Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2008-05

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Warning! Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in May 2008, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index.

Proposed additions

Symbol comment vote.svg This section is for completed requests that a website be blacklisted

urlgen.com



URL redirection service like TinyURL. 143.238.211.63 13:01, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Added Added thanks --Herby talk thyme 16:33, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

www.abradio.pl/radio/30/radio-roxette



Cross wiki spam today from suspect poilish mailserver. MoiraMoira 13:05, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Links mostly removed (other than pl where it may be legitimate). 195.16.91.4 cross-wiki-contribsIP inforobtexgblockglist is the IP involved. I'm inclined to see if this comes back - if it does it is listable in my view, thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

smalur.com

Please blacklist



which is being spammed by



. --Erwin(85) 09:52, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Link shortener, agreed Added Added & thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:58, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

URL shorteners

Blacklisted following shorteners listed on http://lists.econsultant.com/top-10-url-redirection-services.html:

  • eb.cx
  • shorl.com
  • url.fm
  • qurl.net
  • shortlinks.co.uk
  • url123.com
  • 1tiny.com
  • 6url.com
  • flingk.com
  • lin.kz
  • metamark.net
  • minilien.com
  • o-rly.net
  • paulding.net
  • smcurl.com
  • tighturl.com
  • url.etusivu.net
  • w3t.org
  • yatuc.com
  • yep.it

VasilievVV 18:59, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

All have been added Crystal Clear action edit add.png Added – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Universe Daily

See the latest incarnation and AN thread.











Yes check.svg Done, reporting here for logging as I don't have time to log it right now. JzG 11:14, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

sitetiny.com - url shortener



--Versageek 14:46, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for catching it - Added Added --Herby talk thyme 14:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

bloomsdaynyc.com

Please blacklist



which is being spammed by



--Erwin(85) 21:03, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Added AddedVasilievVV 21:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

navarra.net pamplona.com





Spammers





Both spammers are cross-wiki. See w:WT:WPSPAM#spam.navarra.net spam.pamplona.com. 143.238.211.63 10:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Indeed - links cleared but they look persistent over time. Added Added thanks --Herby talk thyme 11:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Multiple sites by Mikhailov Kusserow

User:




Links:

















They all reside on different IPs:

I am closing the 8 SpamReportBot reports (to keep that list clear). Discussion here please. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 14:18, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

All in all, the links seem legit, though in some cases whole linkfarms were added in one edit. Mikhailov Kusserow has a userpage on many of the wikis I checked (SUL?). I have asked id:Pengguna:Mikhailov_Kusserow (which appears to be one of the bigger accounts) to help us out here. Awaiting discussion. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 15:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree that the links look relevant, but there appears to be a distinct bias here, which is not cause for blacklisting unless it continues egregiously, but is cause for concern. Very likely the link placement may be unwanted upon closer inspection, but that is not for us to decide here. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 19:12, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Update - after a message on my talk page I have left another message on the user's en wp talk page (at their request) again pointing to this link. Maybe give it a couple of days but after that I think we must consider listing these in the absence of any explanation --Herby talk thyme 11:23, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

My Mistake

No, I don't think so. We are watching the external link additions on 722 wikipedia, and saw that you added a handful of new links to a handful of wikipedias. As the links have not been used by anyone else, that triggers our system. For IPs that generally means that it is spam, but here this was done by an established editor. That normally means that we can ignore, but Herythyme found that one of the sites was under development, and showed concerns. I still think all is fine, but your input to clarify this would be great. See m:Talk:Spam_blacklist#Multiple_sites_by_Mikhailov_Kusserow, I am sure that this is a mistake, and a short explanation of these links will clear the matter. Thanks already! --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:18, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi - the best thing would be if you would go to the link that Dirk has provided above & comment there. You have been placing links to eight sites across a number of wikis which does look like excessive link placement to the community there. An explanation of why you see that as relevant will allow us to review the matter. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 11:03, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry if I make a mistake in all wkipedia. I just want to give contributions, that's all. I don't have a plan to make a spam. Thank You for all your Reminders. Mikhailov Kusserow 04:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm waiting your comment in meta.wiki or en.wiki. Mikhailov Kusserow 04:47, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the posting Mikhailov however we do need to know why you think these sites relevant & why you have been placing links. As I said on your talk page on en wp a few days ago you need to discuss the matter on this page not a personal talk page. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 06:54, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Have we made a determination on this yet? I'm of the view that adding many links at once is generally not ok, and I don't see a satisfactory response here. Note that this user is on 87 wikis. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 11:20, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I suggest closing this as  Not done. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 20:00, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Six links from cross wiki for discussion



