [23]
  • Massive promotion of ffconsultancy.com products at User:Jdh30 (snapshot) violates WP:NOT#USER.


Hilbert-Hermitian_wavelet

  • Jon Harrop invented the Hilbert-Hermitian_wavelet, 2 page description and derivation in PhD thesis.
  • WP:COI in creating and promoting the Hilbert-Hermitian_wavelet article.
  • An early version [24] of the page said "The Hilbert-Hermitian wavelet was designed by Jon Harrop in 2004 for the reliable time-frequency analysis of signals ..." complete with the User:Jdh30 link.
  • The Hilbert-Hermitian_wavelet does not meet WP:SCIENCE notability.
  • Jon's ffconsultancy.com sells a Mathematica notebook CWT product that implements the Hilbert-Hermitian_wavelet.
  • Claims that the Hilbert-Hermitian_wavelet supercedes the Morlet wavelet both on [25] and off [26] Wikipedia. See Talk:Morlet wavelet#The Morlet wavelet was superceded by the Hilbert-Hermitian wavelet for detailed discussion.
  • Quote [27] "To the best of my knowledge, our product is the only product that implements this wavelet."
  • This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy.


WP:MEAT WP:CANVASSING

  • Jon Harrop has enlisted two friends who created WP:SPA's with the sole purpose to canvas support for the Hilbert-Hermitian_wavelet and to attack my credibility. All of their edits resorted to emotional arguments in an attempt to sway consensus. Both felt strongly that the Hilbert-Hermitian_wavelet should not be deleted but neither were interested in discussing the relevant issues.
    • Special:Contributions/Marie_Mason
      • [28] "it's impossible to to tell who you are and what great works you have obviously done"
      • [29] "some misguided belief that Jon is the root of all spam."
      • [30] "Of course he didn't name it after himself!"
      • [31] "I hope you do decide to try Jon's wavelet. We have been very pleased with it."
      • [32] "Requestion has been very inflammatory and I found that he is rarely constructive."
    • Special:Contributions/Petdoc - used Harrop's IP address
      • [33] "I'd say it was fairly obvious Jon wrote the comment tongue in cheek."
      • [34] "If you ask me Requestion has small man syndrome."
      • [35] removed the expired {{prod|lack of notability}} tag without an edit summary or an explanation.
      • [36] "I agree with Marie Mason that this entire article should not be deleted and that sufficient changes have been made. I also agree with her that it is pointless arguing with you."
      • [37] "However, I really have to disagree that the HH wavelet article is blatant self promotion."
      • [38] "He has called me 'meat' - whatever that is."
      • [39] "I can see how I would be viewed as a meat puppet"


Threads


External references

  • Wikipedia spam links were discussed on the Novemeber 2005 Caml Language mailing list [40]. Interesting quote: "The point is, if Harrop doesn't have megalomania, he sure acts like he does." Read the entire thread because there is quite a bit more relevant information. Particularly [41].
  • The comp.lang.lisp thread [42] which likely was the motivation for Jon Harrop to suspect my identity to be that of Dr. Thomas Fischbacher.


The 4 spam warnings were issued and the final warning has been violated 5 times. Inquiring spam historians are encouraged to read all of the above Threads as they contain a great deal of context. This saga toiled on for what seemed like eons despite the courageous efforts by at least 5 administrators. The ultimate source of the conflict boils down to "some people just don't think the rules apply to them." Sigh. I request blacklisting. [43] [44] [45] (Requestion 23:54, 15 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

The workforall.net spammer meets the sandbox fire-parrot -- for everything else, there's Mastercard

I swear I am not making this up:

Earlier this month, Requestion reported here on widespread spamming by accounts adding links to a Belgian think-tank, WorkForAll; the domain was eventually blacklisted (meta blacklisting entry). For his pains, Requestion got an ongoing stream of abuse and bogus "warnings" from a sockpuppet army of Belgian IPs led by User:Bully-Buster-007. Bully-Buster-007 was blocked last week but returned today as User:Advocates For Free Speech. Before an admin finally blocked the new account and blanked Bully's new attack page, there was this memorable complaint/allegation:[46]

6. The virus in the sandbox
 On mai 11th 2007 a junior WWFA employee was reading a discussion about the present case on "meta" between user:Requestion and another unidentified individual. This discussion ended with the unidentified individual suggestion "want some help? ; ) ". Being a curious character the junior employee followed the link to the unidentified individual's special purpose account in the in the WP Sandbox which provided an external link to an institution of which she later only remembered the name contained "technologies". This link lead her to an obscene image which she described as a parrot sitting on a p. After a few tones of Beethoven's 5th symphony, the victims screen went black, her Pentium2 processor overheated and started a fire which was confined to her and the neighbouring office thanks to the Sprinkler installation. After the victim was released from hospital for her shock and first degree burnings, the incident was reported to the local Belgian Computer Crime Unit (CCU). The investigation is still in progress but faces seriuos obstruction as the most obvious traces on Wikipedia to the source of the virus seem to have been erased.

--A. B. (talk) 14:49, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the same thing happened to me about a month ago, except the bird in question was quite clearly a budgie, and the music I heard was the second movement of the Pathetique. I have no sprinkler system, so was forced to smother the ensuing flames with a rare, vintage Darth Vader costume I keep near my monitor. As you can imagine, my lawyers have already contacted the Wiki Foundation. IronDuke 15:06, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam&oldid=131303745"