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 16:36, 24 August 2009 (→‎Beer Judge Certification Program: ++). 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 – 309807732 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.

    Proposed additions


    Attorney spam

    A little while ago, I tagged and bagged several dozen advertisements disguised as new User and User Talk pages. They've all been deleted and reported to WP:SPI (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nakesha7c), but new ones still keep getting created (see User:Melodiwo1 and User talk:Katlynloy. So I thought I'd be proactive and just submit the spam links for the blacklist:

    --Calton | Talk 07:21, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

     Done--Hu12 (talk) 09:10, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Additional

    Addendum: Sorry, another couple just cropped up:

    --Calton | Talk 03:48, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

     Done, thanks Calton--Hu12 (talk) 16:42, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    No, thank you, as you've saved me from having to play Whack-a-Mole. --Calton | Talk 17:27, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I've played whack-a-mole and its no fun. glad to help, if more pop up, please report. cheers--Hu12 (talk) 14:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Addendum 2: Sorry, I overlooked one, plus another just cropped up:

    --Calton | Talk 04:07, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

     Done. ;)--Hu12 (talk) 19:05, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Addendum 2: Sorry, I overlooked another one, plus another's been cropping up:

    --Calton | Talk 12:48, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

     Done--Hu12 (talk) 16:51, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    porn site referral spam

    70.81.9.135 (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)

    An IP just added a bunch of links to porn star articles in the form of:

    • join.kobetai.com
    • join.clubamyried.com
    • join.pornstars-ambermichaels.com
    • join.transexualstarr.com
    • join.amberpeachraw.com
    • join.clubangelcassidy.com
    • join.clubangeldark.com

    followed by long referral codes.

    Can some regex guru figure out a way to block such links without blacklisting the entire site? I think these are "official" sites.

    Thanks, --A. B. (talk • contribs) 07:46, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Could blacklist track/MTA5MzU2OjM6 as that fragment seems to be in all the links. Stifle (talk) 11:54, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you or someone else more knowledgeable either do this or else show me how to do it? I'm good at plain-vanilla blacklisting (i.e., bexample.\com\b) but not the advanced stuff. I don't understand regex -- I just plagiarize what others have done.
    Also, I can't clean up porn-related pages (this is a shared computer and it's not wise for me to go to those pages); if there's any of this junk still out there, can someone remove it? Thanks, --A. B. (talk • contribs) 17:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Wouldn't adding a variation of "join" work? might catch other non-porn spamlinks.--Hu12 (talk) 03:50, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    This might work 

    join\..*\.com/track/[A-Za-z0-9]{10,}

    Blacklists join.anything.com/track/a string of alphanum characters longer than 10 chars

    Triplestop x3 01:43, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    afterelton.com

    afterelton.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 site is being used (among other uses) to identify people as gay or as having gay relatives, etc. See for instance Special:Contributions/Shojego. Looks like clear BLP violations. We still have a lot of links to the site. Dougweller (talk) 05:29, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 19:36, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that it is polemical and not an appropriate source; it also seems to be subject to abuse by the accounts you list. This will result in some disgruntlement if we add it, but it is clearly not somethign we should be linking widely, if at all. Guy (Help!) 14:32, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    Adbrite referral spam

    AdBrite is a major player in the Internet advertising business. While its overall domain should not be blacklisted, we have a spammer adding links with his referral code and it should be blacklisted.

    URL:

    Spam accounts sharing this referral ID:

    --A. B. (talk • contribs) 13:17, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm not a regex expert; but presumably it would look similar to the paypal referral regex, so possibly something like this:
    • \badbrite\.com/mb
    Not sure if it should also end in \b ... I would think it would need that, but the existing entries for the paypal referral don't use that at the end, so maybe it's not needed here. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:42, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    More accounts
    41.237.100.139 (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)
    41.234.16.93 (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)
    41.237.105.31 (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)
    41.237.109.206 (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)
    41.237.109.177 (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)
    41.237.109.213 (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)
    41.237.96.34 (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)
    41.237.100.67 (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)
    41.237.104.34 (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)
    41.237.97.250 (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)
    41.237.103.39 (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)
    41.234.18.252 (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)
    41.237.109.141 (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)
    41.234.19.243 (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)
    41.237.102.57 (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)
    • The the general blacklisting of the sites link is  Done. I've whitelisted this specific link, http://www.adbrite.com/index.php , for use in AdBrite article only. Variations other than the format above, will not work or be linkable.--Hu12 (talk) 03:21, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    redtube.com

    Currently on the xlinkbot list, I think it should be upgraded here as there are some non-new users adding it. It's even led to an OTRS complaint. Stifle (talk) 08:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    See also - Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2008_Archive_Jan_1.5#http:.2F.2Fspam.redtube.com
    See also - Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/redtube.com
     Done--Hu12 (talk) 19:17, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    chinatouristmaps.com

    chinatouristmaps.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

    Frequently spammed across numerous pages; recent examples just from en:Mount Huang are [1][2][3][4] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjanag (talk • contribs) 03:09, 8 July 2009

    Accounts

    Guilinivan (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)
    Lavender2009 (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)
    116.1.40.19 (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)
    116.1.112.194 (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)
    116.1.38.165 (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)
    116.1.36.173 (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)
    222.217.114.146 (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)
    116.1.43.236 (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)
     Done--Hu12 (talk) 03:02, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    learnislamicfinance.com

    learnislamicfinance.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

    Frequently spammed on Islamic finance and Islamic economic jurisprudence. XLinkBot insufficient as the company keeps reverting the bot's reverts. Doubtful that there could be any legitimate links to/use of the website on Wikipedia. Diffs: [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] --Cybercobra (talk) 23:13, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

     Done Prodego talk 04:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    adbrite.com affiliates

    adbrite.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

    Please see the report at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#Affiliate tagged adbrite.com URLs. The root URL is legitimate to link in the article AdBrite, but there are frequent additions of affiliate links. It would be very useful if all links starting with adbrite.com/mb could be blacklisted, as those are affiliate-tagged links that should not be listed anywhere in Wikipedia. --bonadea contributions talk 18:33, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

     Done see MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#Adbrite_referral_spam--Hu12 (talk) 03:31, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Extreme abuse surveys

    See also - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/ResearchEditor/Archive
    See also - Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/ResearchEditor
    See also - Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Extreme_Abuse_Survey
    See also - Administrators' noticeboard case
    See also - off site canvasing on google groups
    Articles
    Extreme Abuse Surveys
    Ex-treme Abuse Survey
    Extreme Abuse Survey
    Extreme abuse surveys
    Extreme abuse survey
    Accounts

