Jump to content

MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist

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 12:53, 7 February 2008 (→‎www.petitiononline.com/njs4ever/petition.html). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

    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 – 189720319 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.

    Proposed additions

    Alfaintercom spam

    Domain tracking data


    Related domains


    Possibly related domains


    Accounts

    --A. B. (talk) 00:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I blacklisted 12 of these domains on 23 January and 2 more today (drugsinfo.us and alfadrugs.com). I did not blacklist any of the "possibly related domains".
     Done --A. B. (talk) 21:02, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Hey everyone! I am really tired of removing Play Asia referral links. Users add them to articles like common "links", and then convert them to referral by exchanging it. Take 70.79.75.250 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), for example: his typo fix is actually converting a Play-Asia plain link (which in itself is spam) to a referral link (links that start with play-asia.com/SOap are referral, those starting with play-asia.com/paOS are plain ones). Since these referrals are easy to catch and are not unique (for any referral link to a page there is a plain link going there) I suggest blacklisting play-asia.com/SOap. There are many other referral sites as well, but these are easy to catch (not like Amazon ones). -- ReyBrujo (talk) 04:16, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    The IP mentioned appears to have ceased - are there any others involved? Thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Done on Meta now --Herby talk thyme 08:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Agree with this. Is play-asia.com/paOS the same? this link →www.play-asia.com/SOap-23-83-r2q-71-43-77-c-15-tales+of-84-j-70-iuz.html redirects to →www.play-asia.com/paOS-13-71-43-77-c-49-en-15-tales+of-70-iuz.html..?--Hu12 (talk) 11:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Priory of Sion

    Accounts

    Ronnotel (talk) 05:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    See also → Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Systematic_deletion_of_my_contributions_to_Wikipedia--Hu12 (talk) 05:08, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Wfgh447 (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)
    195.92.168.167 (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) [1]
    --Hu12 (talk) 05:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    checkY Done Ronnotel (talk) 13:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Logged this entry --Hu12 (talk) 14:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. Ronnotel (talk) 15:31, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Snowball8000 (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)
    Yet another added → priory-of-sion.tripod.com --Hu12 (talk) 02:08, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Aryavart Impex spam

    Spam domain


    Accounts


    Pages deleted as spam

    --A. B. (talk) 13:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk) 13:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    music-selector.blogspot.com

    See WT:WPSPAM#spam.music-selector.blogspot.com. MER-C 07:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk) 08:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Moscow on The Hudson

    Accounts

    66.108.229.217 (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)
    66.238.199.98 (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)
    66.108.229.217 (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)
    141.155.126.183 (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)
    24.185.186.46 (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)
    141.155.126.183 (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)
    24.185.41.125 (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)
    --Hu12 (talk) 15:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done--Hu12 (talk) 15:35, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Carbon Copy Pro spam

    Constantly being added through bogus user pages advertising some marketing scheme found by "Jay Kubassek" and "Mike Dillard". Ones I've found (now deleted) include:

    --Calton | Talk 15:58, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Blocked the unblocked users. I think these should be listed but out of time. Removed one non existent user?? Cheers --Herby talk thyme 16:04, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Adding back Carboncopyscam, it had an errand "')" in the username, its been fixed ;)--Hu12 (talk) 16:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree also.. Done--Hu12 (talk) 16:37, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    journalreview.org

    Accounts

    EBMdoc (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)
    Researcherbasic (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)
    Basicsci99 (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)
    Labrat2 (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)
    Resdir (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)
    24.185.216.101 (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)
    129.59.114.13 (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)
    68.236.181.27 (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)
    70.136.116.10 (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)
    69.117.14.111 (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)
    Iat (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)
    Awakennow (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)
    Neuro18 (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)
    Eyewell (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)
    Pedsdir (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)
    Uroly (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)
    138.5.243.14 (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)
    PMR8 (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)
    71.125.237.249 (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)
    Long term....--Hu12 (talk) 16:20, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    testmax.webng.com

    Both links point to same Google-ad site. Frequently added to Graduate Record Examination from a number of anon IPs in the 203.187.208.* range:

     Done, thanks Ohnoitsjamie--Hu12 (talk) 20:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    bowsershrine.com

