Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hu12 (talk | contribs) at 07:02, 3 June 2007 (→http://spam.yahotels.gr: sig). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcut
Archive

Archives

List of archives (with sections)


eserver.org

Requestion stumbled on this when looking into my question, Wikipedia_talk:External_links#Links_to_online_libraries:

"The names of the tc.eserver.org pages are perfect matches to the Wikipedia article names. Hmmm, so I did a little digging. I found out that a Geoffrey Sauer is the director of EServer.org. A User:Geoffsauer created the eserver.org article and has edited his own bio. If you look at his contribs you will see a whole lot of eserver.org external link additions. A bit more clicking shows a bunch of SPA's and IPs from Iowa. Looks like a basic COI spamming to me. There are 322 hits when you take out the "tc." and do a Special:Linksearch/*.eserver.org."

Help would be appreciated. --Ronz 02:35, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

COI notice --Ronz 02:57, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think tc.eserver.org is a valuable resource, and useful when used to provide external links for wikipedia articles. With article talk page consensus of course, either before or after the link is added. There is discussion here:

It's just pure spam, encyclopedic content of the site is debatable, but clearly the link was added with self=promotional purposes in mind, along with articles on the site and the person in charge of it, is all pretty clearly advertising. DreamGuy 05:28, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think you're jumping to conclusions. Do you think Administrator User:Doc glasgow was spamming when he made this edit? [1] Enforcing COI/SPAM is very important, but I think we need to be more careful to investigate these things fully. See my complete comments over at WP:COIN. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jehochman (talk • contribs)
I don't think we should be making Strawman arguments either. Nobody suggested that User:Doc glasgow was spamming and his innocence does not negative that this is a COI spamming. There are 322 eserver.org links, some were added in a legit manner while others were spammed. Maybe it's a 50:50 split, but a whole lot of research needs to be done to determine this. Documentation is important and I suggest adding to the {{userlinks|?}} list that Ronz started up above. No need to start deleting anything, yet that is, the spam isn't going anywhere. (Requestion 18:56, 19 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
I added a couple more socks, last eserver.org add dates, external link count, and some info. (Requestion 00:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
I added 13 more socks that I found. There could be a few more hidding but they will be difficult to find. Note that the 129.186.*.* and 12.216.*.* netmasks all resolve to Iowa State University or to someplace in Des Moines Iowa. I've noticed that linking to the book and text sections of eserver.org is fairly popular with a couple regular editors and I don't consider that to be spam. The current count is 249 external eserver.org link spams. (Requestion 21:01, 21 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
I added 3 more socks. The current count is 254 external eserver.org link spams. (Requestion 17:12, 23 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Added another sock. This a tricky situation involving 24 additions of the antislavery.eserver.org link by a university literature professor. The majority of User:Jlockard's edits added an antislavery.eserver.org link or did repair of that link. Jlockard is suspected of being IP 129.219.46.76 who added 39 antislavery.eserver.org links. See this explanation [2] to a spam fighter back in May 2006. The current count is 278 external eserver.org link spams. (Requestion 06:12, 25 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Per WP:COIN, monitored/blacklisted on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:50, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some related analysis about COI and eserver.org junk links vs. high quality links over at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2007_Archive_May#mitpress.mit.edu_-_Bookuser. (Requestion 16:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

We have contact. User:Geoffsauer has responded over at WP:COIN#EServer.org. Not sure what the resolution is. (Requestion 23:18, 28 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I'm updating the entry at WP:COIN#EServer.org. No problems found so far that I can see. More things to look at still. EdJohnston 04:49, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prostate Massage Page "Spam" Question

Hi Guys,

Im new to Wikipedia and trying to learn the ropes.... I edited an external link in the Prostate Massage page and had it removed after a couple of days. Im being told its spam, i see it as an in depth illustrated resource with original content, that i dont see on Wikipedia. Can some one PLEASE tell me why it would be considered spam?

The editor wont give me any more info as to why its conisdered SPAM aside from telling me to read the guidelines, i read the guidelines and i still dont see it as spam. What makes the link i add any different (spam wise) than any other external link there?