    Mathmajorette (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)
    Evetin (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)
    Baawip80 (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)
    Tn25dog (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)
    Gmif814 (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)
    Staggory (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)
    Raorino (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)
    Previewriver (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)
    Attafire (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)
    ResearchEditor (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)
    Extrabreeze (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)
    Brewopco (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)
    Turtleshell2go (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)
    Raspla42 (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)
    Toswi82 (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)
    Reccaban2 (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)
    Nmpras (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)
    Burgelt (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)
    Tn25dog (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)
    Msbvben (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)
    Donrus22 (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)
    Volpe16 (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)
    Gosar10 (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)
    TCEdd (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)
    Peditt4 (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)
    Ontur19 (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)
    Trucbuy (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)
    Chospol (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)
    Dersev (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)
    Aurep84 (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)
    Apoct28 (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)
    Artcast2 (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)
    Nocob5 (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)
    Umat4 (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)
    Colo2 (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)
    Llort22 (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)
    Johech (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)
    Gosar10 (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)
    Savatr (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)
    Scc655 (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)
    Uniterd (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)
    Mkres2 (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)
    Htn56 (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)
    Dramall (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)
    Iamdooser (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)
    Gruftma (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)
     Done--Hu12 (talk) 00:34, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    CITS Guilin

    Big long list of spammers, usually one link per spammer. See WikiProject Spam report MER-C 12:45, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    All  Done--Hu12 (talk) 17:25, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Forgot one. MER-C 08:04, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

     Done--Hu12 (talk) 17:35, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    jwsuretybonds.net

    link
    account

    The same IP user who was originally adding jwsuretybonds.com (which was previously blacklisted), is now adding a link to jwsuretybonds.net - hiding the link addition as a ref tag. [18]

    The site exists primarilly to promote a business (multiple links from the added "ref" to buy bonds) - any secondary value is minor. Also, the added ref does not directly support the content to which it presumably was claimed to cite. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:24, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

     Additional information needed. Previous blacklist case? do you have a link to it?
    Also IP's adding jwsuretybonds.com have added the following;
    Accounts
    216.178.84.198 (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)
    71.224.53.231 (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)
    87.194.150.244 (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)
    84.92.224.196 (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)
    This site is clearly a Link normally to be avoided and fails Wikipedias specific requirements of our External Links policy--Hu12 (talk) 18:12, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    The .com version of the site was blacklisted by TenOfAllTrades (talk · contribs) on Nov 14, 2008 (blacklisting / log).
    It appears to have been done based on postings to his talk page, now archived at User talk:TenOfAllTrades/archive13#Can commercial sites not be linked to? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:26, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    jwsuretybonds.net  Done. Obvious continued abuse, and an attempt to subvert the previous blacklisting of jwsuretybonds.com.
    Threats of continued disruption are Never acceptable. Thanks for the report. --Hu12 (talk) 18:50, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    russian-services.com spam

    Indefinitely blocked editor User:Greenlakes has been continuing to insert POV and COI statements and using his site as references using sockpuppets. It's clear blocking isn't going to be any help as he continues to use proxies to add his link spam.

    Main articles that are targeted:

    GraYoshi2x►talk 19:14, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Agree blocking hasn't stopped the abuse, and proxy attempts to use brute force over multiple article leaves few options.  Done--Hu12 (talk) 19:20, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    New linkspam addresses:

    GraYoshi2x►talk 00:35, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Adding both as they are simply redirecting url's to russian-services.com  Done--Hu12 (talk) 15:21, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    www.russianmilitarytrucks.com

    Account:
    80.41.174.250 (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) Link:
    www.russianmilitarytrucks.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 Please blacklist that spammer. Mieciu K (talk) 00:18, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    80.41.151.3 (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)
     Defer to WPSPAM. Best place for this Now. thanks for the report.--Hu12 (talk) 09:18, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    metal-observer.com

    Please see the WP spam entry:

    WikiProject Spam case

    The spam is being added by a long term abuser. Triplestop x3 17:17, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    This is the key information taken from the original discussion
    links
    accounts
    • NOTE: August 3, 2009 The IP above was blocked for 2 weeks for 3RR violations after repeatedly trying to re-insert the weblink to the amateur fansite.
    I updated this growing list on July 26, 2009. The Real Libs-speak politely 20:48, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Its function and purpose in being a reliable source is certainly in question. Looks as if there are 900 + links on wikipedia. Blacklisting could cause these articles to be un-editable, unless an article-space cleanup is done first. I'm sure more accounts may be found during the cleanup, so add them here. thanks--Hu12 (talk) 15:14, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I was linked here by the original user above (who was trying to remove the review used at Indestructible (Disturbed album)), who has only had one other person agree with him to ban it. The discussion linked at RSN seemed to me to have at least 2 or 3 others that would oppose any such action. I disagree with the action being taken prior to a more thorough discussion between editors who are here in good faith (I will not oppose that the IPs probably were not here in such a manner). That it has been contested before should suggest that a unilateral ban on the website would be unwise, at least until discussion has lead to firm consensus... --Izno (talk) 17:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Note The original discussion (there were actually 4 separate discussions) had many editors in agreement, including several Wiki-admins. The discussion and consensus to ban was over the site being used as either a source for reviews (non-professional reviews are not allowed re: WP:ALBUM and this site is clearly an amateur 'hobby' taken on by a furniture mover and a few of his unemployed friends)... it was also rejected as a reliable source since most of the attempts to use it as a reference came from quoting the amateur album reviews hosted by the site. The website is also under scrutiny from several music labels since it has been linked to an online file-sharing scandal where the site was pirating its advance release album copies and sharing them to online torrent link webhosts. And, as suggested by another administrator who was not involved with the original discussions, Wikipedia would be better off if the links were removed. Numerous editors have taken on this task and it it has now been pared down to less than 200 links left in Wiki mainspace. Cleanup of archives and talk pages can begin once the mainspace cleaning is done. The Real Libs-speak politely 21:55, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that we shouldn't be citing this website's album reviews or the articles written by it's "staff", however, I disagree that we should blacklist the entire website altogether. Currently, I know of two articles (In Flames and Mikael Stanne) that cite metal-observer.com in an appropriate manner. These two articles do not cite some amateur album review or some amateur article written by the website's staff, instead they cite interviews that were conducted with Mikael Stanne. The interview is being used on those aforementioned Wikipedia articles to cite statements attributed to Mikael Stanne and as such should be appropriate unless there is any sort of indication that the metal-observer.com staff fabricated the interview without Mikael Stanne's knowledge (which does not appear to be case). In the end, I politely ask that you assume a bit of good faith and realize that not all editors linking to that site are spammers. --Nova Weaver (talk) 22:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

     Done. Clear multi IP spam abuse. Also seems to fail Wikipedias specific inclusion requirements of our External Links policy, Verifiability Policy and Reliable Source guidelines. There are 109 mainspace links that still need to be removed. If a specific link is needed as a citation, an etablished editor can request it on the whitelist on a case-by-case basis, where the url can be demonstrated as a source because of its encyclopedic value in support of our encyclopedia pages.--Hu12 (talk) 00:07, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    aerobaticteam.blogspot.com

    aerobaticteam.blogspot.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

    More of the usual aerobatic team nonsense. See WikiProject Spam report MER-C 08:37, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

