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 19:05, 8 October 2019 (→‎hartforth.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 – 920280367 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.


    Proposed additions

    issd.org

    Continued spamming for a steroid website by a new sock (Darooka) after warnings and socking blocks of the first 3 accounts. GermanJoe (talk) 07:32, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    FWIW, I have blocked Darooka for the spamming and for attempting to delete this report. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:19, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    plus Added, thanks for the efforts of Wikier23. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:44, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    blanked this report. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:52, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    saadatrent.com

    404 replacement SEO technique across a variety of articles, mostly tourism related. Ravensfire (talk) 15:19, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    The most cunning of SEO techniques. plus Added to blacklist. OhNoitsJamie Talk 01:43, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    klikfilm.org

    Spammed by these two IP's here and on the Serbian Wikipedia. (meta COIBot report) It might be beneficial to blacklist this here; it's a spam site. Vermont (talk) 01:37, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Vermont:  Defer to Global blacklist, cross-wiki problem. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:16, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Vermont: Handled on meta. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:17, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Beetstra, I didn't add it globally as it was only two IP's in the same small range on two projects; I thought it would be better to handle it locally. Vermont (talk) 03:40, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Vermont, yes, it is small .. but edits like this do show a high level of disregard. There is no reason for them not to spread further. —Dirk Beetstra T C 04:02, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Good point. There's also little chance that site could be used for anything other than spam. Best, Vermont (talk) 13:00, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    naanii.es

    Combination Polo and 'Lifestyle' blog, will never be a reliable source for anything. Has been added off and on for about a year (see Lavili's contribs) but that has recently escalated to edit warring and sockpuppetry. Time to stop wasting everyone's time with this one. - MrOllie (talk) 17:34, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    MrOllie, can you check the COIBot reports, there seems to be a xwiki component here, and a much larger set of accounts. Maybe meta? —Dirk Beetstra T C 17:54, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    paisabazaar.com

    Spammed by:

    Repeated spamming and promotional editing for a credit website. Previous warnings and a short IP block have been ignored. Purely promotional website without credible information for an encyclopedia. GermanJoe (talk) 10:31, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @GermanJoe: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:11, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    dietpills.best

    The site is a sister website of issd.org (already blacklisted, see above), cross-linking to the blacklisted domain and obviously maintained by the same spammer for steroids. Continued spamming after various warnings and blocks (see previous case). GermanJoe (talk) 18:08, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @GermanJoe: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (help!) 21:24, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    punjnud.com

    Site is a mixed collection of Pakistani literary works (certainly COPYVIO) and news articles copied from elsewhere (possible COPYVIO). Unlikely to be ever used as a RS. It has been added as REFSPAM in multiple (~50) articles by the above IP editors - please look at their contribution history. — kashmīrī TALK 07:52, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    The COIBot report shows a large number of red-linked users and IPs, and leads to e.g.:
    Next edit will be obvious. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:19, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Kashmiri: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:20, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    camcavetxegiacao.com

    Spambots. plus Added OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:21, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    adult-mag.com

    adult-mag.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

    Appears to be at a minimum, an attempt to gather contact info, or possibly a malware phishing attack of some sort. This edit of mine at removed an inline external link to adult-mag from the article. When I clicked it prior to that, it popped up a browser dialog box with an [OK] button, preceded by text presuming to be from a cable company, with a link not related to the company. When I backed out and tried again, I got a parked domain. The article Adult (magazine) lists a Tumblr domain as their website. Mathglot (talk) 19:27, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Mathglot: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. Yes, appears infested. --Guy (help!) 20:45, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @JzG: Thanks. Have you or someone already removed links from articles? I'm pretty sure I spotted half a dozen or more active links, but I don't remember my exact search, and in a cursory look I don't see them now, but I'm not sure if I'm executing the search correctly. Mathglot (talk) 22:00, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Seems not. Guy (help!) 22:05, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, that was it; thanks. Mathglot (talk) 01:39, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Moved to WP:VPT § Possible interaction of spam blacklist and citation archival-url

    petroff.bg

    petroff.bg: 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

    These editors have all created sandbox pages in their userspace (now all deleted) promoting petroff.bg. It's been going on for years. Also documented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Masondopler. -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:26, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Edgar181: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (help!) 20:46, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    colomba.bg

    Same behavior as with petroff.bg above, just a different .bg link. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:23, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Edgar181: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:30, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Natural News

