Talk:Spam blacklist

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Requests and proposals Spam blacklist Archives (current)→
The associated page is used by the MediaWiki Spam Blacklist extension, and lists regular expressions which cannot 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; either manually or with SBHandler. 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 and prior blacklisting on at least one. 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.
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-linksconnect - Real-time IRC chat for co-ordination of activities related to maintenance of the blacklist.

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 quickly. Additions and removals are logged · current log 2014/10.

List of all projects
Wikimedia Embassy
Project portals
Country portals
Spam blacklist
Title blacklist
Vandalism reports
Closure of wikis
Interwiki map
Bot flags
New languages
New projects
Username changes
Usurpation request
Speedy deletions

snippet for logging

Proposed additions[edit]

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 (, not Provide links demonstrating widespread spamming by multiple users on multiple wikis. Completed requests will be marked as {{added}} or {{declined}} and archived.[edit]

redirect of blacklisted  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:27, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Added Added -- — billinghurst sDrewth 14:28, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[edit]

One of similar recent variations about visas.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:33, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Added Added spam -- — billinghurst sDrewth 12:33, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Proposed additions (Bot reported)[edit]

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).

  • 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


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.
COIBot's currently open XWiki reports
List Last update By Site IP R Last user Last link addition User Link User - Link User - Link - Wikis Link - Wikis 2014-10-15 10:41:45 COIBot MarMollerml
2014-10-15 09:45:51 6 2

Proposed removals[edit]

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.
  • This page is for the removal of domains from the global blacklist, not for removal of domains from the blacklists of individual wikis. For those requests please take your discussion to the pertinent wiki, where such requests would be made at Mediawiki talk:Spam-blacklist at that wiki. Search spamlists — remember to enter any relevant language code[edit]

I was told to defer from en wiki blacklist to here, comments copy and pasted:
How can the site be useful
I cannot find any other sources online which quote some of the historical sources that this website does. The website is as vital as Template:Hadith-usc, which is linking to islamic primary sources at University of South Carolina's website here.

I cant find in the archives here why it was blacklisted. Possibly because it might be considered extremist literature, because it contains: hadith, quran and tafsir. And someone may have thought these historical text promote extremism and violence. If that was the reason it was blacklisted then that is like saying "block websites that link to the bible because it contains violence".

Also Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/ explains nothing about why this was blacklsited--Misconceptions2 (talk) 12:21, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Why it should not be blacklisted
It does not contain spam or any kind of malware. I beleive it was a huge mistake to blacklist this.

This website contains mainly Islamic primary sources known as Tafsir, so just like there is a Template:Hadith-usc linking to islamic primary sources at University of South Carolina's website, this website is same as the USC webcites which has records of islamic primary sources called hadith. has records of islamic primary sources call tafsir. I am proposing this be whitelisted for same reason as why links from Template:Hadith-usc that go to University of South Carolina's database of islamic primary sources is whitelisted.