     Done--Hu12 (talk) 16:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    wavelengthsat.com

    Thanks in advance... — Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 02:08, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Multiple accounts, one gets blocked they create another. Clearly fails our External Links policy and is soley being added for the primary purpose of promoting their product in apparent violation of Conflict of interest and anti-spam guidelines. Done. Thanks--Hu12 (talk) 15:15, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    wikia.com

    Resolved
     – They have Identified the ad network sending the virus ads, and blacklisted that advertiser. All is well. Blacklisting is  Not done--Hu12 (talk) 19:41, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I agree with you however adding this might cause an inordinate amount of disruption. (links to open wikis are discouraged per WP:ELNO and Wikia hardly passes this guideline. It is also fails RS) Triplestop x3 02:45, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    • I don't know Greg. I agree with Triplestop that Wikia will fail WP:EL in the vast majority of cases, but that's not a reason to include it on the spamlist. The report you link to is from Wikipedia Review, where things are misreported or blown out of proportion on a regular basis. Assuming that the screen shots are genuine, it seems more likely to me that they represent a bug that simply hasn't been addressed yet. Keep in mind that many of the biggest web sites in existence, high-quality EL's, U.S. gov't sites, etc. have been victims of scams, hacking, and malware from time to time. Basing a decision on this one report would be highly irresponsible. (Though it would certainly be in keeping with MOARDRAMA!) -Pete (talk) 03:17, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I will investigate the matter further. Triplestop x3 03:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Considering that the evidence was presented by Wikipedia User:Krimpet (her track record), I would say that Peteforsyth ("things are misreported", "assuming that the screen shots are genuine") and Protonk ("need some amazing, thunderingly overwhelming evidence that claims made on WR with respect to wikia are true") owe Krimpet an apology. -- Thekohser
    I owe no one an apology. How does my statement disparage Krimpet? That site is still a cesspool of whiners, malcontents and histrionics even if some wonderful people comment there as well. If someone I otherwise respect wrote an editorial for the Weekly Standard, I would still cast a cautious eye over the piece. If some third party evidence surfaces that wikia is introducing malware on any scale above minuscule, we can talk about putting it on the blacklist. And when we do discuss it, we can discuss the fact that blacklisting wikia would break thousands, if not tens of thousands, of links immediately. Protonk (talk) 18:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Not surprising you'd think you owe nobody an apology if you're going to sweepingly call the #1 site for thoughtful criticism of Wikipedia a "cesspool of whiners, malcontents and histrionics". Meanwhile, I find it ironic and hilarious that you see no problem with the self-described state of affairs, that Wikipedia is infested with "tens of thousands" of links to a privately-held website where more wikis than not are in a state of embryonic, dilapidated disrepair with few to no productive contributors. But, for you, Wikipedia Review is the big problem, not Wikia. I think I've got it now. Thanks, Protonk. -- Thekohser 20:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    If as you both assert, there are tens of thousands of links to Wikia on Wikipedia, that strikes me as cause for concern. But the issue should be evaluated for itself, before radical solutions like spam blacklisting are discussed. I think it would be worthwhile, for instance, to start an RfC about Wikia links, supported with some research into the number and nature of the links, whether they are NOFOLLOWed like other external links, etc. -Pete (talk) 20:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, seeing as the MAXDRAMA party is apparently over, I'm going to pass on snacking on the "apology" bait. But entirely apart from the credibility of the source: we have an accusation, followed by a recommended action. What is missing in between, which would be needed regardless of the source of the accusation, is an evaluation of the accuracy of the accusation. In a court, this would be called a "trial." Here, a term like "responsible due diligence" might apply better. -Pete (talk) 20:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    WR isn't the 'big problem'. It's a non-issue. Any site that is, in 2009, still bent out of shape about Daniel Brandt is not a problem, it's an anachronism. Protonk (talk) 23:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Protonk, can we also add the names "Siegenthaler" and "Essjay" as indicators of anachronism in 2009? -->David Shankbone 17:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I can't find any malicious ads on there because I have many protections enabled. Maybe everyone could go over and check it out? Triplestop x3 15:51, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Barring solid evidence of ongoing issues with malicious adverts, I'd say put it on XLinkBot's revert list - but that would be redundant, since it's already there. It was added in Feb 2009. --Versageek 21:07, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Several Wikia users have reported seeing these adverts here and the staff say that they are aware of the problem. SUL (talk) 22:26, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Given that this isn't deliberate and that Wikia is aware of and attempting to deal with this problem, this seems massively overblown. no need to add to the blacklist. Now, can we get back to actual editing please? JoshuaZ (talk) 23:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, please. -Pete (talk)
    I'm sorry, Joshua, Pete, I have to disagree. If Wikia is still serving virus infected ads (the latest report is TODAY ie, the 28th), it's a bad idea not to at least temporarily block out Wikia until they can get their house in order. It doesn't feel right to send folks to a site that is (unknowingly, agreed) facilitating people getting their computers hijacked. SirFozzie (talk) 20:31, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I appreciate where you're coming from, SirFozzie. But I'm not sure I see a practical solution for what you're describing. Adding Wikia to the spam blacklist, if I understand correctly, would not do anything to current links...it would simply prevent NEW links from being added. Mass-removing Wikia links would be a pretty major project, and would not be reversible (again, somebody correct me if I'm wrong) -- so it's hard to imagine how it could be done in a termporary way as you suggest.
    Also, I'm not sure it's our responsibility to take care of people beyond the confines of Wikipedia. If they are running unprotected Windows machines that can't detect this sort of malware, that's unfortunate, but it's really beyond our ability to prevent that sort of problem. Also, again -- top web sites on the level of NYtimes.com and cnn.com have had this sort of issue in the past...should we really be taking on responsibility for removing links to any site that might be temporarily infected with a virus? -Pete (talk) 21:15, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    The difference is that Wikia is part of the extended "Family", so to speak. In the eyes of the public, they're (Wiki/Wikia) pretty much the same thing, and I really do not want to see "Wikipedia knowingly serves virus infected pages" in the press. We get enough bad press as is. SirFozzie (talk) 22:02, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    That makes sense, and I can't disagree. I'm open to exploring ideas about what to do about this. But for the reasons I mentioned above, I'm pretty sure the spam blacklist is the wrong tool for the job. Not sure what the right one would be. Perhaps it would be worth getting in touch directly with the Foundation? I'd imagine Jay Walsh (Communications Director) would be interested to hear. Also, it's possible that a request from the Foundation might nudge Wikia toward pursuing a solution more aggressively... -Pete (talk) 23:21, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed, there doesn't seem to be much action being taken on the Wikia side, and the longer this issue goes, the more damage can be done... I was thinking about posting something on Jimbo's talk page, but was worried that it would be seen as a reason to continue the drama. Any other folks we can try? SirFozzie (talk) 23:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Protocol would normally dictate we block immediately in cases of virus' ect. (Temporarily until resolved/or its safe). I see no indication that this is fixed and evidence there is a issue. There are currently 16,615 Wikia links on en.Wikipedia, with potentialy the equal amount of links on our 700+ Wikimedia Foundation wikis (we could be looking at over 10 million links +). This is no doubt also affecting the 3000+ Wikia wikis. This is beyond the scope of controllability by us on the English or meta Wikipedia. Foundation needs to be notified. What a pickle...--Hu12 (talk) 16:04, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    The problem seems to be that Wikia has sold their unwanted ad space to some of the bottom-feeder ad networks. "pointroll.com" seems to be one of the offenders. There may be others. (Search for "pointroll.com" and "spyware" for background.) --John Nagle (talk) 20:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    < (just reading up on this having missed it) this seems to be the latest news. Privatemusings (talk) 00:00, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Whew! Good for Wikia! Now, their 16,000+ external links from Wikipedia are safe and sound. I am so relieved for Jimbo and his financial backers! -- Thekohser 02:28, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    That says that Wikia found one unidentified bad advertiser and claims this means all of them have been eliminated. I'd suggest continuing to look for trouble for a week or so to verify that. --John Nagle (talk) 04:34, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I disagree that it should be added. Wikia is probably the largest wiki farm on the web. About WP:ELNO, guideline # 12, it may be an open wiki, but it has a community almost as big as Wikipedia. How could a wiki host be spam? Plus, there are some external links to Wikia. If we have an article about it, it doesn't make much sense to add it as spam. There may be ads on Wikia, but I'm sure a whole bunch of other non-spam external links have ads. Alxeedo TALK