Thanks, Wiki Forever 19:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The site that you added to four different articles is a commercial site that sells sex toys. I doubt you'll find similar commercial links on those articles. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:03, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can point time and again to articles like the one i have submitted that are on commercial sites.

Case in point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_ejaculation Most of those external links are on commercial sites. (libida.com, holisticwisdom.com, etc, etc...)

Here as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_sex#External_links . I can also point to others as well if need be. The article pertaining to prostate massage i added, provides actual information and diagrams that are not available any where else.

Seeing these actions on Wikipedia makes me really sad, it makes me wonder sometimes about the partiality on the site, what makes any of the external links mentioned above any better of a reference than what i provided. If someone can actually take a look at this and give their input, it would be much appreciated. As, i have read all the guidelines and still see NO DIFFERENCE!

Wiki Forever 13:14, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Also, on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_sex#External_links (libida.com and holisticwisdom.com have 2-3 listings on that page, how is that not SPAM and self promotion!) They dont exactly sell doughnuts either.

I respect the rules, but the rules should apply to ALL fairly. I think they provide a great resource for wikipedia, but i ask what makes the articles they list (2-3 diff articles on the same page) submitted any different than what i submitted. I again state that, the article i listed was researched and very in depth with respect to prostate massage and a great reference for wiipedia. There was no other listing on the prostate massage page with that kind of info.

76.17.251.220 14:25, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


That last posting from the IP was mine (forgot to login)

Wiki Forever 14:26, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.b-movies.gr

b-movies.gr

Spam sock accounts

193.92.231.118 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
193.92.228.20 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
212.251.122.83 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 00:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored and blacklisted on COIBot. IP ranges: 193.92.231.0/24; 193.92.228.0/24; 212.251.122.0/24. --Dirk Beetstra T C 22:23, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, can you guys help me with this one.... I need some clarification on an external link. Should the link to the official Holmfirth Folk Festival site that I added in the arts section of the wikipedia:Holmfirth page have been inserted in the external links section of the page instead? The link was deleted as "business advertising spam" by 82.30.78.230, but I don't see the difference between this and the link to the websites of artists Ashley Jackson or Trevor Stubley that are also in the arts section. I was following the example set there by adding the festival link (possibly wrongly - hence this talk post).

The festival is a community event not a business (although it is supported by the Holme Valley Business Association), the website is relevant and on-topic (being about an annual event in Holmfirth and also being the official site), and contains informative detail (like dates and venues). It does contain links to accommodation, but these are for visitor info, rather than advertising. Having read Wikipedia:External_links and Wikipedia:Spam, the link seems to fulfill requirements. Obviously the site is an advertisement in itself (in terms of raising awareness for the festival), but then so are the abovementioned artist websites, and others on Wikipedia such as the Glastonbury official website.

Any advice/ideas? Tyke abroad 04:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd see linking to the Holmfirth Folk Festival externally being ok in an article dedicated to the folk festival itself; however, Holmfirth the town should not link to it (See Wikipedia:EL#Links_normally_to_be_avoided - number 13). Also, if the festival itself isn't notable enough to have its own article, then it definitely shouldn't be linked on the town's website as well, and I'm thinking thats the case... JoeSmack Talk 07:40, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and I'm removing those two artists' links, as they are in similar territory as you pointed out. JoeSmack Talk 07:41, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that Joe! Tyke abroad 06:29, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.projecthoneypot.org

Adsense pub-6572552607348631

Spam sock accounts

Eastdakota (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
LunaticBeatnik (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
71.213.117.99 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 23:48, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored and blacklisted on COIBot. 71.208.0.0/12 resolves to Qwest Communications Corporation. --Dirk Beetstra T C 22:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikisummaries?

