MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
SineBot (talk | contribs)
Bots
2,546,196 edits
m Signing comment by Nirmalsite - "→‎cinemawoods.net: "
JJEv810 (talk | contribs)
171 edits
mNo edit summary
Line 74: Line 74:


[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk%3ASpam-blacklist&type=revision&diff=863959882&oldid=863923619 Changed/maimed this request]. --[[User:Beetstra|Dirk Beetstra]] <sup>[[User_Talk:Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">T</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">C</span>]]</sup> 07:10, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk%3ASpam-blacklist&type=revision&diff=863959882&oldid=863923619 Changed/maimed this request]. --[[User:Beetstra|Dirk Beetstra]] <sup>[[User_Talk:Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">T</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">C</span>]]</sup> 07:10, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

== factor8scandal.uk ==
* {{link summary|factor8scandal.uk}}

;Spammers
*{{User summary|JJEv810}}
+ others. Please blacklist. - [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 03:31, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

:{{rto|Jytdog}} {{Added}} to [[MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist]]. --[[User:Beetstra|Dirk Beetstra]] <sup>[[User_Talk:Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">T</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Beetstra|<span style="color:#0000FF;">C</span>]]</sup> 18:13, 10 October 2018 (UTC)


== cartitleloanscalifornia.com, tfctitleloans.com ==
== cartitleloanscalifornia.com, tfctitleloans.com ==

Revision as of 10:07, 22 October 2018

"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 regex — 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 - 865187623 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.
    →snippet for logging: {{/request|865187623#section_name}}
    →snippet for logging of WikiProject Spam items: {{WPSPAM|865187623#section_name}}
    →A user-gadget for handling additions to and removals from the spam-blacklist is available at User:Beetstra/Gadget-Spam-blacklist-Handler


    Proposed additions

    breitbart.com

    And others. JarlaxleArtemis socks apparently. Guy (Help!) 12:15, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist to control ongoing abuse. --Guy (Help!) 13:32, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    How does Breitbart fall under WP:BLACKLIST? Skingski (talk) 20:31, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    JarlaxleArtemis is amongst the most incorrigible and persistent long-term abusers, with a preference for stirring up trouble in powderkeg topic areas like American politics. Blacklisting is justified to deter him given his preference for open proxies and masses of socks. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 00:58, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    schick-sa.com

    This is added as promotional content "Inventor of the parking guidance system". Added to:

    by an IPv6. The anon's IP changes with each edit/revert and communication is difficult to impossible. I did add a note on talk:Parking guidance and information#Addition of promotional content which I doubt has been read by the anon.
    This website is not used elsewhere as a link or in any reference. Jim1138 (talk) 19:50, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Jim1138: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:57, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Davincivaporizer

    Spammers

    + others. Please blacklist. -KH-1 (talk) 12:12, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @KH-1: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:12, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]


    Changed/maimed this request. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:10, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    cartitleloanscalifornia.com, tfctitleloans.com

    Ideally, any domain with "titleloan" should be blacklisted. Thanks. — Newslinger talk 17:17, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    • Regex requested to be blacklisted: titleloan

    if it is ideal.... --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:15, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Newslinger: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:15, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    sci-hub has a new TLD

    is the latest incarnation of Sci-Hub that someone has found and started posting as links for references. The site is generally a substantial a host of copyvio content. Except in the article about the site itself, we should presume any links to it fail WP:COPYVIOEL. While the additions seem to be in good faith, it's a long-term problem involving many different editors. We already blacklist them at .bz, .cc, .ac, but now they have jumped to .tw presumably as a result of their mile mile of lawsuit losses for copyvio. So I propose adding .tw. Thinking back to MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/July 2016#Sci-Hub, should we wildcard the TLD (pinging User:Anachronist)? DMacks (talk) 21:42, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Anachronist and DMacks: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist, while we discuss more permanentsolutions. --Dirk Beetstra T C 21:51, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Beetstra: The rule could be made more general, like sci-hub\.[a-z][a-z]. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:54, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Anachronist: I was even considering \bsci-hub\. --Dirk Beetstra T C 00:02, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @DMacks: original requester not pinged on blacklisting. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:11, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see a problem with sci-hub\.[a-z][a-z] (any two-letter TLD). I could even support \bsci-hub\. (that as any level of the hostname). The only non-two-letter I have seen is .tech. You added that specific one to blacklist on meta after discussing it there back in April. Should it be expanded there at least to include the two-letter regexp? DMacks (talk) 10:17, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Searching here on en.wp, I now see use of .io, .hk, and .club, so I now strongly support the more general regexp. DMacks (talk) 10:29, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Regex requested to be blacklisted: \bsci-hub\.