    deepcreekvacay.com

    There have been several new users who've added this and other vacation related websites to Deep Creek Lake State Park over several months. The registered accounts got tired of me threatening them with spamblocks, and the ip seems to jump around (sometimes registered to Long and Foster, sometimes just as a bare commercial ISP on Whois). I'm torn between just semi protecting the article and requesting the blacklist, but since I don't see that the link would ever be to a site that meets WP:EL I think this is probably the best course. Syrthiss (talk) 12:37, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Accounts
    68.82.200.34 (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)
    71.230.67.5 (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)
    71.61.225.254 (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)
    deepcreekvacations.com
    Accounts
    Ravenfan1976 (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)
    Ravenfan76 (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)
    Jasonthurman (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)
    71.61.225.97 (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)
    DeepCreekHotProperties.com
    Accounts
    69.89.169.65 (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)
    65.122.111.70 (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)
    69.89.168.88 (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)
    71.61.226.128 (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)
    Quite a bit of disruption on that page, I've added to this request the other serial offenders.  Done--Hu12 (talk) 19:35, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    worldnews.com.ar

    worldnews.com.ar: Linksearch en - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C Cross-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Local - COIBot-XWiki - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.org • Live link: http://www.worldnews.com.ar

    Frequently spammed on World & Online Journalism and has been since last year by IPs ( all 190.xxx.xxx.xxx). The user is now reverting XLinkbot to try to make the spam stick. With this edit, the spam remained from July 21 until August until I caught it again. ..and again last night,[19].

    worldnews.com.ar (*|search current) - These are just the spam attempts since being listed on XLinkbot.

    This game of whack-a-mole has gotten very old...please help. Cheers
    ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 10:55, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    If they resort to reverting XLinkBot in this way .. plus Added. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:15, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    You just made my Christmas list...very appreciated. 8^D
    ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 11:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Software test certification spam: testinside.com, more

    Spam for Cisco Career Certifications test certification.. but it's being spammed to any article with "cisco" in the title, such as Cisco, Texas, Cisco Adler, or The Cisco Kid. I've blocked the IP, but they'll be back, and the links add no value. I'd add to the blacklist but I don't want to break it :-) tedder (talk) 05:24, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    More
    See also - Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2009_Archive_Jul_1#testinside.com
    Accounts
    Annared001 (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)
    218.104.48.38 (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)
    Obvious and persistant spamming. Also Moving ones own link"UP" is never a sign of good faith.  Done--Hu12 (talk) 17:13, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Scanlation websites

    These websites are distribution channels for copyright violating materials known as scanlations. Editors have attempted to sneak these links into the external links sections, user pages, or use them as pseudo-references. In a few cases, images from these copyvio websites have been uploaded to Wikipedia. Some of these links are preemptive as when the main sites are blacklisted, edits will attempt to switch to other sites. Even with that in mind, this list is hardly expansive and is only from the first three pages of Google hits using the search term "read manga online" along with a few other known scanlation websites. --Farix (Talk) 23:10, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm not sure we should be adding preemptive ones without any serious reason. I think such measures should be reserved for things like virus threats otherwise that sets a high president for blacklisting which would go against WP:CENSOR's spirit, if not word. For the non-pre-emitive ones, I do agree with Farix.陣内Jinnai 03:13, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    From WP:NOTCENSORED: Content that is judged to violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy, or that violates other Wikipedia policies (especially neutral point of view) or the laws of the U.S. state of Florida where Wikipedia's servers are hosted, will also be removed.
    Since linking to external websites that contain material that is in violation of the creator's copyright is a violation of Wikipedia policy (WP:COPYLINK), this would not be covered by Wikipedia's anti-censorship policy. --Farix (Talk) 19:07, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Most of those do indeed host copyviolating manga scanlations, either as a scanlation group's website or (more often) by hosting scanlations done by same, but I know of two of them that do not: Manganews.net hosts a fair amount of (non-reliable) reviews of manga and well as news items in addition to indexing scanlators, but is not itself a distribution channel; mangaupdates.com is mostly a scanlation tracker, but again, is not itself a distribution channel. —Quasirandom (talk) 03:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Both site actually do link to torrent for scanlations when they are available as well as the scanlation's homepage here where the scanlation can be obtained. anidb.info is already on the blacklist for similar reasons relating to fansubs, though they have changed their url to anidb.net. --Farix (Talk) 12:47, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    A lot of sites link to copyrighted material, lots of unreliable and sometimes reliable: blogs, search engines, news sites, etc.陣内Jinnai 16:12, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    And? While we can't blacklist every website/blog/forum that links to copyright violation material, at the very least we should blacklist the major hubs of such links. --Farix (Talk) 18:52, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm neutral while those websites give access or help to access contents protected by copyright doing a such list is difficult to maintain and is somewhat shouting a statement like "Wikipedia censors scanlation". --KrebMarkt 17:15, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia already has a policy against linking to websites with material that is in violation of the creator's copyright. Adding these to the blacklist is just a method to enforce a pre-existing ban. --Farix (Talk) 18:52, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Read that policy. First it only pertains to sites that host the copyright material itself (it even spells it out explicititly). Sites containing links do not fall under that. Second, it still provides for context, such as for an article on the site itself or a section which directly relates to that. However, in the latter I can't see that as being likely as most news outlets do not talk about anything specifically for scantalations (a few talk about specific fansub groups). So I could give you the latter part given I doubt any of these are notable, but the former is not covered by policy. And I also don't believe in pre-banning excpet when it deals with Wikipedia's system integrity.陣内Jinnai 22:06, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    godakshin.com

    godakshin.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

    spammer

    Go Dakshin is your friendly South India travel community. Find comprehensive South India travel guides, photos, videos, tips and much more here You can also connect with friends and family through the social networking features.