Blacklisting reasons:
No opinion on delisting. MER-C 12:50, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Ah i get it now, so it was blacklisted because some guys were posting external links to it. But the links were abosultely relevant. If only the blocking admin knew why those guys werel inking to that website on articles related to Quran verses. Its because those links give commentaries of the relevant quran verse. Although those guys may have spammed links from this website on wikipedia. I see that this spamming in particularly was actually relevant and not really considered spam. More effort should have been taken to investigate back then what exactly a tafsir is--Misconceptions2 (talk) 17:56, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
removed from blacklist here, but Template:Defermetablack because the site is still blacklisted on Meta.
I'll add that the behavior after being blacklisted on meta (evading the blacklist and hiring an outside entity to help them continue spamming) is questionable. Sites are blacklisted on the basis of behavior, and relevance isn't a reason to de-list, although I agree the links would be quite useful on Islam-related articles. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
@Misconceptions2: See the xwiki report above. Abusive overlinking looks to be the reason, and noting that it is still blacklisted at 4 wikipedias, so it was a widespread issue.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:46, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
I am not convinced either. Can you please explain why this site is offering additional info over the several original and translated pages that are already linked on many of the Wikipedia pages where these links were spammed to. We don't add external links just because they are on topic or about the same subject or because they are telling the same as another page that is already linked. The pages are not in English, so for the majority of the English-reading readers of Wikipedia the pages are not giving any additional info. If you argue that they should be linked from a template, then I would like to see a discussion about that. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:30, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
The links of those pages do not link to historial sources that this website contains. There are many types of tafsir. And this site has certain types that others do not. The most famous tafsir is Tafsir ibn Kathir, and this is hosted on many sites, that is what people usually link to. But htis site has other alternative ones like Tafsir of al-Wahidi (also called asab al nuzul which is very famous), also it has tafsir al jalayn. Many more as well. I dont find them on other sources--Misconceptions2 (talk) 20:52, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
I would suggest that you go back to enWP and seek a whitelist of the domain, or maybe look to specific paths of usefulness that they can whitelist. Maybe after it is demonstrated to no longer be abused it can be removed.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:46, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[edit]

This is fan-run website that works in conjunction with the official (Japanese) Tezuka website. It has been a reliable source since at least 2007. The website recently underwent some reconstruction, but it appears that an IP who sourced the characters and relevant part for Wikipedia, many years ago, was the reason to Blacklist it in August 2014. Please remove it from the blacklist. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:11, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Fan sites are not authoritative, see w:en:Wikipedia:External links. This domain was added due to a spambot repeatedly trying to add the url, and I see no reason to remove it with the recent history.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:28, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
That reasoning does not make any sense when the Wikiproject has been content with such links for 7 years and that it has official approval from the Tezuka operators. Seems quite arbitrary and I have not seen evidence of recent abuse. Could you provide that? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:54, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
You can also look for local whitelisting if you want this to be used at English Wikipedia - en:WT:SWL. --Glaisher (talk) 16:20, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Has this been an issue on any other Wiki other than Enwiki? I think I was the last person to actually add the link back in last year. The entire blacklisting seems to have been done because of an account that actually appears to be by an IP that points to a prominent A&M editor who is known for using IP addresses. If the issue is from 7 years ago, asking for a reason other than "bot flagged" be given here. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 21:51, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
When it was blocked ... it was attempted to be added by spambots crosswiki. It was attempted to be added by spambots crosswiki. It was attempted to be added by spambots crosswiki. That was said above, and I am not certain how to say it any more simply.
Much of this is jargon to me and I didn't understand where or what was being attempted. I thought my addition some months ago was being used to blacklist the site, but I guess it was some spammer attempting to flood it? I never seen this - but I guess its resolved. Thanks. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:08, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
The spambot activity was xwiki and seen in our global abuse filters, and as such none of the reports that I will have seen were enWP, they will be all of the smaller wikis. If you think that it should be allowed at enWP, so you can request a whitelist at w:en:Mediawiki:Spam-whitelistbillinghurst sDrewth 12:31, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[edit]

This is the official algarve web site, from the Entidade Regional de Turismo do Algarve. Can it be removed from the blacklist? --Andyrom75 (talk) 18:11, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello? :-) --Andyrom75 (talk) 13:20, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[edit]

linking wanted in (at least) w:fr and w:de; blocked as a false positive of louisvuitton-spam-prevention [a-z0-9-]louis-?vuitton, see Special:diff/3124563. One way to globally un-blacklist the domain is a change to [a-z0-9-](?<!fondation)louis-?vuitton. I'll do that now, but maybe there are better ideas. -- seth (talk) 20:40, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Ah, that is the website, I have seen a similar complaint on en.wikipedia (but they did not tell me yet which website they were actually talking about). I already thought that this was the problem. I think this is indeed the best solution. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:30, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

global blocking of widely used links[edit]

