Talk:Spam blacklist

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Requests and proposals Spam blacklist Archives (current)→
Shortcut:
WM:SPAM
WM:SBL
The associated page is used by the MediaWiki Spam Blacklist extension, and lists strings of text that may not be used in URLs in any page in Wikimedia Foundation projects (as well as many external wikis). Any meta administrator can edit the spam blacklist. There is also a more aggressive way to block spamming through direct use of $wgSpamRegex. Only system administrators can make changes to $wgSpamRegex, and its use is to be avoided whenever possible. For more information on what the spam blacklist is for, and the processes used here, please see Spam blacklist/About.
Proposed additions
Please provide evidence of spamming on several wikis. Spam that only affects a single project should go to that project's local blacklist. Exceptions include malicious domains and URL redirector/shortener services. Please follow this format. Please check back after submitting your report, there could be questions regarding your request.
Proposed removals
Please check our list of requests which repeatedly get declined. 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 value in support of our projects. Please consider whether requesting whitelisting on a specific wiki for a specific use is more appropriate - that is very often the case.

Please sign your posts with ~~~~ after your comment. This leaves a signature and timestamp so conversations are easier to follow.

Completed requests are marked as {{added}}/{{removed}} or {{declined}}, and are generally archived (search) quickly. Additions and removals are logged.

Other discussion
Troubleshooting and problems - If there is an error in the blacklist (i.e. a regex error) which is causing problems, please raise the issue here.
Discussion - Meta-discussion concerning the operation of the blacklist and related pages, and communication among the spam blacklist team.
#wikimedia-external-links - Real-time IRC chat for co-ordination of activities related to maintenance of the blacklist.
Projects

Information

Tools

Requests

snippet for logging
{{sbl-log|1725202#{{subst:anchorencode:SectionNameHere}}}}

Contents

[edit] Proposed additions

Symbol comment vote.svg This section is for proposing that a website be blacklisted; add new entries at the bottom of the section, using the basic URL so that there is no link (example.com, not http://www.example.com). Provide links demonstrating widespread spamming by multiple users on multiple wikis. Completed requests will be marked as {{added}} or {{declined}} and archived.

[edit] razboifilatelic.blogspot.com



See User:COIBot/XWiki/razboifilatelic.blogspot.com. Best regards, Finn Rindahl 19:25, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done (via the crosswiki report). Tusen takk, —Dferg (disputatio) 21:51, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
De nada ;) Finn Rindahl 22:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Lots o' URL shorteners

Regexes hidden in a comment.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 03:40, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Crystal Clear action edit add.png Added  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 04:24, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

These have no reason in the log:



[1]


Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2007-04#leenk.org.2C_dwarfurl.com

 — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 04:11, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Fixed both of those.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 04:29, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Essay spam









































































 — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:47, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Crystal Clear action edit add.png Added  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 19:34, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] co.cc again



MZMcBride removed this entry. Wikipedia claims that the domain is not a real TLD and is used for URL redirectors. On that basis, I think it should be re-added with a preceeding dot: \.co\.cc\b  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 19:43, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Having had to deal with a lot of the spam links, I strongly endorse restoring this link. No offense, MZM, but this one should have been discussed first before removal. --Ckatz 10:05, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
It's clearly not just being used for URL redirection. As the Wikipedia article notes, it can be used as a real DNS. .com is capable of URL redirection and brings in a lot more spam. I don't think blacklisting an entire TLD or ccTLD (real or not) is a good idea, though I can understand it's the simplest solution. Is there a complementary global whitelist? Do we have any idea how many false positives this addition to the blacklist will cause? --MZMcBride 10:42, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Do you have any evidence supporting your reason for removal? Discussion when working with others is critical, and your flippant response to my query is worrying.
As to the substantive issue: Yes, there will be candidates for whitelisting, that was acknowledged and addressed from the initial request for blacklisting. I haven't seen that the rate is unacceptable, which you simply take as a premise, and we have helped users to request whitelisting where necessary, and will continue to do so.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 14:56, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Flippant? You've globally blacklisted an entire ccTLD, which has broad implications on 700+ projects, plus an unknown number of sites that also use this list. This entry in particular is creating an unknown (and possibly high) number of false positives (I'm only here because there was a local problem at en.wiki regarding what appears to be an entirely valid URL and it was baffling how the URL could be blacklisted). Here's the diff of you broadening the regex—where was the discussion for doing this? I don't see anything in the log, though admittedly the log is nearly impossible to navigate. (If there is no discussion, what was the rationale? Is there supporting data to suggest that the only possible approach here is to block the entire ccTLD, an obviously extreme tactic?) --MZMcBride 16:33, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
I think you missed this.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:36, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Are discussions on this talk page archived anywhere? I checked the log (silly me, I know). Reading the old discussion, I'm still baffled about the rationale here. It can be used for URL redirection. So can literally any other domain (top-level or otherwise). That's not an argument to ban any and all uses of it. If there's evidence that this domain is unmanageable and won't result in an excessive number of false positives, I don't have an issue with including such a broad regex. But I'd like there to be some specific data to point to, not just "can be used for URL redirection," which I consider a non-argument. --MZMcBride 16:42, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Not "can" -- "is" (well, "was" until you removed it :D). You can see User:COIBot/XWiki/co.cc for a small taste (too many results to generate the large taste) - or the original request. Anecdotally, yes, we know it was abused cross-wiki; that's why I added it when JzG brought the request here - if not it would have been "add to XLinkBot for enwiki, and we'll attempt to monitor on other wikis with COIBot.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:50, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] solarelectricity.weebly.com