    Most recent example: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Agatti_Island&diff=prev&oldid=307564842

    58.8.11.123 (talk) 17:19, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    seems to have stoped since the report, lets monitor these for now. Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#godakshin.com  Not done--Hu12 (talk) 14:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    bpled.com

    bpled.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

    IP spammer added this site on Advertising, see this edit. Momo san Gespräch 14:07, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    95.98.198.73 (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)
    77.249.49.215 (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)
    Googledark (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)
    188.89.78.144 (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)
    Mostly looks like vandalism, however the useraccount and the remaining IP's similarly mark the additions as "minor". Suspicious, but may not be enough for a blacklisting. Seems these have been reverted, if continues please report any new additions.--Hu12 (talk) 14:43, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Beer Judge Certification Program

    Abusive sockpupptry. See WikiProject Spam report MER-C 04:32, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Accounts

    I am a beer judge (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)
    Bjcplinkstays (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)
    Morennmore (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)
    Cantstopbjcp (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)
    Living vector (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)
    Dabiiigtimers (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)
    Morennmore (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)
    Bjcpbjcpbjcp (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)
    Scensaless (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)
    Mademangg (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)
    Isasurvivor (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)
    Marcusjankins (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)
    Dasacrtic (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)
    Thekingofqueeens (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)
    Onemorebiigtime (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)
    Brickshiithouse (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)
    Shoelessjoeboy (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)
    BJCP (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)
    Awyeahhereiis (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)
    The420Rabbi (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)
    Ssmalalk (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)
    Tizer cuut (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)
    Brazzersbrazzers (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)
    Perapera (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)
    Miklebe (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)
    Jfkdalsls (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)
    Surviving vector (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)
    76.17.142.216 (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)
    Giiiiiiiiiinenna (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)
    Brickshiithouse (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)
    Hoodyhooo (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)
    Yosheko (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)
    ConsensusToKeepBJCP (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)
    KeepTheBJCP (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)
    207.231.95.97 (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)
    Betty Logan (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)
     Done--Hu12 (talk) 16:01, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Completed additions

    Proposed removals

    www.army-guide.com

    The barmy-quide blocks it though. Flayer (talk) 12:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Not quite, it's blocked because of spamming. Can you explain why we should not expect this to restart if we deblacklist the site? Stifle (talk) 17:55, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmmm... No. But I've been reading this site for a while lately and everything was fine. Flayer (talk) 20:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry to jump in here, but I'm not sure why this site is blacklisted for spam. I reviewed the requirements for listing it as spam, and it doesn't seem to meet any. It was posted frequently in external links, but this appears to have been done by one or two 'enthusiastic' users with 'good intentions' (providing additional sources on the topic), which perhaps triggered the initial fear that this was a spam link. If you look at the links posted, they were all relevant to the page that they were posted in. If you look at the contributions of the people who posted them, they're on a wide variety of topics, not just one's associated with the site in question... so it doesn't appear to be for the sake of advertising or a bot (really, what could an 'army guide' have to do with wrestling?). Finally, yes, this site was posted frequently, but it's an extensive site, so it can be realistically associated with many articles here at Wikipedia. -Jonathon A H (talk) 21:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    babynology.com

    contains information about origins of names given to babies.

    I was editing a pre-existing article that included a list of individuals. One person had two "a.k.a."s, one of which seemed to me as unlikely. A google search brought me to babynology.com and I learned that the TWO meanings in one language (which I don't know) were similar to the two meanings in another (which I know beyond simple basic-tourist level). One meaning helped explained something that prior editors of the article had overlooked.

    Babynology was truly helpful, in that I had jumped to ONE of the pair(s) of meanings, while overlooking the other.

    I made the edit but, to support it, had to use a "satisfice" -- i.e. not the best source. To avoid possibly copying copyright information, I wrote my own blended summary, but I think that the wikipedia English user community loses on this matter; a link to babynology would for some people be educational on this matter.

    It doesn't seem too likely that a site such as THIS (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22babynology.com%22 - see self-description), which is ranked by Alexa and Quantcast would risk what it has.

    Interestingly I think this was the site I was unsuccessful at linking to back in 2008, but in that case I found what I considered a good source and let it go. (The name of THAT site had BABY &/or NAME in its URL).

    If there's an ADMIN willing to review this during spare CPU cycles, it would be a service. Dad7 (talk) 19:44, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    See also - Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2008_Archive_Apr_2#Adsense_pub-9029159188744814
    See also - MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/June_2008#Live2Support_Inc._spam_on_Wikipedia
    Based on the abuse, I'm reluctant to remove the entire domain. If a specific link is needed as a citation, you can request it on the whitelist on a case-by-case basis, where the url can be demonstrated as an appropriate source (in an appropriate context). Thanks  Defer to Whitelist--Hu12 (talk) 19:37, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for responding. I looked, and what I see is this (#1) there is a Google Ad Sense Ad#. Since this web site is about baby names, depending on the baby name being researched, different Google ads might be supplied. To quote from above in this list re "Army-Guide" :
    Quote: It [i.e. Army Guide] was posted frequently in external links, but this appears to have been done by one or two "enthusiastic" users with "good intentions" (providing additional sources on the topic), which perhaps triggered the initial fear that this was a spam link. If you look at the links posted, they were all relevant to the page that they were posted in. If you look at the contributions of the people who posted them, they're on a wide variety of topics, not just associated with the site in question... so it doesn't appear to be for the sake of advertising or a bot ... Finally, yes, this site was posted frequently, but it's an extensive site, so it can be realistically associated with many articles here at Wikipedia.
    If there are many aspects to the Army (including families who move along), why not consider that as the explanation. More people have a name than are members of the army. If a mere 17% of editors writing about someone with a name linked to Babynology.com, then ... Something Pretty Amazing, Methinks ... As for 17%, it's just a number
    (#2) I looked at the Google list per your suggestion. It seems that people around the world use it. Here's one from the other side of "The Pond" -- http://www.circumcisionlondon.co.uk/Naming_the_Baby.html
    (#3) I seem to recall hearing that, just as traveling one way without luggage may seem suspicious to the powers that be, registering a site for just one year ditto. Babynology was created 2003, expires 2012-12-09, over 3 years from now, per http://who.godaddy.com/WhoIs.aspx?domain=babynology.com&prog_id=godaddy


