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 Beetstra (talk | contribs) at 16:30, 12 May 2019 (→‎electronicsprojectshub.com: Added to Blacklist using SBHandler). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

"Wikipedia:Spam-blacklist" redirects here. Not to be confused with Wikipedia:Spam blacklist or Wikipedia:Spam-blacklisting.
    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 – 896747329 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.


    Proposed additions

    freesoftware99.com

    See User:Mdtanvir99, where Mdtanvir99 added promotional spam to their userpage for the site in question. The userpage has been marked for G11. See diffs on their userpage first diff (with 104 links to the site) and second diff (they removed and replaced with just one link). Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 17:32, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    ad2brand.com

    Repeated spamming and advertising for a SEO. Several warnings and a block (see Chachitmang) have been ignored. New spam attempt (hidden as Wiki-link) in Kharadi. GermanJoe (talk) 12:19, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @GermanJoe: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:51, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    company-histories.com

    The noticeboard RfC at WP:RSN § Rfc: company-histories.com showed strong consensus to blacklist the domain as a copyright violation of Gale's International Directory of Company Histories. — Newslinger talk 19:51, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Newslinger: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --— JJMC89 (T·C) 03:14, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    joebiden.info

    Added by blocked Murca-editor17 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log); fake bad-humor copy of 2020 campaign website. Nate • (chatter) 06:40, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    goodnoon.com

    Systematic dead link spam for a marketing site by multiple throwaway accounts. GermanJoe (talk) 19:03, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @GermanJoe: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:38, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    net-informations.com

    {{BLRequestLink|net-informations.com}}

    Spam from rotating IPs going back to 2008 or so, through to today. Touched lots of articles, see IP contribs. - MrOllie (talk) 16:16, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @MrOllie: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:14, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    onefivenine.com

    I've been weeding out uses of this site for months now, and we're down to around 190 instances from what was well over 2000 in January 2018. The site was one of many discussed here, all of which will eventually come in for the same treatment. However, it is still being added and so I find myself going round in circles. - Sitush (talk) 08:06, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Sitush: do you think that we could just list the whole set here and blacklist based on that discussion? (we do blacklist if there is a clear consensus that they should not be used at all, and only make exception at very rare cases which then can easily be handled at the whitelist - I am not sure if this RSN discussion is strong enough for that). --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:43, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I would be happy to see all but mapsofindia blacklisted. As the discussion noted, mapsofindia does have some genuine use but the rest are scrapers. Bear in mind that the participants in that discussion, other than Reyk, are all very frequent contributors to India-related articles - they know their stuff. Sorry, struck that - there was a discussion somewhere that involved more members of the India wikiproject, but it isn't the one I link above. Same outcome, though. - Sitush (talk) 10:46, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Sitush: so that makes the above list? --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:01, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Seems to, yes, thanks. - Sitush (talk) 11:14, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yeah, I remove links to 159 every now and then and it does seem to me that I'm seeing instances I removed being put back in. Blacklist sounds like a god plan. Reyk YO! 11:19, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


    delhihousingschemes.com

    Repeated spam for a real estate site by throwaway accounts and IPs. Multiple warnings and a temporary protection of their main target Delhi Development Authority have been ignored (continued after protection ended). GermanJoe (talk) 15:21, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @GermanJoe: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:09, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    telecomssupermarket.co.uk

    Bot-like spamming over the past few weeks nine months, both in article namespace, and now, talk page archives. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 19:10, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Suffusion of Yellow: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --— JJMC89 (T·C) 20:15, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    IMDB

    imdb.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 has probably been discussed before but since folks continue to try to pass it off as a WP:RS on a regular basis, including for things like WP:DOB, I think it's time to put a stop to it.

    The content on IMDb is user-generated, and the site is therefore considered unreliable by the majority of editors. Some have argued that certain content on the site is reviewed by staff, although there is no broad agreement as to whether this constitutes bona fide fact checking, or what portions of the site, if any, should be considered reliable. A number of editors have pointed out that IMDb content has been copied from other sites, including Wikipedia, and that there have been a number of notable hoaxes in the past. Toddst1 (talk) 15:20, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Toddst1, this is opposite to WP:ELPEREN (though I do think that a reliability argument counts way stronger than ‘it contains much info that we do not have’, especially when that info is unreliable). As this request is not based on mitigation of spam, we would need an RfC showing that the issues with the site warrant blacklisting. —Dirk Beetstra T C 03:24, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    electronicsprojectshub.com

    electronicsprojectshub.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 Slow spam. Every few months an IP adds another link. Too infrequent for a block of the two IPs used so far to be effective, too many different pages for semiprotection to be effective. The only question is whether this gets spammed often enough to justify blacklisting. (Something at the top of this page explaining how often a site needs to be spammed to justify filtering would be a huge help. I'm just saying.) --Guy Macon (talk) 13:20, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Guy Macon: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:30, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals


    thepointsguy.com

    At Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#RfC: The Points Guy, although there is a consensus that content involving credit cards from this website should be avoided, there is a general consensus that other content from this site should not be regarded as generally unusable. Considering that the website was added to the spam blacklist after WP:SILENCE, this should not remain on the blacklist. feminist (talk) 12:17, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Feminist: The wording was closer to 'never for credit cards, and avoid if possible for the rest' .. I am tempted to use the Whitelist to gauge how often the latter is actually unavoidable. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:28, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    The whitelist can be an interim solution, yes, but based on the comments it's clear that at least some parts of the website should not be blacklisted. feminist (talk) 14:31, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Feminist: yes, I read the comments by the users, but to repeat the wording of the closer: "Hell no for anything related to credit-cards. Use editorial discretion for usage in other areas and avoid if other sources can be located.". Note that the site was blacklisted because it performs native advertising, not because (parts of) the site are unreliable. I am not suggesting whitelisting as an interim solution, I am suggesting to use the whitelist requests to see how much of this material is really needed (i.e. which parts can not be avoided since there are no other sources), and leaving the status quo. That is strengthened by the remark that part of the material is 'hell no', and de-listing would also allow that to be used again. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:20, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    This discussion continues at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist#"News" and "Reviews" sections of The Points Guy (thepointsguy.com/news, thepointsguy.com/reviews). — Newslinger talk 10:01, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    firsttimemarinekeeper.com

    This site provides information on fish keeping, specifically how to care for certain species in an aquarium. It is a site that doesn't make any money from adverts or traffic, it is just a useful resource for those of us who are researching how to best care for a particular fish as each fish requires certain water parameters and care requirements. There is absolutely no reason to blacklist the external links that were added as each link went directly to a relevant page all about that specific fish. Abi Young

    no Declined This was spammed pretty extensively, which is a good reason to blacklist it. It's also pretty obvious that there is a conflict-of-interest here. Note the second sentence in the "Proposed Removals" instructions: Requests from site owners or anyone with a conflict of interest will be declined. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:15, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Worldwide Business Research

    Looks like the URL wbresearch.com was added to blacklist page because a Wikipedia page was created for Worldwide Business Research in 2007 that was too promotional and not informative enough.

    Worldwide Business Research (WBR) is a conference company that creates and runs B2B conferences and their brands. It is also referenced as the organizer of one of its brands Etail Conferences.


    Trying to have it removed from the blacklist so that a request can be added to have a neutral and fact driven page created for this company. Thank you for your help, and happy to provide any additional information.

    ckarayannides [[User talk:ckarayannides|Talk 16:32, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Comment It wasn't blacklisted because the page creation was "not informative enough." It was blacklisted because multiple accounts attempted to spam links to it, mostly to wbr.co.uk (links to the same site). OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:49, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment Ah, I see. Thanks for your comment. Sorry, I had read here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Worldwide_Business_Research that there was an issue with the material. There might be another page with more details.

    I never saw the original page, but my assumption is that whoever spammed the page back in 2007 will not spam it if is removed from the blacklist. Let me know if this is appropriate. Thank you! ckarayannides Talk17:50, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined At present, there isn't any use for those links in Wikipedia. If you just want to remove it from the blacklist to create an article about your company, your best bet would be to submit the article first to WP:AFC, providing the necessary 3rd party reliable sources to indicate how the company meets WP:CORP notability criteria. If the article is accepted for submission, we could whitelist a link to it or unblacklist it. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:43, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment Will do! Thanks for the info. ckarayannides Talk 14:00, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    techved.com

    Respected Admin, this website techved.com is genuine website and i have personally verified it and have seen that it is reported in spam with btechved\.com\b. Hence my sincere request to you is remove this website from the spam blacklist.It is indeed a genuine website.May be someone might have tried to do some attempts to link this site so that it gets reported into spam.But i have personally visited the office of the website.It is indeed a genuine website.So, request you to remove it from the spam blacklist.

    Yours Sincerely, Shamasinkandeer Shamasinkandeer (talk) 06:27, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Moved here from the bottom of this page, even though I don't see a reason to whitelist this site. —RainFall 06:36, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined. No encyclopedic use presented. — JJMC89 (T·C) 19:29, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Troubleshooting and problems

    Logging / COIBot Instructions

    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.
    Note: If you do not log your entries, it may be removed if someone appeals the entry 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 who adds 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. This data is available in real-time on IRC.

    Poking COIBot

    When adding {{LinkSummary}}, {{UserSummary}} and/or {{IPSummary}} templates to WT:WPSPAM, WT:SBL, WT:SWL and User:COIBot/Poke (the latter for privileged editors) COIBot will generate linkreports for the domains, and userreports for users and IPs.


    Discussion

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist&oldid=896747329"