Page is a front-end advertisement to get around existing blacklisting of the earthforenergy.com domain. See related meta-SBL archived entry at Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2009-01#Redirects for clickbank.net.

The new page is an advertisement with a link to "CLICK HERE TO VIEW THEIR WEBSITE", which forwards to the previously blocked domains. --- Barek (talkcontribs) - 16:32, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Crystal Clear action edit add.png Added  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:41, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed additions (Bot reported)

Symbol comment vote.svg This section is for domains which have been added to multiple wikis as observed by a bot.

These are automated reports, please check the records and the link thoroughly, it may report good links! For some more info, see Spam blacklist/Help#COIBot_reports. Reports will automatically be archived by the bot when they get stale (less than 5 links reported, which have not been edited in the last 7 days, and where the last editor is COIBot).

Sysops
  • If the report contains links to less than 5 wikis, then only add it when it is really spam
  • Otherwise just revert the link-additions, and close the report; closed reports will be reopened when spamming continues
  • To close a report, change the LinkStatus template to closed ({{LinkStatus|closed}})
  • Please place any notes in the discussion section below the HTML comment

[edit] COIBot

The LinkWatchers report domains meeting the following criteria:

  • When a user mainly adds this link, and the link has not been used too much, and this user adds the link to more than 2 wikis
  • When a user mainly adds links on one server, and links on the server have not been used too much, and this user adds the links to more than 2 wikis
  • If ALL links are added by IPs, and the link is added to more than 1 wiki
  • If a small range of IPs have a preference for this link (but it may also have been added by other users), and the link is added to more than 1 wiki.



[edit] Proposed removals

Symbol comment vote.svg This section is for proposing that a website be unlisted; please add new entries at the bottom of the section.

Remember to provide the specific domain blacklisted, links to the articles they are used in or useful to, and arguments in favour of unlisting. Completed requests will be marked as {{removed}} or {{declined}} and archived.

See also /recurring requests for repeatedly proposed (and refused) removals.

The addition or removal of a domain from the blacklist is not a vote; please do not bold the first words in statements.

[edit] lprussia.com



lprussia.com - this site has been blocked from Russian part of wiki http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linkin_Park claiming that the page got spammed by multiple anonimous ip addresses. The matter is that lprussia.com is not spam at all and it directly belongs to http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linkin_Park being the most visited Russian Linkin Park fan site. Please remove the url from the blacklist. Hope for your understanding.

The domain is not blocked here but on Russian Wikipedia. You have to ask on ru:MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist for removal. Symbol deferred.svg Deferred to ru.wikipedia
Dferg (disputatio) 11:17, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] lofoten.info



This is the OFFICIAL TOURIST INFORMATION for the Norwegian island group w:Lofoten. The communities of the islands refer to this site (e.g. http://www.lofotportalen.no/ "Turisme" and "Turist info"). See also http://www.visitnorway.com/en/Product/?pid=35406 . It is the second time that I have to request the removal of the blacklist. This entry does not fullfill the definition of spam and the guideline ("Only blacklist for widespread, unmanageable spam.") at all! It is absolutely inacceptable that this blacklist is used for censorship of official websites! And I'm not affiliated with the site, I'm not even from Norway. --94.221.81.53 17:02, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

