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 JzG (talk | contribs) at 09:06, 21 February 2009 (→‎michaelcrook.org: more). 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 – 272232445 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.

    Proposed additions

    nonciclopedia.wikia.com

    Another uncy off-shoot which never needs to be linked anywhere and has been spammed on User talk:Hinoa. Has potential to be spammed by the sites users like what happened with uncy.--Otterathome (talk) 22:08, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    • There are four links, all form Uncyclopedia where this and other language uncyclopedias are discussed. Actually I would think that none of them are notable, and could safely be removed from that article, but that is just my view. Right now I see no evidence of abuse. Guy (Help!) 15:11, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    refinance2day.tk

    Link
    Accounts

    Added site is to a "blog" front-end, links from it redirect to mortgageloan.com, which is a commercial loan application site. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:29, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    xr.com

    Links
    Accounts

    A link shortener / redirect site. Functionally equivalent to sites such as tinyURL.com. The above user has utilized it to get around the blacklisting of closingcost.info. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 03:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Update: I've now submitted a blacklist request for this one at meta:Talk:Spam blacklist#xr.com. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:13, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    See also:
    Good catch. Now blacklisted on Meta.[1]
     Defer to Global blacklist --A. B. (talk • contribs) 18:22, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    movie-critic.net

    Links
    Accounts

    A recently spammed movie-review site of questionable reliability and utility; user insists on spamming links to it accross a broad spectrum of movie articles, and is persistant in doing so. User has been indef blocked, but blacklisting his site may discourage him from further attempts to use Wikipedia as an advertising tool for his website. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:14, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Million pixel knock-offs

    The spammers are back at Million Dollar Homepage.

    I will look through the history for others. I'm adding this one now. Guy (Help!) 23:22, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    iranmania.com

    As of 2009-02-20, this site is listed by Google as an attack site. here, Google says, in part, that of the 457 pages we tested on the site over the past 90 days, 59 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent.

     Done as a malware site. Guy (Help!) 22:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    lashtal.com

    User self-identifies as owner of site on his user page. He has been reverting removal of links to his site and is now [www.lashtal.com/nuke/PNphpBB2-viewtopic-t-3419.phtml recruiting his site membership] (of a site which he claims is not a social networking site) to come to his aid and support his position on Wikipedia. Give me a break! Will in China (talk) 16:55, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I see there is significant abuse occuring, first;
    • "This is an appeal from the owner and editor of LAShTAL.COM to Wikipedia specialists and experts ... if you know what you're doing on Wikipedia and are willing to help, please make the necessary changes on the relevant pages (I suspect they will apply to anything that mentions LAShTAL.COM or the Encyclopedia Thelemica) or get in touch by PM or email." [www.lashtal.com/nuke/PNphpBB2-viewtopic-t-3419.phtml]
    Accounts acting as meat puppets
    Ian Rons (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)
    Dougbrown93 (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)
    69.204.185.3 (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)
    Secondly,
    Edit warring and disruption by Owner;
    Acsociety (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)[2]
    86.3.136.130 (talk · contribs)
    Lashtal93 (talk · contribs)[3]
    Lashtal.com (talk · contribs)[4]
    These accounts, based on their edit history, in apparent violation of Conflict of interest and anti-spam guidelines, have engaged in disruption, Edit warring and are actively soliciting users Off-wiki on lashtal.com to edit Wikipedia for the sole or primary purpose of promoting lashtal.com.  Done--Hu12 (talk) 20:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    michaelcrook.org

    See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Blogging4truth/Archive. The user is inserting links to his blog and promoting BLP violations. I have added the site, there may e alias URLs. Guy (Help!) 08:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals


    largedogbreedz.com

    I can't find any logs or justification for this domain. I'm new here, so I'm not suggesting it doesn't exist, I just cant find it. Could someone point me to it, or delist it? It isn't a great source, but it has useful information on Doberman Pinscher temperament. If theres a good reason for this, no worries, but I can't find it.

    Thanks--Thesoxlost (talk) 04:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    The relevant reports are Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2008 Archive Mar 2#User page spammer and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2008 Archive May 1#User page spammer2. The reason why you didn't find it is the spam blacklist is composed of regular expressions and the . needs to be preceded with a \. MER-C 06:14, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Is there a specific URL that you need to use as for a citation in an article?--Hu12 (talk) 19:08, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    ytmnd.com