    Broad regex. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:24, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @DMacks and Anachronist: plus Added \bsci-hub\.. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:28, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @DMacks and Anachronist: it is probably prudent to remove all these links now, replace them with the proper doi's. Maybe a task for a bot? --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:50, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Only about a 100 links per search though Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:25, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I did a search for links yesterday and found only one in main space, which I did replace with a DOI. Everything else is in talk pages or archive discussions. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:02, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! I replaced a bunch yesterday/today also. DMacks (talk) 17:02, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Beetstra: I think this should be global, it's a major problem even though additions are almost certainly in good faith. Guy (Help!) 11:00, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Anachronist, DMacks, JzG, and Galobtter:  Defer to Global blacklist, cross-wiki problem? --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:11, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree it should be global. ~Anachronist (talk) 13:20, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I only do major work on en.wp and commons. I see a few dozen uses there. Global sounds good. DMacks (talk) 16:52, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    beescoin.in

    Blog/linkfarm frequently and repeatedly spammed by dynamic IPs, all geolocating to Kolkata, India. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 12:33, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Thomas.W: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:35, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    wirecellar.com

    Places shortlink redirects to involuntary software download, probable malicious SW. Domain itself is a redirect to ad.fly, no encyclopedic value. General Ization Talk 23:28, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @General Ization:  Defer to Global blacklist, cross-wiki problem. --Dirk Beetstra T C 00:28, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @General Ization: Handled on meta. --Dirk Beetstra T C 00:30, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    ancient-origins.net

    ancient-origins.net: 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

    Looks like a decent site at first glance but actually full of fringe, eg The Legendary Hyperborea and the Ancient Greeks: Who Really Discovered America? It gets used by innocent editors as a source and external link. Doug Weller talk 10:53, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    • @Doug Weller: Would revert listing be OK first, as there's no obvious spamming? Guy (Help!) 22:17, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Doug Weller: plus Added to User:XLinkBot/RevertList. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:37, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Doug Weller: plus Added to User:XLinkBot/RevertReferencesList. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:37, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    waddle.com.au

    waddle.com.au: 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

    Website for a company selling invoice-finance loans. Has been linkspammed by at least:

    Zazpot (talk) 13:20, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Zazpot: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Guy (Help!) 22:17, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    tellonym.me

    User and now IPv6 hopper adding links to this with similar edit summaries. No reason for this site to be linked here. Ravensfire (talk) 14:01, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Ravensfire: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:42, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    ketoconnection.com.au

    After discovering this in a talk-page FAQ, I wanted to leave a note here to see whether this is sufficiently egregious to be blacklisted. The IP who posted it last month has made no other edits, and I believe that it is not linked anywhere else on wiki. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:56, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    cinemawoods.net


    This unreliable blog type site is being spammed on multiple Indian articles by Nirmalsite (talk · contribs) who is a spamming only account, also an editor on the blog is called Nirmal, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 18:09, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Atlantic306: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:38, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Nirmalsite (talk) 15:05, 21 October 2018 (UTC) i am really Sorry for my websites adding Links in Wikipedia reference and i was not aware of Wikipedia guideline.. I Will not do this again and please Remove my site from Spam-blacklist... @Atlantic306 @Beetstra Dirk Beetstra Atlantic306[reply]

    Websites aren't removed from the blacklist at the owner's request. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:28, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    I m really sorry and I will not do this Again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nirmalsite (talk • contribs) 07:05, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Qualified Lawyers Transfer Scheme school

    It seem some non-notable private school slip some spam link into wiki articles in order to promote their tutoring on the exam. The two domain above is not related to the exam but relates to the school. Matthew_hk tc 16:00, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals

    artofliving.org

    artofliving.org: 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

    Found this while trying to undo a change on the art of living page. I couldn't understand why the website is added to spam. Its not redirecting, using url shortner, doing any suspicious activity, serving ads or opening pop-ups once you go to the website. The bot report also seemed unalarming. The reported vandal in proposed additions section above seems to have used it for citation. Not sure if mistakes of some user can be attributed to the website.

    While the information about the website is available on the page in form of the domain name, adding the link to spam seems like an error. Could this be corrected please? Thanks.

    PS: I'm only a visitor to the page, not someone getting paid by anyone for this. 122.178.206.30 (talk) 03:46, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    no Declined,  Defer to Whitelist for specific links on this domain per instructions there. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:50, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you at least share why this domain is in spam? It doesn't violate Wikipedia:Spam or Wikipedia:ELOFFICIAL in my newbie understanding. Also, not sure if discussions like these need to happen on the article's talk page. Guidance welcome. Thanks. 171.76.114.124 (talk) 05:57, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    First, the domain is not spam, editors were spamming the domain. And that has been noticed since 2009 (see e.g. User_talk:Post.amit, User_talk:Shaileshjgd, User_talk:27.106.41.93, User_talk:Sunakshitejwani). Some of the spammy material still remains, e.g. User:Wcf2016/sandbox. Edits clearly suggest coatrack edits and likely conflicts of interest (which is also suggested in the tag on Art_of_Living_Foundation). Please ask for whitelisting for the pages where this is primary source or official link type material. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:48, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Found this domain is blocked under spam list. I couldn't understand what made the website to fall under the section. It didnot violate any wikipedia terms since the domain has high authority and reputed organization involved in many social activities to report with valid proof of article link for reference. Requesting to remove the domain from the blacklisted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.93.187.58 (talk) 08:34, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Did you read nothing that was said above? Beetstra explained it quite well. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 23:31, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    breitbart.com (removal request)