    This domain was blacklisted awhile ago. I had mistakenly added some of my own domains, which I didn't at the time realize was against the rules. I now do, and I'm sorry for doing so. Anyway, this domain was blacklisted, which is unfair since it is not my site. I understand that my domains are blacklisted, I broke the rules, rules I didn't realize, but I still did. bowsershrine.com should not be blacklisted though. I did add it too the Bowser page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowser_%28Nintendo%29 because it has relevant content relating to that page. But I do not own or run that site, and the owner of it should not be punished for my mistake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.64.112.59 (talk) 01:38, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    noooxml.org

    Accounts

    Pieterh (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)
    84.64.233.164 (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)
    Kaern (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)
    72.40.2.171 (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)
    190.48.122.75 (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)
    Adi86 (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)
    80.233.255.7 (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)
    76.10.155.246 (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)
    76.10.136.135 (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)
    recent activity see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2007_Archive_Sep#http:.2F.2Fspam.noooxml.org --Hu12 (talk) 19:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    colinjoss.com spam on Wikipedia

    Spam domains

    Google Adsense ID: 1603406589185684


    Related domains


    Accounts


    Reference

    --A. B. (talk) 01:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Done --A. B. (talk) 01:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals

    hanazagorova.xf.cz

    I don't know why it's blocked? This web pages contain complete hyperlink discography.

    careers.stateuniversity.com

    This website contains comprehensive job profiles, using data from sources such as the US Bureau of Labor. It is part of stateuniversity.com, a directory of US state universities. The information appears to be accurate and can be used in many articles. I do not see why this is blocked. TheKillerAngel (talk) 16:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    When you drill down into the actual content, you get a page that appears to be supported by an affiliate advertisement, making it unsuitable according to WP:EL.
    Furthermore, the bottom of the pages state "Content on this website is from high-quality, commercially published books available in print form" without specifying any copyright permission or fair-use disclaimers, which make the link unsuitable according to WP:COPYRIGHT (don't link to pages containing copyrighted material). =Axlq (talk) 06:53, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I would agree. Web site appears to be carrying work in violation of the creator's copyright no Declined--Hu12 (talk) 07:49, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


    Message from SEOlogy.co.il CEO

    The following discussion is an archived report. Please do not modify it. Subsequent reports should be made in a new section.


    Dear Wikipedia,

    I have posted this message personally to the people involved, then found this place so I will put it here as well.

    My name is Natan Birenboim, I'm the CEO of SEOlogy.co.il, a leading white-hat SEO company in Israel which optimizes the websites of large, notable organizations in Israel and abroad.

    A few days ago I've found out that most of our clients, including ourselves, are listed on Wikipedia's Blacklist. After investigating the issue, I have sadly realized that one of our employees abused Wikipedia by pushing links to his own private websites into several entries, ignoring Wikipedia's rules and warnings, disregarding our policies.

    If this issue would have been brought to my attention, I would have made sure immediately that it doesn't happen again. But since I haven't personally gotten a warning, there was no way I could have known about the issue.

    I have just fired the employee responsible for this disgrace. I request that our company's clients' legitimate websites be delisted from Wikipedia's blacklist immediately.

    Here is the list of sites that I request to be delisted:

    www.fancydiamonds.net
    www.hadassah.org.il
    www.fts-soft.com
    www.orange.co.il
    www.seology.co.il
    www.wao.co.il
    www.3dvsystems.com
    www.africa-israel.co.il
    www.arkia.co.il
    www.caesarstone.com
    www.cognifit.co.il
    www.e-mindfitness.com
    www.eldan.co.il
    www.gemini.co.il
    www.hadasit.co.il
    www.hertz.co.il
    www.idit-technologies.com
    www.mainsoft.com
    www.meitav.co.il
    www.optier.com
    www.optonol.com
    www.ortal-hr.co.il
    www.prepwizard.com
    www.reliable.co.il
    www.shahal.co.il
    www.shomreymishkal.co.il
    www.silentium.com
    www.tambour-paint.com
    www.verlain.com
    www.verlain.co.il
    www.verlain.fr

    Please let me know how we can proceed.