    While this is not urgent, as I said before re Satisfice, but could you (please) at least tell me what about this site was "spammy" (much of the data in the archive has been deleted, so I was limited in what I could read of what you referred me to) Dad7 (talk) 19:45, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia owes much of its success to its openness. However, that very openness sometimes attracts people who seek to exploit the site. In this case, as in most cases - spam is defined not so much by the content of the site, as by the behavior of the individuals adding the links. This is a case of a company spamming at least 5 of their domains (including babynology.com) under multiple accounts, over multiple pages, despite community disapproval and in violation of multiple policies. The big picture showed someone who abused Wikipedia to promote their own interests. For the same reason the other administrators added this site, I see no indication the spamming will not resume if unblocked. Additionaly, there also seems to be plenty of reasonable alternatives to this site.  Not done. As suggested above, If a specific link is needed as a citation, feel free to request it on the whitelist on a case-by-case basis. thanks.--Hu12 (talk) 08:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    endritualabuse.org, etal

    I am a California licensed psychologist and have just noticed that my website, endritualabuse.org, has been blacklisted, as well as the websites, extreme-abuse-survey.net and ritualabuse.us , all of which provide information about ritual abuse. These three resources have been of tremendous value to victims of ritual abuse and to therapists and clergy helping victims. I cannot fathom any legitimate basis for wikipedia prohibiting access to these websites. There is absolutely no basis to suspect any wrongdoing or criminal activity on any of these three websites. These websites are dedicated to helping victims of violent crime. There is no basis to deny that such crimes occur. Criminal convictions of crimes involving ritual elements are well-documented, such as the May 2006 conviction of Father Gerald Robinson for the 1980 murder of Sister Margaret Ann Pahl. I personally correspond with a few hundred legitimate psychotherapists, internationally, who treat these victims. I urge wikipedia to quickly reverse the blacklisting of these websites. Ellen P. Lacter, Ph.D. tl|Done/archives/July/2009/Proposed removals|archived Ellenlacter (talk) 00:52, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    • Background including " mass spamming" and sockpuppetry:
    See also - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/ResearchEditor/Archive
    See also - Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/ResearchEditor
    See also - Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Extreme_Abuse_Survey
    See also - Administrators' noticeboard case
    See also - off-wiki canvassing
    Spam Articles
    Extreme Abuse Surveys
    Ex-treme Abuse Survey
    Extreme Abuse Survey
    Extreme abuse surveys
    Extreme abuse survey
    Accounts
    ResearchEditor (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)
    Mathmajorette (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)
    Evetin (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)
    Baawip80 (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)
    Tn25dog (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)
    Gmif814 (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)
    Staggory (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)
    Raorino (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)
    Previewriver (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)
    Attafire (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)
    Extrabreeze (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)
    Brewopco (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)
    Turtleshell2go (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)
    Raspla42 (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)
    Toswi82 (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)
    Reccaban2 (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)
    Nmpras (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)
    Burgelt (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)
    Tn25dog (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)
    Msbvben (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)
    Donrus22 (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)
    Volpe16 (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)
    Gosar10 (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)
    TCEdd (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)
    Peditt4 (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)
    Ontur19 (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)
    Trucbuy (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)
    Chospol (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)
    Dersev (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)
    Aurep84 (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)
    Apoct28 (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)
    Artcast2 (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)
    Nocob5 (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)
    Umat4 (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)
    Colo2 (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)
    Llort22 (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)
    Johech (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)
    Gosar10 (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)
    Savatr (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)
    Scc655 (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)
    Uniterd (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)
    Mkres2 (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)
    Htn56 (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)
    Dramall (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)
    Iamdooser (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)
    Gruftma (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)
    Wikipedia violations include, but not limited to

    Typically, we do not remove domains from the spam blacklist in response to site-owners' requests. Instead, we de-blacklist sites when trusted, high-volume editors request the use of blacklisted links because of their encyclopedic value in support of our encyclopedia pages. If such an editor asks to use your blacklisted links, I'm sure the request will be carefully considered. Equally Wikipedia is not a soapbox nor is it a place to to promote your sites[20][21][22].--Hu12 (talk) 17:42, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    pokerverdict.com

    Please remove this useful website from the blacklist. I had the following conversation with the person who originally suggested that the website be blacklisted:

    This discussion originally took place here.

    You think that Poker Verdict is an unreliable source? They have some useful information, especially on players; the biggest hurdle is proving their reliability, though. It might be wise to contact them to determine how and where they get their information from, etc. Gary King (talk) 01:48, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    No, I think they are generally a reliable source. But they created nine spam articles last year for the "November Nine", which they used solely to spam their website as a "reference", basically only referencing that the person made the final table, which is an obvious fact available everywhere. The company that owns them has several other publications/websites which they have spammed here. So... while the site seems okay in general, their egregious single-purpose spamming is way over the spam line. 2005 (talk) 02:25, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, well the website is blacklisted, so I was going to use it for a few articles but then noticed that it is blacklisted. Do you think it's safe to remove it from the blacklist? There are other ways of preventing people from adding the same URL over and over again; for instance, their accounts can be blocked, or the articles in question can be semiprotected—which might be more effective if only a small number of articles are being bombarded with these URLs. Gary King (talk) 03:28, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I would not object to it being unblacklisted. It was just a large pain at the time, because these guys are shameless, and like I said, some of their other sites are blacklisted. I suppose it would be fine to unblacklist it, but blacklist again if they get too spammy again in the future. 2005 (talk) 03:56, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Gary King (talk) 04:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    • The request does not address the reasons for blacklisting, and there is no evidence of reliability, peer-review, editorial policy etc. Do you have an example of an article where it provides a provably reliable source? Guy (Help!) 16:58, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      •  Not done due to lack of reply. Stifle (talk) 17:27, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • At the very least, can't this site be used as an External link for poker player profiles, etc.? Gary King (talk) 01:31, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • Gary, I suggest that you request the admin, Stifle, who denied the request, that it be reconsidered, particularly given that the only reason given for denying it was lack of response. ArbComm is in the process of clarifying blacklisting principles, and "not reliable" isn't a legitimate reason for blacklisting; you may or may not have come up with a possible legitimate usage, but that's a matter for those involved with articles to determine. When the clarification passes (it has six votes in favor, none opposed, with four net votes required to pass; it seems unlikely that the rest of the arbitrators are going to jump in and shoot it down), any admin can reverse this as no longer complying with guidelines, and maybe even before that. But it's a courtesy to the admin who declined to ask him. The relevant phrase from the ruling: Blacklisting is not to be used to enforce content decisions. Source reliability is a content decision. --Abd (talk) 13:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • I suggest that we first look into the spamming that happened with this link .. 21 September 2007 - 14 February 200827 Augustus 2008 .. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:42, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • Looked a bit better. See also 2005's concern "It was just a large pain at the time, because these guys are shameless, and like I said, some of their other sites are blacklisted.", I'll look into better later. Abd, why do you pull "..and "not reliable" isn't a legitimate reason for blacklisting" into here? Who said that it was blacklisted because of that? --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:14, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I see enough reason to blacklist this site, these three editors (top three users) make up ~75% (51 of 65) of the linkadditions I have in the database (the IP mainly adding it indifferently to many pages). However, we are half a year further, and as it seems a reliable source (I'll go with 2005's suggestion here), we could add this to User:XLinkBot and remove it here, but keeping in mind that if new (or the same) SPA's appear, that this may be a better place, using specific whitelisting instead. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:15, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    With only three accounts spamming the URL, it seems like simply warning those accounts and/or blocking might be a better option. Gary King (talk) 02:35, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Concur with Beetstra on transferring this to XLinkBot. Stifle (talk) 08:22, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    So what's the status on this? Gary King (talk) 15:14, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Bump? Gary King (talk) 18:36, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    pokerplayermagazine.co.uk