    breitbart.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
    Breitbart has been, and is currently, used in many articles. It is true that there are some recent socks which are inappropriately adding links to Breitbart. But I would argue that such disruption can be better handled by adding it to XLinkBot to block new users or IP users from adding such links. None of the socks banned is more than a week old, and as such XLinkBot should be able to handle this. Per what this page says when adding a blacklist Please ensure all links have been removed from articles and discussion pages before blacklisting.. That was not done, and it would be inappropriate to do so as Breitbart is still a valid RS for its own opinions on many WP articles. Instead, when people are updating pages that already have links to Breitbart, they will get caught in this blacklist. -Obsidi (talk) 21:46, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Looks like I'm not the only one that is concerned if this is a long term blacklist [5] -Obsidi (talk) 22:48, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    This is on the blacklist to control massive spamming and disruption by JarlaxleArtemis socks. If you have consensus on a talk age that a link to Breitbart is appropriate in an article, you can request whitelisting. I understand that you object to Breitbart being deprecated per WP:BREITBART, but that's not an excuse for you falsely stating that there is a consensus that it is RS for its own opinions "on many WP articles". There are in fact very few where Breitbart is cited as a source for its own opinions, and that is a good thing, because per WP:UNDUE we should not be deciding that an unreliable source is reliable because we are presenting its opinions about something. I don't think you'd want the opinions of far-left websites included from the primary source on articles about far-right people like Trump or Bannon just because some editor decides it's a significant dissenting view, and I suspect you'd be doubly indignant if the source had a history of spreading fake news. Guy (Help!) 08:20, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    You have not shown that XLinkBot cannot handle that. All of the socks you have pointed to are less then a week old. The blacklist can only be used if there are not other means of preventing the problem. Breitbart, whether you like it or not, is a RS for its own opinions, let me remind you from the RFC close It can still be used as a source when attributing opinion/viewpoint/commentary. You are highly WP:INVOLVED here, you personally started the RFC against Brietbart, and now you are using your tools to prevent even opinion/viewpoint/commentary of Breitbart which is a recognized valid reliable source for that. Sometimes it is good to have both far-left and far-right viewpoints discussed, that is what WP:NPOV is all about. -Obsidi (talk) 14:05, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    More and more independent and uninvolved editors are objecting to your actions here. -Obsidi (talk) 14:23, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Obsidi: no Declined. 10 months of XLinkBot did not stop the abuse. It has been shown not to work. And note that the existence of links does not stop editingto the page. The rest can be whitelisted. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:42, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    econlib.org (removal request)

    Econlib provides many classical and modern economic texts and resources; while it has a right-libertarian skew (and is sponsored by something called Liberty Fund), I'd argue it has in general acceptable quasi-academic standards, with clear authorship and primary sourcing, holding a research think-tank reliability level perhaps, and it's at least worth reconsidering and clearly justifying the broad blacklisting (original inclusion discussion here and edit here). For the record what spurred my proposal is the fact that the David Ricardo 1817 book that is provided on Econlib is currently tagged as a suspect source on the Land Value Tax article page. The link itself is really sloppy (doesn't connect the Wikipedia text to a specific page and argument in the reference), but the source material is otherwise perfectly valid. Jaszczuroczłek (talk) 15:39, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    What it mainly provides is an ideological wrapper around content not originated by them. It is a think-tank side project. Most of the links we have had are to out of copyright texts that should be linked to neutral repositories such as Wikisource or Project Gutenberg. It was also extensively spammed. If there is consensus to include specific content that is verifiably significant and not available from any source free of the ideological baggage, we have the Whitelist. Guy (Help!) 10:56, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I have replaced the link with a link in a university library. Guess ultimately it could be on WikiSource (it may already be). --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:04, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Troubleshooting and problems

    If references contain blacklisted URLs

    Hope this is the right place for this kind of enquiry. What am I to do if a cited reference is to a website that has been blacklisted since the reference was added? I was just reverting vandalism on Rajat Poddar, but got a spam blacklist error because of one of the domains (awardsandwinners.com) has since been blacklisted, and so ended up leaving out that reference. — Smjg (talk) 22:01, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Smjg: it depends on the reason of blacklisting, but if it is a proper reference, you should ask it to be whitelisted. Otherwise, remove the link./reference/whole statement. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:10, 19 October 2018 (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

    I would like to report secresystems.net. If anyone can figure out how to contact them and get assurances they are working on their problems, they are welcome to. Otherwise, my virus protection was disabled. This happened after I got a message saying it had expired and I should download again, which I ignored.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 14:29, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Update: The tech support person, in trying to do something else, told me to restart my computer. My virus protection was working again. No one was able to explain why. She suspected it was updating, but it seems strange it would just disappear. — Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:06, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist&oldid=865187623"