    Regards,

    Natan Birenboim,
    SEOlogy CEO
    natan@seology.co.il
    972-77-3330186/7

    Comment I think it would make more sense to make the request for individual links as the need arises to add them. I'm guessing most of those links wouldn't belong in Wikipedia anyway per WP:EL (i.e., appear to be commercial versus informative or non-English language). OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:13, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: Previous archived discussion was here.
    Comment, I note that A.B. has put a significant amount of time in this one, and appears to have initiated the correspondence with SEOlogy. I would defer to hearing his opinion on the matter, although I share Jamie's observation that the lion's share of the links above are simple storefronts which would not be acceptable as external links or references. I would also note that these are listed at meta, and apparently not here - the discussion may need to move. Kuru talk 18:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Mr. Birenboim has left similar messages on multiple talk pages; I've started a centralized discussion at:
    --A. B. (talk) 18:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Closing this as no Declined See WikiProject Spam report--Hu12 (talk) 20:07, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    datashaping.com

    This and 4 related domains were blacklisted here in August 2007. After a request on meta triggered further investigation, these domains plus 7 more related domains have been blacklisted on meta. I have removed what are now redundant entries here.

    References:

     Done --A. B. (talk) 14:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    www.encyclopediadramatica.com/org

    The following discussion is an archived report. Please do not modify it. Subsequent reports should be made in a new section.

    I usually tell people I don't belive there's a big bias on this site. But when you censore a joke site like this I'm starting to get second thoughts. If anything the link should be allowed and creating articles about it not(?). IT IS A WIKI PROJECT, IT SHOULD BE LISTED UNDER WIKI PROJECTS! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.100.111.208 (talk • contribs) 15:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Well, let's weigh the potential for abuse (very high) against the potential that ED would be an encyclopedic link (close to zero, considering that Wikis are not considered reliable sources). In the event that a page of this site should be linked, we can add it to the whitelist. You should go to MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist and ask for a one-page exception, because there's no way this ought to be removed from the blacklist. Cool Hand Luke 15:15, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Read: Wiki project. It is a Wiki project. It's name is just satirical to what you just said. That Wiki's aren't very reliable. Though in the end I'd always trust a 100 people editing an article (the public) more than I'd trust a single professors biased "facts". ((Warning to myself: Off-topic)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.100.111.208 (talk • contribs) 21:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    This is blacklisted on Meta, we can't help you.. --Versageek 22:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

     Not done by ruling of the Arbitration Committee. MER-C 01:41, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Agree, This needs to be no Declined and closed--Hu12 (talk) 07:33, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

    www.journalreview.org

    JournalReview.org is a non-profit, free, academic, educational resource which I - as well as about 7000 other physicians and health care professionals internationally participate in. The site allows participants to discuss published medical literature with colleagues. Anyone is able to read the data and discussion posted on JouranlReview.org. Participants can annotate citations by adding metadata beyond what the abstract offers. This allows authors to suplement their work, respond to questions, and alows researchers to gain ideas on how future efforts may be directed to help expand a field. The site charges no fee to use, and shows no advertisements. Please re-consider your position on this site. It has been included on Wikipedia since at least 2005 without objection. The resources has been discussed in several peer reviewed publications, including this one EBMdoc (talk) 03:46, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    www.petitiononline.com/njs4ever/petition.html

    Why was this link blacklisted? It contains no spyware or malicious intent. It is free speech. It contains useful information for anyone who is passionate about the Arsenio Hall Show and would like to do something about it using the democratic process. It lived on the Arsenio Hall Show page as an "external link." Now it has been both removed and blacklisted. Would love an answer. Thank you

    Knyte77 (talk) 05:23, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined Please take a look at the specific requirements of our External Links and Reliable Sources guidelines. I don't think this link meets either guideline.--Hu12 (talk) 20:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I took a look....it clearly isn't a "reliable sources" link, nor is it trying to be. It is an external, relevant link. Which passage of the External Sources page are you basing your arbitration on? And again, blacklists are for spam it seems. A petition online link is not spam, is it?

    Knyte77 (talk) 03:49, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Its not a resource about the subject, which is the purpose of the External links area. Its a petition and advocates a point of view, Wikipedia is not the medium for this. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for Propaganda, advocacy, or recruitment of any kind, commercial, political, religious, or otherwise.--Hu12 (talk) 12:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    www.famousamericans.net/fredericknashogden/

    I request that this page be removed from the blacklist. I attempted to use this page as a reference in the article Ogden's Cavalry, but was prohibited from doing so because of the page being on the blacklist. I must admit that I am not thoroughly familiar with what criteria puts a page on the list, but after looking the page over, I didn't notice anything offensive on it. Sf46 (talk) 00:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Troubleshooting and problems