    This is the website of a legitimate poker magazine, the British Poker Player Magazine, published by Dennis Publishing, one of the world's leading independent publishers. They publish other reputable British magazines, including MacUser, Computer Shopper, and Custom PC. Gary King (talk) 19:41, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Gary asked about this at the Poker Project before coming here. He forgot to mention that Dennis Publishing also publishes Maxim magazine. We are not dealing with a publisher who is known for producing "National Enquirer" but rather a legit publisher... and Poker Player Magazine is a legit publication.---Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 20:37, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    All Dennis Publishing magazines were blocked because of spamming from COI and sockpuppet accounts. I'm not familiar with the whole history, but the above link is one place it is talked about. All their magazines are of equal quality so this particular one should not be unblocked unless the COI block of them all is reversed. 2005 (talk) 22:13, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I can appreciate that... I guess. If it is worth publishing, then it can probably be found elsewhere. While PPM is a reputable magazine, I would not rank it among the top 3 or 4 (Bluff, Cardplayer, and Allin are all, IMO, better.---Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 22:20, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    See also → Dennis Publishing COI Spam (may)
    See also → Magazine spam (Oct)
    Accounts
    Chrismarais (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
    212.117.228.133 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) "Public network for Dennis Publishing "
    82.45.132.196 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

    194.205.219.2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
    Ali_strachan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    IP's 212.117.228.133 (registered to Dennis Publishing) and 82.45.132.196 are still actively promoting Dennis Publishing material in clear violation of our Conflict of interest and anti-spam guidelines. The scope of breadth of abuse by Dennis Publishing is such that it will most certainly continue if removed. no Declined. If a specific link is needed as a citation, an etablished editor can request it on the whitelist on a case-by-case basis, where the url can be demonstrated as an appropriate source. --Hu12 (talk) 03:02, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    oldunreal.com

    The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

    I noticed that the patch information in the Unreal article's infobar was unsourced, so I wanted to add citations for the 226f and the 227f unofficial patches. I attempted to add the reference tags only to meet with the message that my edit had been blocked because of a spam filter. Not really sure why this is on the spam list...oldunreal.com is a community site supporting the classic game Unreal, and is the source of the 227f patch mentioned in the infobar. They are not selling services or promoting anything...as far as I know? They are just a bunch of people trying to maintain a classic game. I may be wrong but I think they are the last major fan site still standing, so anyone wanting up-to-date citations is going to have a difficult time finding them elsewhere; the forums, wiki, and other information on the site are useful sources that I'm sure would be of further help to someone with an interest in maintaining this article... at any rate, I needed to cite them as a source and was not able to, hence I am requesting that this site be removed from the blacklist. For reference, here's the line I tried to edit in the article: 

    | version      = 226f<ref>Epic Megagames.  [http://unreal.epicgames.com/versions.htm "Unreal: Latest Version"] updated July 13th, 2000; retrieved July 27th, 2009</ref>, 227f (unofficial)<ref>Old Unreal, [http://www.oldunreal.com/wiki/index.php?title=227_release_notes "227 Release Notes"] updated May 14th, 2009; retrieved July 27th, 2009.</ref>
    Also for reference, the current entry in the local blacklist: 
    \boldunreal\.com\b