Does anyone have any insight into wikisummaries.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 ? There seems to be several links to it and I don't know what to make of it. --ElKevbo 03:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Domains - all registered to Brian Risk, Carrboro, North Carolina 27510


Socks


I added some domains and the User:Geneffects sock. Quick rough guess is that more than 100 linkspams have been added over the past year. If found this diff [3] interesting. The text is copied from the wikisummaries.org page word for word. Looks like a copyright infringement but the owner added it. We've got some COI going on too. Nothing has been deleted, yet. Still collecting information. (Requestion 04:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

monitored/blacklisted on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 22:06, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising personal details, Campa Cola

  • Im not sure if this is the right place to report it but I seem to be having a problem with an article called Campa Cola. This one user seems to be using different Ip addressed to add company and personal details to the article to help promote this business, this seem to be happening on a daily basis and when I had a look through the page history, it looks as though its happened almost a hundred times before. Would it be possible to have this page locked or semi protected to prevent this from happening. Even though it is a different ip address every time, you can tell its the same person. Please check out these diffs. [4]. You would have to go back prior to my revision.--AdamJWC 05:19, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, this isn't really the right place. I'd suggest finding a common ground and not blindly reverting. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 17:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invisible inkspam

Third one I've seen of these, not sure if they were all the same site. Maybe this is something a bot should be looking for? This guy may have read a lot of Dick Tracy comics, but he should know that rubbing lemon juice on Wikipedia will bring out the secret message. --CliffC 12:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that's cool. I'm surprised the wiki engine allows transparent text. Somebody must not believe in all that "nofollow" stuff. (Requestion 14:32, 29 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Google strictly observes "nofollow"; Yahoo does not -- see this blog post quoting search engine officials. --A. B. (talk) 14:48, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That is what they say but is there any proof? Google has a history of being very opaque about its algorithms and procedures. (Requestion 14:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
On top of which all Wikipedia is republished invisible links and all by a hundred or so mirrors like answers.com most of whom don't use nofollow. i.e. Big Google advantage from links on WP whatever we do. --BozMo talk 15:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
comment Somebody is using what he "learned" from Matt Cutts about hidden links [5] ;). Watch out for the other examples as well. A.B., regarding Loren's post at SEJ. Some of the engines "follow" the link as in "go to the page that is linked to with 'nofollow'" and index that page. None of the engines use links with 'nofollow' attribute in their link based ranking algorithm thought. The link does not count as a vote and probably also the anchor text will not be used for determining relevance in some cases. See nofollow (which I extended). My last statement is a speculation, but would make sense. Basically, don't take 'nofollow' literally as in "not go to the linked to page" or "do not follow the link". "dontcount" or "novote" would have been more accurate and descriptive about what the attribute is used for. --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 07:00, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We can speculate on how the engines treat nofollow but it is probably safe to say that the Google Toolbar gives a follow and a vote to every link that is clicked. (Requestion 13:54, 30 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

funhowtobooks.com

Spam sock accounts

-- Siobhan Hansa 14:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored on COIBot. 202.184.0.0/15 blacklisted against link, resolves to a business park, the other IPs (60.48.0.0 - 60.54.255.255) are in a large range on an ISP in Kuala Lumpur. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:18, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 May 26#Template:FreeContentMeta

This regards the topic of interwiki maps (shortcuts to other non-Foundation wikis that bypass the normal "http://" linking system). For some background, see:

Additional background can be found at:

The contest template creates a special box for links to other wikis; for example:

left|50px|
[Page|CorpKnowPedia] has information related to:
[Spam]
I made a hash of the template, but you get the idea -- the other wiki's logo goes in the upper lefthand corner. The center of the box refers readers to the appropriate page on whatever the other wiki is.
In this case, I'm using CorpKnowPedia as an example (their mission: "document and create a repository of information regarding those nefarious and elusive entities known collectively as corporations").
--A. B. (talk) 14:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:GRIEF

Project members should be aware of this enlightening essay. —Moondyne 14:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, tis a good one. I added a link to it on the main-page. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 16:59, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently others disagree. Oh, well. Kafziel Talk 21:57, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They want to MfD it? That is so wrong. I consult WP:GRIEF daily for guidance in helping lost spammers forward on their spiritual journey. This essay must be saved from deletion! (Requestion 22:46, 29 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Life settlement

-pulled from archive-

71.228.14.6 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (71.224.0.0/12, cable provider, NJ, US) is spamming links to Life settlement after several warnings:

--Dirk Beetstra T C 16:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]

A link addition that may be related:
--Dirk Beetstra T C 15:18, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sigord.blogfa.com spam

Spammed widely crosswiki to C++ and other articles. Just a few examples:

Domains:

Accounts:

Affected articles:

  1. Arman
  2. C Sharp
  3. C++
  4. China Internet Network Information Center
  5. Computer network
  6. Computer program
  7. Iranian blogs
  8. JavaScript
  9. JavaScript
  10. Omid Kordestani
  11. Persian language
  12. Uploading and downloading
  13. Yahoo!