Recently was blacklisted by billinghurst. A lot of links to that domain are used in many wikis. In many cases those links should be unlinked for several reasons (for example in w:de not all archive-bots are able to cope with posts that contain blacklisted links; apart from that some users complain about not being able to send their post although they did not link to a forbidden url---in fact a forbidden url was linked somewhere else on that page).
Is there a (best practise) workflow for unlinking such links in all the wikis? For example in w:de there are two bots which are able to unlink blacklisted links. Probably there are similar bots in w:en. But I don't know, whether there are similar e.g. french or dutch bots. Probably there is no global bot for such a job, because the task would differ from wiki to wiki.
Actually I want to ask this in general. As a second question I'd like to know/discuss, whether the blacklisting of is necessary; can that domain be used to circumvent the sbl? -- seth (talk) 21:12, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

It was being abused, though let us remove it first and have the discussion if it is that widely used.  — billinghurst sDrewth
Removed Removed  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:18, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
'\b(lmgtfy|letmegooglethatforyou)\.com.*[?&]l=1' is there, the option 'l=1' is turning it into a redirect site. Without that, it is just another google-search. Now there is not much need to link to google searches in mainspace of a wiki, it has its function in discussions (some of the 'research' templates on en.w are using it). Those however do not need to use lmgtfy/letmegooglethatforyou - that is just a funny gadget that can be (completely!) avoided by using google (or other search engine) directly.
The unlinking of domains that get blacklisted is an ongoing problem. First, I think that bots SHOULD be able to cope with blacklisted links (or even have a right that their edits are not affected by the blacklist - as long as that does not get 'abused' by the bot-owner). For, the links can easily be replaced by the analogous google-search. On en.w an unlinking bot has not gained any consensus that I am aware of (it can amount to 'vandalism' if a good ref gets de-linked because it did get spammed and blacklisted - I personally had a fight where I blacklisted something after a 8-or-so-year-spam-campaign but which was used, sometimes, as well by regulars).
I don't understand why 'a forbidden url was linked somewhere else on that page' is an issue - if the link was already there the blacklist should not trip, one needs to 'add' the blacklisted domain for the filter to trip, and if that is not the case, something else is wrong.
Regarding - I think that it has no use on Wikipedia (use the direct google link instead) and since it was abused (and a certain potential for that as well), it may have its place on the blacklist. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 03:39, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
The problem is not so much that this link was putted on the blacklist. Worse, the previously existing links were not removed automatically. This means that this page (a talk page mostly) is more or less locked. If someone would like to edit only a single section (and this blacklisted link is not located in this section), then this editor cannot realize why the change should not be stored. Maybe this can be treated as a bug. I think, the blacklist should then act on this section only, in which this link is located. --Charly Whisky (talk) 16:07, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Maybe you did not understand what I said here, if there is a link on a page and that links ends up on the blacklist, then there are no problems with saving that page - the blacklist ONLY blocks additions of links, not links that are already there. What you describe is not part of the blacklist functionality, there is something else going on over there. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 07:37, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Maybe you did not understand what I said: in the given example the spam filter using the black list made the exactly contrary procedure: see [1] There was a problem with saving that page, indeed. This edit was possible only while the allegedly spamlink was removed simultaneously. Before that I could not save my edit! [2] (The attempts to save are documented by the wiki software: Admins should be able to check the log-file.) --Charly Whisky (talk) 08:35, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Troubleshooting and problems[edit]

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).

SBHandler broken[edit]

SBHandler seems to be broken - both Glaisher and I had problems that it stops after the closing of the thread on this page, but before the actual blacklisting. Do we have someone knowledgeable who can look into why this does not work? --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 04:08, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Erwin - pinging you as the developer. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 04:16, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

FYI when you created this section with the name "SBHandler", you prevented SBHandler from being loaded at all (see MediaWiki:Gadget-SBHandler.js "Guard against double inclusions"). Of course, changing the heading won't fix the original issue you mentioned. But at least it will load now. PiRSquared17 (talk) 15:30, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Closed Closed


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