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 06:13, 28 December 2021 (→‎digipatrika.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.

    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 - 1062396728 after you have closed the request. See here for more info on logging.
    snippet for logging: {{/request|1062396728#section_name}}
    snippet for logging of WikiProject Spam items: {{WPSPAM|1062396728#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


    businesstimes.org

    Hopping accounts to avoid scrutiny, mostly hijacks existing references: example - MrOllie (talk) 20:35, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @MrOllie: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist (can you not just become an admin so you can just blacklist this crap yourself?). --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:47, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I fear I'm too opinionated for the RFA process. MrOllie (talk) 17:57, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, I'm not free of opinions either (I have a rather strong one on top of my user talk page), and I think you would be of great help here. Dirk Beetstra T C 06:47, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    upguys.com

    Per COIBot. GeneralNotability (talk) 21:32, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @GeneralNotability: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --GeneralNotability (talk) 21:32, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]


    Signsny

    Link

    See [1] for previously tagged IPs/users. And this from today

    Time to blacklist.-KH-1 (talk) 01:16, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @KH-1: plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist (as what I said to MrOllie above, isn't it time that you become an admin so you can blacklist this yourself?). --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:48, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Nah, the current arrangement is fine.-KH-1 (talk) 09:01, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    digipatrika.com

    plus Added to MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:13, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed removals

    themoviedb.org (and tmdb.org)

    Why is themoviedb.org (and its link-through tmdb.org) on the blacklist, when it very prominently features as a main data property on Wikidata (see "Wikidata property" section here)? I've had to hide instances (i.e. <!-- themoviedb.org --> ) on its page at The Movie Database accordingly, just to submit it's own English language page (Note. It already has a page on nine other WP languages).
    Please remove. Thanks in advance. Jimthing (talk) 19:04, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    I would guess for the reasons that were laid out the last time you asked about this: MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/February_2017#themoviedb.org_/_The_Movie_Database - MrOllie (talk) 21:41, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    That was several years ago, and things have certainly moved on. TMDb now appears on nine other WP language sites, and as previously mentioned above, has Wikidata properties. Link usage should now be allowed to follow similar sites like IMDb's usage: allowing "External links" section usage, but remain not as citation sources.
    To be clear, I am in no way affiliated to either site (although I used to be a contributor to IMDb for a while), and they each take their data from user generated content overseen by moderation. Hence they should both be treated equally in regards to external links section use accordingly. A bad actor(s) spamming TMDb as citations from years earlier should not be used as an excuse to ban the usage of links from a site indefinitely from external links sections. Jimthing (talk) 23:14, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jimthing: no Declined. And you know very, very well why it is on the blacklist, Jimthing. You are very aware that Travis Bell was here promoting this site, you rewrote his draft which then got deleted, and now you are rewriting it again without significant notability. The only use of this site would be on its subject page, which can be handled by the whitelist. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:54, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Again, the whole article has been re-written with a load of extra information now added. So please can admins actually consider the facts as they are today please, which have absolutely nothing to do with past actions. Otherwise we'd forever ban things because someone at some past time, years earlier, did something. This is completely unfair way to judge current editors, who have no relation with those events whatsoever. I really am getting fed up of these past events being used to tarnish my efforts, when I had absolutely no part in them. Jimthing (talk) 15:05, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jimthing: Yes, there is a lot of info, and not a single reliable source showing it is notable. Anyway, with the passed spamming I would really just whitelist for one page - the subject page - and then do case-by-case evaluations whether it is useful elsewhere before de-listing. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 11:15, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    lionjek.com

    I want to request from the administrators and admins of wikipedia please remove my website Lionjek.com. I had given a work to my website editor to share my website on other platforms. But he makes a mistake and he shared a lot of links on a single wikipedia page. I had fired him from his job. I am really sorry for that. I am an administrator of lionjek.com and I want to make a request please remove my website lionjek.com from spam list. I guarnteed this website will never create any type of spam on wikipedia. We write quality content on my website lionjek.com. I am really sorry for that mistake. We will never create any type of spam in future on wikipedia. Please remove our website from spamlist. Please forgive me and give at least one chance to rectify the mistake. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.225.241.76 (talk) 06:16, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    I am trying to resolve all the issues please belive me and our site and give atleast one chance to rectify my mistakes. I only want one chance. Please belive me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anshulv993 (talkcontribs) 05:55, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Rejected, bad faith request. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:08, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Troubleshooting and problems

    Discussion

    everybodywiki.com

    everybodywiki.com seems to be scraping wikipedia including possibly drafts. I've noticed them a few times now used in AfC articles. A quick search showed only one, now-removed, use in mainspace but seeing as this will never be a reliable source should it be blacklisted?Slywriter (talk) 15:22, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    I've removed hundreds of links from this site; it's on a list of mirrors I watch for daily. In addition to mirroring the content of both main and draft spaces on Wikipedia, it's also a wide open wiki with zero editorial control. 90% of the time, this is used for self-promotional or spam articles. While I typically don't support adding mirrors to the blacklist, this one has been used abusively by a very large number of people. I'd be in favor of blacklisting it - there is absolutely zero chance of it ever being used as a source or an external link. Kuru (talk) 15:28, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]