References:

  1. meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#sigord.blogfa.com (Permanent link)

--A. B. (talk) 20:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored/blacklisted on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:04, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

andorraz.org and kwfm.net spam

Spammed links to Andorra-related articles across 37 different wikipedias. Here's a partial sample:

  1. an:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  2. ast:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  3. be-x-old:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  4. bn:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  5. bn:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  6. da:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  7. fr:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  8. it:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  9. lt:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  10. nl:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  11. nn:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  12. pl:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  13. pt:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  14. ru:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  15. sk:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  16. sl:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  17. sr:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  18. uk:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  19. ar:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  20. bg:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  21. ca:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  22. cs:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  23. el:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  24. en:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  25. es:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  26. eu:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  27. fi:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  28. hr:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  29. hu:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  30. hy:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  31. ja:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  32. ne:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  33. no:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  34. oc:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  35. sv:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  36. tr:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26
  37. zh:Special:Contributions/85.94.174.26

Domains:

Account

See meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#andorraz.org and kwfm.net spam (Permanent link)
--A. B. (talk) 20:19, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored/blacklisted on COIBot. IP resolves to 85.94.168.0/21 in Andorra. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:01, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

aboutmyarea.co.uk

The aboutmyarea.co.uk external link started appearing on Wikipedia a couple days ago. All of the socks are WP:SPA's.

Domains

Socks

The 4 warnings were issued and the final warning has been violated several times. The IP's appear to be coming from all over. The aboutmyarea.co.uk site must have some sort of Wikipedia promotion going on. I request bot watch and black listing. (Requestion 21:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I just added 2 more socks (Requestion 21:33, 29 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Added 2 more socks. See User_talk:86.138.224.46 for an interesting message that explains the aboutmyarea.co.uk "national franchise group" spamming. (Requestion 15:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Add a sock IP found by User:Beetstra. (Requestion 17:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Monitored on COIBot, don't think blacklisting will help much. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:51, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that nearly all of Romanbond (talk · contribs)'s contributions were links to sites within the Skin Care Network. Though this set off my spam alarm, I do note that the content is purportedly written by dermatologists, etc., and it doesn't seem to be ad-heavy (yet). Thoughts? OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

monitored/blacklisted on COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
fungalguide.ca: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • Spamcheck • MER-C X-wiki • gs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.com
--Dirk Beetstra T C 08:01, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

bellicosmetics.com

bellicosmetics.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 been added repeatedly to articles about stretch marks and pregnancy. I got an email from the named user which quoted WP:NOT:

"Advertising. External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they can serve to identify major corporations associated with a topic (see finishing school for an example)."

and stated: "Belli Cosmetics is a major corporation associated with stretchmarks, thus the link is appropriate."

I don't believe that this sort of association is what was intended by that particular statement in WP:NOT. --Versageek 01:41, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

tourismindochina.com spam

Spammed domain

Affiliated sites:

Accounts:

Reference:

--A. B. (talk) 03:01, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored, IPs resolve to broadband providers in Cambodja and Vietnam, user blacklisted against link. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.nbrii.com

Spam sock accounts

NBRII (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
71.240.165.18 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 04:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored and blacklisted, IP (71.240.0.0/12) resolves to a internet provider (Verizon). --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.chakpak.com

Spam sock accounts

60.254.124.243 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
122.167.107.53 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
125.22.44.84 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
202.131.155.13 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
59.144.50.48 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
122.167.111.31 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
122.167.35.251 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 05:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitored and blacklisted. IPs (60.254.0.0/17, 122.167.0.0/17, 125.22.44.0/24, 202.131.128.0/19, 59.144.50.0/24) are all internet providers in India. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Linkreports by COIBot