    There is strong noticeboard consensus at WP:RSN § Natural News to blacklist Natural News as a fake news website that primarily publishes conspiracy theories and pseudoscience. — Newslinger talk 01:47, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Newslinger: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:11, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    officiallibracoin.com

    Fake website, likely a scam, spammed to Libra (cryptocurrency) multiple times. Diffs: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, everything by this guy. Saucy[talk – contribs] 04:15, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Saucy:  Defer to Global blacklist, cross-wiki problem. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:04, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Saucy: Handled on meta. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:06, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    movid.ml

    Being used in 123Movies, seems to be a piracy site. Special:Diff/919718463, Special:Diff/919571937, Special:Diff/919566402, etc. --Majavah (t/c) 10:35, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    gujunews.in

    Being spammed by multiple IP addresses. Ravensfire (talk) 00:36, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Ravensfire: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:10, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    hartforth.com

    It's a personal website belonging to an individual (claiming to be "Sir Knight Dr Anton Anderssen, Lord of Hartforth" on social networking sites and CV sites on the 'Net) who makes false claims about having a British noble title, "Lord Hartforth", a title that doesn't exist, and then apparently using that to scam people in the US. Links to the site, along with the false claims about the title, have been added regularly to articles here for more than ten years now, primarily to Hartforth and Anderssen, being swiftly added back again every time it's removed (see recent page history of Hartforth). - Tom | Thomas.W talk 14:30, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Thomas.W, Did any of the social networking sites get added as well? If so, which? —Dirk Beetstra T C 18:10, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I haven't seen any of the other sites being added here, I found them when doing a search on the name of the person, when trying to figure out what this was all about. When doing some research here on WP I also found accusations about the fake title being actively used for scamming people. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 18:39, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Thomas.W: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 19:05, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals


    utilitydesign

    utilitydesign.co.uk: 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

    Domain was reported for spam activity and blacklisted by user B CliffC in 2008. As one of the UK's largest official stockists of designer furniture and lighting I'm surprised to see that it was blacklisted for spamming furniture and designer related terms. Along with their category and designer page listings this website's blog is an award nominated and valuable resource for these topics. Please kindly reconsider blacklist status. Thanks Shaunyness (talk) 10:23, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    In which article do you think there should be a link, and supporting what content? Guy (help!) 10:42, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @JzG: I found the blacklist status after going down a bit of a rabbit hole but as an example, the article utilitydesign.co.uk/blog/flos-gun-lamp RE the history of Philippe Starck page Gun Lamp I feel would support the existing Philippe Starck page as it references the charitable cause behind the designer's political messaging. Shaunyness (talk) 11:47, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Shaunyness: The spamming in 2008 was rather heavy, though a long time ago (which is not necessarily a factor). You state that this is basically a blog, which have limited utility on Wikipedia. I guess that its use would better be defined through some specific requests at the whitelist first (i.e., specific links for specific Wikipedia pages), so  Defer to Whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:04, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, I am interested why you wanted to link utilitydesign.co.uk/brands/flos-lighting (as opposed to, say, flos.com) on a page that is stating 'He was denied a job for Flos Lighting, ...', where the page you wanted to link to, likely rather obviously, does not mention Shiu-Kay anywhere on the page. Can you please explain? --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:11, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra: I see your point (RE linking to Flos.com) but I guess given that the brand is "Flos" rather than "Flos Lighting" a link to the lighting collection specifically seemed to make more sense at the time. I didn't think the mention of Shiu-Kay would be relevant in determining the usefulness of the linked domain but rather the collection of lighting product from designers successfully hired by Flos would give perspective. Thanks Shaunyness (talk) 11:47, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Shaunyness: In which case we would link to "Flos (designer company) lightning", we do not use external links in prose. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:51, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra: Understood and appreciate your response. Noted for future. Thanks Shaunyness (talk) 11:55, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Wondershare

    wondershare.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

    I am unsure why this site was added to the Wikipedia blacklist, but I can only imagine that it because people were forcefully trying to add links from the website to certain articles back in 2013, and it might have been a violation. Nevertheless, I would request that it be removed from the said list.

    While I am an employee of Wondershare in Canada, I am not making this request on their behalf, I am not a member of their marketing department, and I hope to present this case in the most unbiased way I can. Wondershare is a reliable software company and its products are used by a large community of internet users. Wondershare software is featured by resellers and there have been press articles released by well-respected and credible sources dedicated to describing the benefits of Wondershare software products.

    Wikipedia articles comparing Video Editing, PDF Editing, Data Recovery, and Diagramming software products and technical capabilities are incomplete for researchers and technical analysts.