    Discussion

    archive script

    Eagle 101 said he had one running on meta, is it possible to get it up and going here?--Hu12 10:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Would be good - Eagle hasn't been working on Meta for a while though & I've not seen anything (there was supposed to be a logging script too!) --Herby talk thyme 12:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Great news, Ive written a script that can archive this page given the templates that we use, I can create a approved archive along with a rejected archive if people are interested. βcommand 06:51, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    "Interested" - bit of an understatement there :) Great news - please feel free to help/supply the script. I tend to leave stuff around a week in case anyone shouts or adds more (archives once done should be left alone). How would you handle the "discussion" type bits? Cheers --Herby talk thyme 09:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    First question, do you want approved and rejected request in separate archives? as for the discussions we could get Misza bot over here for things older than 30 days. βcommand 17:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I would think one archive, seperate sections, like it is currently[2], not sure if the script can do that, but if so, doubt there would be objections in implementation...--Hu12 (talk) 00:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    There is no simple way of editing sections using the bot. (section editting is evil). it would just be one large archive. βcommand 00:59, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    blogspot.com

    See also: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam § Time_for_blacklisting_blogspot.com.2C_with_whitelisting_of_specific_domains.3F

    I added countingcrowsnew.blogspot.com, freemodlife.blogspot.com, and googlepackdownload.blogspot.com to the blacklist. I made a previous report about the blogspot sites and they're being spammed by the same blocked sockpuppet who I filed a report about here. Spellcast (talk) 22:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Update: I've also added b5050-raffle.blogspot.com, gpd2008.blogspot.com, and itsleaked.blogspot.com. They were being spammed by the same blocked sock in that report. Spellcast (talk) 05:18, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm inclined to blacklist the domain then whitelist where needed but some heavy flak is likely to arrive? --Herby talk thyme 08:06, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    From an en:Wikipedia mission perspective (though possibly not your personal perspective:) a bigger issue than the flak that will be generated is the disruption to editing. I believe a lot of pages, particularly biographies of living people, contain legitimate links to the subject's blog - many of which are hosted on blogspot. Simply blacklisting and then waiting for whitelisting requests will likely
    1. overwhelm the whitelist page here and on meta (which given you are one of the most active admins on both, may not be ideal for you!)
    2. be confusing and frustrating to a lot of editors especially newbies, but also any who are not familiar with the blacklist/whitelist set up
    3. lead to a loss of legitimate links and legitimate edits as people struggle to work out whether to keep their edit and lose the link or the other way round while any whitelist request is ongoing.
    I think a move like that will take some careful planning and preparation to avoid these issues (might also help cut down some of the heat). One way or another, I think we need human editors to assess the current blogspot links on article pages and enter appropriate ones on the whitelist before the blacklisting goes into effect. I don't think such a move will cut out most of the flak though, so we might want to ensure there are other admins involved to help spread the weight, and a nicely presented page of evidence of the issues the domain causes to point people to.
    Blogspot certainly gets spammed a lot more than most domains, and I support blacklisting. But It's still a domain that has a lot of good links and I think it's important to think through how a move like that will impact people, and to adjust to the situation. -- SiobhanHansa 13:54, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Briefly - needs quite a bit of thought but equally is worth that amount of thought --Herby talk thyme 13:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    There are many, many legitimate links to the domain, not only to blogs belonging to article subjects but to blogs belonging to Wikipedia contributors. Better to blacklist individual blogs as needed. --bainer (talk) 16:23, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Not sure why Wikipedia contributors would be adding their own blogs? A very limited number of blogs actualy meet WP:RS and even fewer still meet the requirements of WP:EL or are a blog that is the subject of the article or an official page of the articles subject. There are currently 32,916 blogspot.com Blog links on Wikipedia, if whitelisting even a thousand "legitimate links", its worth it.--Hu12 (talk) 17:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    You've presented some convincing reasons to leave certain blog links out of Wikipedia, but not a reason to leave all blog links out. Wikipedia contributors might want to link to their blogs because, you know, it is possible for said contributors to frequent websites on the internet other than Wikipedia :P See WP:COMMUNITY. There is also a performance cost to whitelisting and blacklisting; as far as I can tell, 1000 whitelisted entries costs more computationally than 1000 blacklisted entries (instead of using one large regex, which is how the blacklist works, you're doing 1000 individual regex replacements). GracenotesT § 18:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I was under the impression server load was something we were supposed to leave up to the developers to worry about. If they see an issue and ask for a reassessment that would be one thing, but its not a good argument against a tactic without their weight behind it.
    The suggestion isn't that all blogs should be banned. the suggestion is that this particular domain gets spammed so much it would be beneficial to the project to blacklist it and only white list the ones that are appropriate. -- SiobhanHansa 18:13, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Hu12 I think it's important not to overstate the case here. Not all of the ~32,000 links (assukming the 1K of good links estimate) that are not legitimate external links or citations will actually be harmful to Wikipedia. While editors' own blogs on their user pages aren't necessary to the project, in the vast majority of cases they do no harm and may help editors fell a bond that connects them to the project. Many more will be links from discussions and projects. While I don't think that's a reason for keeping a domain that is also being spammed so much - it's not the case that we do 32,000 links worth of "good" by removing them. For the most part we only really benefit from the spam and poorly placed article links that go. -- SiobhanHansa 18:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    (unindent, crosspost my post from WT:WPSPAM)