I have slightly changed the report function of COIBot, when we (on IRC) command it, it generates a report with the respective white/black and monitorlistings, and, when there are reports, with the reports (poke us when you want us to refresh the report). I will from now on just add rules to COIBot when links get reported here and generate a report (even if it is empty), and not post when I have added the rules. So when 'COIBot Linkreport' is a blue link, rules have been added (where necessary). Hope this helps. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possible spam - Sydneynorthscouts.com

Would it be possible for someone to check out these weblinks [6] that have been inserted by that user and decide weather or not they need to be removed, I am not quite sure, so I would prefer someone who has a little more experience to have a look before these edits are reverted, thanks.--AdamJWC 10:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can be removed per WP:EL, not directly linked to most of the subjects, and WP:SPAM. Monitored on COIBot; IP (60.224.0.0 - 60.231.255.255) is of an ISP in Canberra. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
All reverted--AdamJWC 11:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know they're hungry for Google love when they spam the Latin wikipedia

One way to find the really bad crosswiki spammers is to pick a very small wikipedia (not in the top 50) from the list of wikipedias, then see who's spamming it. Odds are, they're picking one article, then hitting every wikipedia with that article (as listed in the left hand corner). That's how I found this spam:

Top 57 wikipedias with this spam:

Beyond the top 57, the following also have these links:

In most cases. the links were added by one-edit throwaway usernames, usually with Anglo Saxon names.

The domains' owner according to domaintools.com is listed at various addresses in New York, Philadelphia and the Philippines. Looking for spam using Eagle's interwiki search tool using enimenfanforum.com found lots of it in the top 57 wikipedias. Beyond those, look for links in smaller wikipedias by looking at the list of wikipedias on a spammed article (for instance, Eminem).

Google searching the eminemfanforum.com domain name, I then found a long list list of domains owned by the same owner:

Further searching turned up an e-mail address which led to more domains:

Likewise, some of the sites had links to still more sites owned by the same owner although I had to be careful about assuming ownership since there were also many exchanged links owned by other unrelated, innocent site owners.

Domains confirmed to be owned by this spammer:

Google adsense ID#: 9474678852583214

Accounts (en.wikipedia):

I kept finding more domains owned by this owner and more interwiki spam -- and I did not even search that many web sites and domain names. I suspect there's a lot more out there. --A. B. (talk) 13:12, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisting request:
--A. B. (talk) 14:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked the sleeper accounts, for what it's worth. more:

At least the en: article space should be clear now. Femto 15:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC), 16:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another domain:
  • www.purseboard.com
purseboard.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
--A. B. (talk) 17:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've searched and cleared all the smaller wikipedias (below the top 57 covered by Eagle's interwiki search) -- can someone help with the top 57? I'll move on to clearing the smaller wikipedias on the new batch below.--A. B. (talk) 04:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


A few more (109) from the same guy

References:

1 to 10

  • www.aishwaryaraifan.com
  • www.amandapeetforum.com
  • www.amyelizabethfisher.com
  • www.angellocsin.org
  • arnoldaloisschwarzenegger.com/link.html
  • www.ashleesimpsonclub.com
  • www.bachelorfan.com
  • www.bigbrotherfansite.com
  • burberryworld.com
  • www.captainbarbell.org
I've cleared the smaller wikis (below the top 57 searched by Eagle's interwiki search). Can someone clear the bigger wikipedias? I'll move on to the smaller wikipedias in the next batch of 10. --A. B. (talk) 04:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

11 to 20

  • www.cassieforum.com
  • chanelworld.com
  • www.cherylburke.net
  • www.christianbautista.org
  • christinaaguilerafan.com
  • clayaikenforum.com
  • www.danitykanelyric.com
  • davidblainefan.com
  • www.demimoorefan.com
  • dixiechicksonline.com