    Additionally, perhaps, in the foreseeable future, an informative article covering Wondershare—itself becoming a well-known technology provider—would be something of interest to the public. I cannot determine whether or not the excessive editing with links to wondershare.com (which indicates some conflict of interest) will ever happen again, but I would argue that it seems to have ceased for years from now. Perhaps, in light of all the above, the site should be removed from the blacklist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FrankLorne (talk • contribs)

     Deferred meta. As was noted the last time this came up, it's blacklisted on meta, not here. Note that a request was declined on meta in 2014. Your company has already made several unsuccessful attempts to create an article. [1], [2], and Wondershare (deleted via WP:PROD and WP:SPEEDY several times. OhNoitsJamie Talk 01:40, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Please could a different admin consider pv-magazine.com

    pv-magazine.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 been requested many times over the past decade as you can see from my previous request at MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/February_2019#PV_Magazine and the archives: [3]. I am not disputing their spamming many years ago but just saying that given the urgency of fixing global warming it is really a waste of editors' time to try to find other sources given that this seems fairly comprehensive and perfectly reliable. So I suggest it is time to give them another chance as I suspect some editors probably give up on their edits because of this blocking. Please could an admin other than Beetstra reconsider for a fresh view of the issue.

    I often edit environmental articles about Turkey and the magazine has a section "www.pv-magazine.com/region/turkey/". For example the article "Turkey’s net-metering: Will commercial, residential or municipal lead the way?" is short but gives analysis hard to find elsewhere in easy to read English, so could be used to improve solar power in Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 05:56, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    @Chidgk1: no Declined, sorry. As per prior requests, this is basically a trade paper that is based in large part on press releases and they are known to watch this page with a view to resuming linking, e.g. by employed writers (MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/July 2016 § pv-magazine.com). There is no shortage of peer-reviewed engineering journals that are a substantially better fit for Wikipedia. --Guy (help!) 12:31, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @JzG: I agree there are good engineering journals but it is not really engineering I wished to write about in this case but government. To take the example of the article above I would like to write something like "According to local solar businesses the take up of residential solar is being hindered by the need to persuade multiple layers of government of its benefits." There is plenty of material for when net metering was introduced and how it might work (such as this) but little criticising how it is actually working in practice. Obviously government supporting English language media such as Anadolu Agency or Daily Sabah will not criticise the government bureaucracy. It is possible something might appear eventually on Google Scholar but meanwhile it is hard to find an alternative source to support my example sentence. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:12, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Chidgk1, then you can always find a non-english source (where pv-magazine likely based their report on ...), or decide to see if you can get it past a whitelist request. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:20, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I would be prepared to bet money that the statement can be traced back to a lobbyist for a solar power company. Guy (help!) 18:07, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @JzG: Yes you are right, the article is based on the views of a solar power company and the writer has disclosed that his trip to the trade fair was paid for. My point is that the article is criticising government and is therefore not available in Turkish as the government controls the media here.Chidgk1 (talk) 05:07, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Chidgk1: no Declined. Badly spammed, in by far the most cases easy to replace. Just regurgitations of presss releases, nothing more. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:05, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    no Declined by another admin as well. Hope that helps. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:49, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    It seems there is something wrong with this blacklist entry. See for example this diff from today. - MrOllie (talk) 15:58, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Nevermind, that particular one is on the whitelist. - MrOllie (talk) 18:09, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    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

    Unable to edit en:Miami because of blacklisted citation

    I tried to revert this edit at Miami, but the edit is blocked because it contains a new link to an external site on the blacklist. The only thing the revert should be adding to the article is a ">". The citation that is being repaired in the edit is a named ref to a Census Bureau site, and in any case an anon IP was able to delete that ">" without triggering the blacklist. So how do I find out what is blocking the edit? - Donald Albury 23:30, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    I was able to revert it just fine. The spam blacklist entry you were hitting is this: [4]. Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:09, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Donald Albury and Reaper Eternal: it would be better to decide what needs to be done with that link. IIRC that site is notoriously unreliable. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:26, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra and Reaper Eternal: I removed the citation from the article, and the sentence it supported, as it was based on the elevation of a point that is not in the city. While the sentence supported by the citation was part of a general discussion of the geology of South Florida, and may have been appropriate in the article, I did not feel it was essential to the article about the city. In the meantime, there are other citations in that article that need to be reviewed, but that is another story for another day. - Donald Albury 17:07, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist&oldid=920280367"