    Any reason that this was added to the blacklist? - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 14:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    [24] is not blacklisted. -- seth (talk) 15:49, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, the reason it was added was that the YTMNDers were linking every single meme to every single article even vaguely related, at one point there were thousands of links. Since virtually every YTMND uses copyright material (if only on the soundtrack) there was a strong consensus that the site be blacklisted and the homepage whitelisted for the article on YTMND. It's blacklisted on meta. And actually that was the result of a productive and co-operative piece of work with YTMNDers active on the article itself.
    1. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2006/07#Googlebombing_by_YTMND
    2. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2006/07#unfunnytruth.ytmnd.com_.26_unfunnysequel.ytmnd.com
    3. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2006/10#ytmnd
    4. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2007/01#ytmnd.com
    Nothing can make these links encyclopaedic. Not even Doom music. Guy (Help!) 23:34, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Troubleshooting and problems

    links.com regex biting nonspammed ready-links.com and broken-links.com

    See suggestion by Beetstra re ready-links.com and [25] discussion of similar problem] with broken-links.com. Regex expression (currently \blinks\.com\b) needs fixing, if possible. --Abd (talk) 02:12, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Original report from log: [26]. The spammed URL wasn't links.com, it was links.links.com. Looks to me like the regex was a simple error, the intention was to blacklist links.links.com, not links.com. links.links.com is dead. I don't see any sign of other reports involving links.com subdomains. --Abd (talk) 02:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I could request delisting for links.com, but if someone wants to maintain the original blacklisting, even though continue spamming is very unlikely, the subdomain was apparently removed by links.com probably for the same reason links.links.com was reported, that would be harmless. It's just simpler to remove it than fix it, though. --Abd (talk) 15:14, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello? Anybody home? This one should be very straightforward. There was no intention to blacklist ready-links.com, but whitelisting was denied because what needed to be done was fix the regex expression. (The original intention was to blacklist links.links.com, not links.com, apparently, though it's possible the blacklisting admin intended to blacklist the entire site links.com. But certainly not ready-links.com, or broken-links.com, which was just whitelisted on request. However, there seems to be no need to continue the blacklisting of links.links.com, it is dead and very unlikely to come back. And other links.com links being spammed? I couldn't find any. Thanks.--Abd (talk) 21:23, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    As there don't seem to be any objections, this will be minus Removed. -- seth (talk) 23:58, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Logging / COIBot Instr

    Blacklist logging

    Full Instructions for Admins


    Quick Reference

    For Spam reports or requests originating from this page, use template {{/request|0#section_name}}

    • {{/request|213416274#Section_name}}
    • Insert the oldid 213416274 a hash "#" and the Section_name (Underscoring_spaces_where_applicable):
    • Use within the entry log here.

    For Spam reports or requests originating from Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam use template {{WPSPAM|0#section_name}}

    • {{WPSPAM|182725895#Section_name}}
    • Insert the oldid 182725895 a hash "#" and the Section_name (Underscoring_spaces_where_applicable):
    • Use within the entry log here.

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

    Note: if you do not log your entries it may be removed if someone appeals and no valid reasons can be found.

    Addition to the COIBot reports

    The lower list in the COIBot reports now have after each link four numbers between brackets (e.g. "www.example.com (0, 0, 0, 0)"):

    1. first number, how many links did this user add (is the same after each link)
    2. second number, how many times did this link get added to wikipedia (for as far as the linkwatcher database goes back)
    3. third number, how many times did this user add this link
    4. fourth number, to how many different wikipedia did this user add this link.

    If the third number or the fourth number are high with respect to the first or the second, then that means that the user has at least a preference for using that link. Be careful with other statistics from these numbers (e.g. good user do add a lot of links). If there are more statistics that would be useful, please notify me, and I will have a look if I can get the info out of the database and report it. The bots are running on a new database, Eagle 101 is working on transferring the old data into this database so it becomes more reliable.

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

    poking COIBot

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

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


    Discussion

    Malicious sites

    Can a site be blacklisted for being malicious? prowrestling.com is one, a Google test shows 6.97% of the pages on the site resulted in malicious content being downloaded to the users computer without their consent. My own personal experience with the site was the same, I would have to run my McAfee security sweep after visiting the site due to the problems the site would cause. Here is the Google report [27]. I have brought this up at the wrestling project and so far they seem to agree about not using this site. TJ Spyke 02:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Sites that are found to be malicious, or host exploits need to be immediatly removed and blacklisted to protect wikipedias users. Another check for this can be found at http://linkscanner.explabs.com/linkscanner/default.aspx . --Hu12 (talk) 19:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia mirrors

    What's the feeling about placing wikipedia mirrors on the blacklist? I know they aren't normally "spammed" by single editors and aren't malicious, but they do tend to show up in articles inserted by well meaning folks and can create circular references. We discussed it on AN but I wanted to kick the real answer back to you guys. Some of these have something on the order of 500-1000 links (probably a lot more if I went through everything on Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks) and it might be nice to know that manually removing them wouldn't be in vain after a few months. Thoughts? Protonk (talk) 02:26, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Is it possible to blocklist internal WMF/interwiki links?

    There's a very banned user (banned WMF-wide, per Jimbo) that keeps popping up here linking back to the one site he's apparently still active on. He will link his sig as an IP user as something like interwikiname:User:Something/Something or interwikiname:User talk:Something/Something. Can this be blocked from here to discourage him or is that not technically possible? rootology (C)(T) 14:42, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    We used to have MediaWiki:Usernameblacklist... might be an equivelent on meta.wikimedia.org? --Hu12 (talk) 22:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist&oldid=272232445"