21 to 30

  • dondforum.com
  • dooneybourke.info
  • www.evalongoriaforum.com
  • falloutboyforum.com
  • www.fergieclub.com
  • www.gofaithhill.com
  • greysanatomyclub.com
  • www.gucciweb.com
  • www.halleberryforum.com
  • hi5-friend.com

31 to 40

  • howardallanstern.com
  • www.inthedb.com
  • jasminetrias.org
  • jeanreesewitherspoon.com
  • jenniferanistonforum.com
  • www.jenniferjoanneaniston.com
  • jeriryanfan.com
  • www.jessicaalbaclub.com
  • www.justintimberlakeforum.com
  • kapamilya.org

41 to 50

  • kapamilyadealornodeal.net
  • kapuso.net
  • katieholmesweb.com
  • keithurbanforum.com
  • kelliepicklerforum.com
  • www.kimchiu.net
  • www.kimchiu.org
  • www.kirstendunstforum.com
  • www.leasalonga.net
  • www.mariahfansite.com

51 to 60

  • www.mariasharapovapicture.org
  • www.mariolopez.info
  • www.marthastewartfans.com
  • www.mauitaylor.org
  • www.maumarcelo.org
  • www.michellerodriguezforum.com
  • mimirogersonline.com
  • myangelinajolie.com
  • mycarrieunderwood.com
  • myfendi.com

61 to 70

  • mypanicatthedisco.com
  • www.myspacefansite.com
  • nascarfish.com
  • natalieportmanclub.com
  • ncaafansite.com
  • nellykimfurtado.com
  • neopetsfansite.com
  • www.nflfansite.com
  • nicklacheyforum.com
  • nicolekidmanworld.com

71 to 80

  • nicolerichiefan.com
  • oprahfansite.com
  • www.philippine-idol.com
  • www.philippineidol.org
  • www.pinoydreamacademy.info
  • www.piolopascual.org
  • www.pradafan.com
  • pussycatdollsforum.com
  • rihannaforum.com
  • www.rock-star-supernova.com

81 to 90

  • www.salmahayekworld.com
  • www.sammilby.org
  • scarlettforum.com
  • shakirafanforum.com
  • sharonstoneforum.com
  • www.simpsonfan.com
  • www.southparkclub.com
  • www.soyouthinkyoucandance.info
  • spearsfan.com
  • stephencolbertonline.com

91 to 100

  • theamazingracefan.com
  • theapprenticefan.com
  • thefacebookfan.com
  • thelostfan.com
  • themasters-tournament.com
  • thenbafan.com
  • tigerwoodsforum.com
  • tomcruiseforum.com
  • topmodelfan.com
  • triciahelferfansite.com

101+

  • www.tylerchristopher.org
  • ufcheaven.com
  • www.vanessaminnillofan.com
  • www.wikipediafan.com
  • wwefanforum.com
  • youtubefan.com
  • zacefronforum.com
  • zhangziyiweb.com
  • zoesaldana.org

--A. B. (talk) 03:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

more accounts:

Femto 12:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

perhaps unrelated perhaps not:

Femto 14:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 14:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 15:22, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 15:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 15:58, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 16:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 18:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 18:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Femto 19:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

healthy heating etc.

68.178.114.159 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) adds domains related to heating to e.g. Underfloor heating. CIDR 68.178.0.0/17 resolves to an internet provider in OR, US (Integra Telecom, Inc.).

--Dirk Beetstra T C 18:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spam sock accounts

Carolynh 98 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
--Hu12 22:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.siteseein.gr

Adsense pub-8949636886414823

Spam sock accounts

88.218.44.192 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
--Hu12 00:36, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

adsense spam http://spam.allgoodarticles.com http://spam.ebooknetworking.com http://spam.downloadfreepdf.com

Adsense pub-1672514986876842

Spam sock accounts

Ravedid (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
--Hu12 00:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.sixsigmafirst.com

I suspect there are other editors too. -- Ronz  02:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These ips are all I could find. -- Ronz  15:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://spam.yahotels.gr

Related http://spam.alexandros-skopelos.gr

Spam sock accounts

87.203.190.18 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
87.202.110.39 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
Nikos29ath (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
--Hu12 07:02, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam&oldid=135500247"