    The rule \bblogspot\.com is (currently) not on COIBot's monitorlist. Some of the sub-domains have been added via WT:WPSPAM, or have been caught by the automonitoring of COIBot (mainly because the name of the editor is the same as the name of the subdomain on blogspot.com).

    Still, a linksearch on the resolved IP of blogspot.com (72.14.207.191) results in a mere 118 results (all COIBot linkreports)! Often the multiple use of the single subdomains is not a cause for blacklisting, as they may only have been used once or twice. Also, I suspect there are tens of thousands of blogspot sub-domains out there, but these are only the links that are caught because the wiki username overlaps with the domainname of the subdomain (or have been reported here). Would this cumulative behaviour warrant blacklisting of \bblogspot\.com .. here, or even on meta? --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:37, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Appropriate links may indeed be a problem, though the majority will fail some or many of the policies and guidelines here (or don't even have to be a notable fact, or do not need to be a working link while being mentioned; "Mr. X has a a blog on Blogspot.<ref>primary reliable source stating that the blog is the official blog</ref>"; we are not a linkfarm), and I would argue that the spam/coi part of the problem becomes a bit difficult to control... --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Crosspost spamlink template for blogspot.com to link this discussion to the linkreports from COIBot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Please try to remember how frustrating generic, unexpected spam blocks can be for new and incautious editors. Last time I "checked", if you make an edit with Internet Explorer and you post it directly without preview (two things you should never do), then if the spam blacklist comes up your text is gone. Back arrow gets you the original text of the article. Edits that die that way may not get remade, and they may sour the editor on further contributions. I don't think there should be any blocks on top-level domains or large general purpose Internet sites. 70.15.116.59 23:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I have to disagree in this case - there's concern that the dynamic IP spamming it is using it to perpetrate scams or send out computer bugs. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 04:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    There's no way we can realistically do this. blogspot has an Alexa traffic rank of 12 - it's higher than Amazon.com - and has well over 30,000 links on en.wp alone. Adding this would be incredibly disruptive to thousands of articles. Unless someone wants to go through all 32,000 links to find the ones that can be kept so we can whitelist them, there's no way we can do this. The ones that are spam should be removed and blacklisted, but WP:EL and WP:RS are not very good reasons to completely forbid links to a domain. Mr.Z-man 16:47, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Though I agree that Wikipedia has a big blogspam problem, I also have to concede that there are too many legit blogspot links (e.g., bio subjects own blog) as SiobhanHansa noted. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    (unindent)blogspot.com is currently on User:XLinkBot's revert list. XLinkBot is designed to revert only non-autoconfirmed users, and will only do so a limited number of times. Assuming we emerge from our trial period, I think this would be an effective way of stemming the influx of inappropriate blogspot links. Established editors would still be able to add blogspot.com links and only new or changed links would be reverted - so it wouldn't interfere with non-autoconfirmed users editing pages that already contained a link. --Versageek 18:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I put the header in a template to reduce size of this request page and included MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist/Indicators which is loosly based off of RCU's indicators.--Hu12 (talk) 15:58, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    Google "I'm feeling lucky"

    Would the following regexes work?

    • \bgoogle.com/search?.*&btnI
    • \bgoogle.com/search?btnI

    —Random832 20:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Blacklist logging

    {{WPSPAM|0#section_name}} →(replacing '0' with the correct "oldid" (ie. permalink) example shown here).

    For example:

    {{WPSPAM|182725895#Blacklist_logging}}

    results in:

    See WikiProject Spam report

    This should aid in requests originating from Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam and for use with the entry log here. I've added a snipit in the header --Hu12 (talk)

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist&oldid=189720319"