The addition is not mentioned here but discussed at dewiki and to some extent at nowiki. I remember this one from nowiki, where it was indeed over-utilized and thus removed from several articles. I can confirm that the site is (semi-)official touristinformation. Not sure why it was added, it does not seem to have been added as much Xwiki as it was on nowiki (I might have missed something though.) Finn Rindahl 17:58, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Why "semi"-official? It's official, see e.g. http://www.visitnorway.com/en/Articles/Norway/North/Lofoten/Tourist-Information-in-Lofoten/ (VisitNorway is the official Tourist site of the state of Norway). And it is rather normal if a tourist information for a region and its communities is added to the articles about the region and each community. If it is readded again and again to the article about Lofoten, this is only shows that a lot of people know that this is the official site and think that the official site should be mentioned in the article. It's questionable if this is useful in every case, but this does mean in no way that this is spam. --94.221.81.53 18:39, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
OK, strike semi then :) As I recall it, there was attempts at Wikipedia in Norwegian to add this link to more or less articles about every place in Lofoten - this was concidered overlinking and it was removed from every article except no:Lofoten (where I certainly agree it is a relevant linkaddition). Now, if something similar has happened crosswiki that might be teh reason why it is blacklisted (not because the link itself is bad, but because it has been added to much at articles where it isn't really relevant. Now, this linkreport does not indicate such linking (apart from at nowiki as described), so that is why I agree with ip 94.etc that global blacklisting seem a bit strange. I'm not an admin here (anymore) - just adding some observations/opinions to help the admin who's going to look into this ;) Finn Rindahl 18:57, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi!
I blacklisted the website because of overlinking at de, en and no. We can try to unblacklist that website and watch, whether there will be overlinking again. I'll unblacklist it now. Yes check.svg Done -- seth 23:27, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
They were adding links to their own website according to this, and they did it cross wiki (de, en, nl, nb, nn) and the link was reinserted sevral times on en:Lofoten after it was removed by others. The blacklisting of the link was according to policy.
Wikipedia isn't a tourist guide, there is no obligation to have links to any tourist information websites, official or unofficial. If "official" links gets spammed they can be blacklisted, just like any other link that gets spammed. ---Jorunn 11:21, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
What Jorun writes is of course correct. I had forgotten about that posting on my commonstalk, and tracing my steps I see that I here told the user that linking from no:Lofoten was ok but not linking from all places in Lofoten. I was of course referring to Wikipedia in Norwegian, but he may have misunderstood this as a carte blanche for linking from any Lofoten article. Note however that these overlinking attempts at nowiki ceased after this.
Anyway, the purpose of blacklisting is to prevent new spamming, not punish previous - let's see what happens next. New excessive linkpushing will of course mean we'll have to relist it. Finn Rindahl 14:19, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


[edit] eu-football.info



This website is about six months in Spam-blacklist, but in this period it was white-listed in pl.wikipedia.org and ru.wikipedia.org by requests of absolutely different people. Also in page Кузман Сотировски somebody tried to add link to this site but it is impossible now. I think this site is may be useful to wikipedia if different users add to wikipedia information from it. I didn`t ask to whitelist any page but I think that entire website has to be whitelisted to let users from whole Europe find statistics football facts for wikipedia. Also this site is not spamming now in pl.wikipedia.org and ru.wikipedia.org, so it wouldn`t be spamming in whole wikipedia too. Thanks! Tyxis 18:55, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Lots of cross-wiki spam per User:COIBot/XWiki/eu-football.info. Where specific uses can be justified, you can request local whitelisting. Symbol declined.svg Declined  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 19:49, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] damascus.par-darmstadt.de



This website is an official University site. It gathers important information from students work. The site is linked by important sites in the architectural world like www.german-architects.com; www.architekturclips.de; www.architekturvideos.de; www.citymayors.com; www.tu-darmstadt.de; etc. the list still continues. I don't know why so many entries were made, but I think that it is well worth to remove that site from the spamlist. The information disposed there is all on CC license. I think that it is important to distribute this information. please have a look at the site and make your own opinion.

The domain was already removed.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 19:51, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] complaintsboard.com



Please allow. There are important discussions there. The website is one of few offering space for free complaints. Complaints are part of life. The website is not loved by corporations. Please show democracy.

That domain is not blacklisted here.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 03:24, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Symbol deferred.svg Deferred to w:en:MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist - added per [2]  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 03:25, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Troubleshooting and problems

Symbol comment vote.svg This section is for comments related to problems with the blacklist (such as incorrect syntax or entries not being blocked), or problems saving a page because of a blacklisted link. This is not the section to request that an entry be unlisted (see Proposed removals above).

None currently

[edit] Discussion

Symbol comment vote.svg This section is for discussion of Spam blacklist issues among other users.

None currently