    Thank you,

    Joren (talk) 13:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Origional case
    Seems this has been a problematic for the article Unreal, with a disturbing history of abuse, including off-Wikipedia soliciting to spam the link. Wikipedia is not a Userguide for posting patch downloads. Currently I'm not convinced the problem will not continue if oldunreal.com was removed from the list. Would seem there are other reasonable Reliable and Verifiable alternatives available. --Hu12 (talk) 15:32, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh really? Was not aware of that. Are you familiar with this history? It seems kind of draconian to say "we are not allowed to cite site xyz" because of some past instance where people wanted to spam the link. Not sure what to think about this... in any event, it nonetheless stands that the current patch information is unsourced. It doesn't do for an article to say "current version is x.xx" without a reference. Wikipedia may not be a manual, but it does need to have verifiable information.Joren (talk) 20:32, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, upon re-reading your comment I see I failed to notice the link you'd helpfully provided. After reading it... oh dear, I see you are right about the spam thing having been an issue. "If not, I will have people spam the royal shit out of the unreal wiki article." That's disturbing... kind of sad to see them shoot themselves in the foot like that (shakes head)... however... I still believe oldunreal is a good and notable source of information, regardless of how idiotic some of their community may have been at one time. There are plenty of articles on Wikipedia that end up citing people that have been hostile to Wikipedia in the past... one of the web-comics I've read, Ugly Hill, had a similar issue if I recall; the article was nominated for deletion and the webcomic's author sent a bunch of fan-drones to Wikipedia to protest. They voted to keep the article notwithstanding the author's ham-fisted attempts to influence Wikipedia, and I think it speaks well for us that we can be dispassionate about it and ignore the past emotional baggage from those incidents. Heck, I'd be willing to go on their forums and explain things to them if it came to that... I just don't want to see people unable to use them as a source if that helps to improve an article.
    So here's an alternative I'd propose: since the abusive editing appears to have been IP-based, and half a year ago, why not remove the website and if the problem occurs again, semi-protect the article. This will allow registered users to use them as a citation source, but stem the tide of spam. It has been half a year since this happened... perhaps it has died down by now? And if it hasn't, we can reach for semi-protection since the abuse is only related to one article and anonymous IPs. What do you think? Joren (talk) 20:49, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    While I appreciate your intentions, Blocks exist to protect the project from harm, and reduce likely future problems. There has been significant disruption, abuse and repeating inappropriate behavior along with major breaches of policy associated with oldunreal.com. Clearly evidenced Off wiki threats of disruption, and prior spam attacks is not sufficient evidence this will not continue if un-listed. To insure this problem won't occur again, this is no Declined. Additionaly, semi-protecting the page when there is no reason to do so would unecessarily lock out many good faith editors. --Hu12 (talk) 22:00, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Just to clarify, I was not proposing semi-protection unless the abuse resumed :) My instinct is that things be free and open; there should be restrictions only if there is a problem. I appreciate your concern about not locking out good faith editors, and I share it - I see myself as a good faith editor, and I feel I was unnecessarily locked out by this block. This restriction has been in place for half a year... it seems harsh that because of edit-warring on one article, the site is banned from all of English Wikipedia, forever; no one anywhere can cite them as a source. Would there be harm in unblocking it on a trial basis, and seeing if the abuse resumes? It has been half a year, which is a pretty significant cool-down period, and I would be willing to monitor the article myself and report back if it resumed. If you doubt my willingness, please check the history of the Wang Dan article, a similar case of an editorial news site being spammed that required semi-protection. I repeat - I'd be willing to make things clear to them. Back in the day, I used to be a pretty obsessed Unreal guy; I think I can speak their language ;) Joren (talk) 22:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    It's been a while, and I noticed my last reply did not get a response. While I respect the reasons stated for leaving it on the list, I still believe that:
    1. The status quo is locking out good-faith edits (myself included), and therefore a lighter remedy should be pursued
    2. I'm willing to monitor the article to see if the abuse resumes after removing the entry from the blacklist.
    3. If the abuse DOES resume, semi-protection is a better remedy anyway since the abuse only involves anonymous IPs on a single article.
    I am concerned that maintaining it on the wiki-wide list for this long (half a year!) could be seen as spiteful and may be creating unnecessary enemies, and hope that this proposed course of action would be more conducive to maintaining a better atmosphere for editing this article. I appreciate the consideration given so far by Hu12, and I'd also like to see some others weigh in on this. Thank you, Joren (talk) 03:33, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Hyperbole or or repeatedly asking until you get an opinion you like, isn't grounds for delisting, nor can you assure against its return. I'm now becoming concerned as few people will continue to argue tendentiously in pursuit of a certain point, topics in which they have no connection. As stated above There has been significant disruption, abuse and repeating inappropriate behavior along with major breaches of policy associated with oldunreal.com[23].
    Clearly evidenced Off wiki threats of disruption, prior spam attacks and heavily used Meatpuppets by the site owners is sufficient evidence this will continue if un-listed. Based on Unreal's history it would appear the disruption continues currently with repeated anon insertions of oldunreal.com's patch[24][25]. In addition to the above, it's an unofficial fansite / fourum / wiki, which does not meet Wikipedias inclusion criteria of the External Links policy, Verifiability Policy and Reliable Source guidelines. Policies and guidelines are community standards that have widespread community support and exist to protect the project from harm, and reduce future problems. While you may not like those foregoing facts, it is not in Wikipedia's interests to invite such disruption. Equally Wikipedia is not a Userguide for posting links to patch downloads for games. To insure this disruption won't occur again, this is still no Declined. thank you for your time.--Hu12 (talk) 16:39, 20 August 2009 (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.travel 2 macedonia.com.mk

    Dear Wikipedia admins,

    We have already contact Mr. Dirk Beetstra (user:Beetstra).

    as we are turning into a tourism agency, we need to straight things up here, about the spamblacklist. It was 2 years ago some kid we hired, managed somehow to place this very important Macedoninan domain into wikipedia's blacklist. We have spoken with him, since we have dismissed him and he has given your contact (Dirk Beetstra). Please can you explain in details about the spam removal procedure, since the travel2macedonia domain is of great value for Republic of Macedonia.

    Thank you, Travel2Macedonia general manager contact[AT]travel 2 macedonia.com.mk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.28.10.119 (talk) 08:55, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I have pointed this user to the blacklist on meta, where it is listed: m:Talk:Spam blacklist. Here no Declined. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:46, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


    teamicogamers.blogspot.com

    This is a legitimate blog focused around the video game developer Team ICO. I have seen no signs of spam and the folks here are all about keeping fans of the video games updated with the latest information. I'd like to create a link to this page for "The Last Guardian" Wiki page. --TheRedFall (talk) 17:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Blogs are Links normally to be avoided, as are fan sites. Would also seem to fail Wikipedias specific requirements of our Verifiability Policy and Reliable Source guidelines also. --Hu12 (talk) 15:41, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    free-game-downloads.mosw.com

    On this website there is an article (base-url + /abandonware/pc/arcade_action/games_ch_cl/chromium_b_s_u_.html (cannot put a link because it is blocked)) that could be used as reference for the WP page Chromium B.S.U.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.168.190.147 (talk) 02:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    See also - free-game-downloads.mosw.com and accomplices
    See also - free-game-downloads.mosw.com
     Defer to Global blacklist
    --Hu12 (talk) 17:25, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    alldatasheets.com

    Datasheets are a useful source of information in electronic articles, especially for tables. This site is an extensive repository of component datasheets. It is also preferable to go to a datasheet rather than directly to a manufacturers site because datasheets, being aimed at engineers, are usually free of marketing drivel. I am not at all sure why it is on the blacklist, or even how to find out, but I am willing to bet that it is not the site who have been doing the spamming but some minor company who have been posting their datasheet and the site gets the blame. Can we have it unlisted please? If not please whitelist http://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/96216/ETC/RG58CU.html which I need for an article. If you go the whitelist route I will probably be back regularly with requests. SpinningSpark 16:18, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Troubleshooting and problems

    The system tells me that moonos.co.cc is blacklisted, but I can't find it listed. Help! UrbanTerrorist (talk) 04:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    i found in the black list under ## sometime 2005 (Spam blacklist/Log) that .888 has been blacklisted so i cant make an external link for 888.com i cant say i understand why. because i see PokerStars do have an external link. whatever it was - im sure 888.com cleaned up their act since 2005. can it be white listed? --Michaelcoopr (talk) 11:16, 20 August 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

    FYI: Local reports from COIBot

    I have posted this with full explanation on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#New COIBot functionality, in short, COIBot now saves reports for links where the additions trip certain thresholds to reports on meta. They are categorised in m:Category:COIBot Local Reports. For en: m:Category:COIBot Local reports for en.wikipedia.org categorises all reports concerning this wiki, open reports are in m:Category:Open Local reports for en.wikipedia.org. More information can also be found in m:User:COIBot/Local. Please be careful with evaluating these reports, it is based on bot statistics, NOT on an evaluation of the information linked to or a full evaluation of the editor. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:32, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Can non-clickable URLs be dealt with?

    I just reverted a large number of edits by 88.159.116.99 which inserted the string "according to www.stadiumzone.net" into articles about football stadiums. Technically, they are not links and the cannot be followed by clicking, but (please correct me if I'm wrong) they still constitute spam. Is there a way to automatically prevent this? According to this search, similar edits have occurred in the past and probably will again. Favonian (talk) 11:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    The spam regex can be used, however I am not sure this is practical [26] Triplestop x3 14:44, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist&oldid=309807732"