  • Its an Islamic website and used in this article as a reference, can you kindly explain me that why have you taken that link out of the article?--Asikhi 06:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


Some links from allaahuakbar.net are valid and have been placed for non-spam reasons. Please look at these on a case-by-case basis and don't blanket-delete.-76.191.149.215 21:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

  • allaahuakbar.net is an Islamic web portal and it covers wide range of topics on Islam. I am sorry but I couldn't understand that why have you deleted [http://allaahuakbar.net this link] along with WHOLE SENTENCE?--Asikhi 06:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)






  • It is an Official Website of International Spiritual Movement Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam in Urdu, Why this was taken out?--Asikhi 06:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


  • This link belong to official website of “CENTRE FOR LEGAL AID ASSISTANCE & SETTLEMENT” (CLAAS), why it was removed?--Asikhi 06:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

There are several users involved, generally the users who are only active on one wiki seem to revert vandalism (as the bots involved). User on more than one wiki (not implying that they did something wrong):




But the link gets sometimes reverted while the Asikhi was not active with that link on that wiki. Maybe 'older' spammers (pre-database?).

Please provide some discussion, I am closing the reports and will point the discussions here. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 09:11, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

As far as msapubli.com is concerned the link being placed "looks" relevant as it is quite long. However (for me) it redirects to the home page which appears to have no relevance to Wikipedia and contains the wor "affiliated" which makes me wonder. I will look far more closely at the others. This batch concerns me --Herby talk thyme 09:26, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
I have real doubts about the validity of these sites to Wikipedia as a whole --Herby talk thyme 10:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Herby, these are not good links, and I would blacklist, but note that there are many links on several wikis that must be removed. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 21:13, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I think this should be listed but I am concerned about the number of existing links that need dealing with - any ideas? --Herby talk thyme 08:00, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Only one, and that's to do some spadework. I will start on this. JzG 20:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Here's a plan: purge them from the major projects, use admin contacts on those projects to blacklist and prevent them going back in, and once we've got the count down on the main projects we can blacklist them here and clear the project blacklists. Either that or hit them once and blacklist, and leave any edit warriors who revert to pick up the pieces. But I had some idiot who told me that he'd had to use rollback to revert a link back in that I'd removed because a manual revert or an undo was caught in the blacklist so would not save. I have not the words... JzG 21:00, 11 May 2008 (UTC) Scratch that. People have plainly been busy, we're down to a handful of links to each on the top 20 wikis, mostly on talk and user talk pages. Safe to blacklist? JzG 21:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
    That was partly me. It looks (above) like someone's not happy with me culling these links. The one mentioned above is used in <ref> :O
    I have serious doubts about it's validity as a reference or an external link; I think listing is OK at this point. Disagreement? – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:54, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I reviewed these sites before the request came here. I do not see them as encyclopaedic and therefore I believe the blacklisting is correct. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 07:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I am not convinced, at least you should review following sites:
asipak.com
claasfamily.org
allaahuakbar.net
Thanks & regards, --Asikhi 07:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Indeed - as I recall them from the first time I looked at them. They may be interesting to some degree however they are not encyclopaedic. Equally they were excessively linked. I see no reason to remove these but others may see it differently. --Herby talk thyme 08:03, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Crystal Clear action edit add.png Added – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Can I use now above mentioned websites as reference?--Asikhi 11:19, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
    No, they have been blacklisted. They are unsuitable for use as references, and are not encyclopedic. Please see the discussion above for further reasoning. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 11:23, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Cocktailteam.net

Looking at this it seems to largely added by IPs



Views welcome (not suggesting blacklisting is necessary but....) --Herby talk thyme 09:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Might as well. The IPs are spamming, and the site is not suitable for linking IMO. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:44, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Linking continued quite some yesterday on enwiki, but has been cross-wiki in the past. Links cleared, and Crystal Clear action edit add.png Added – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 23:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

thatsqingdao, etc









Relentless spamming of this site, myredstar.com, qingdaoofficialguide.com, qingdaochinaguide (the last two of which redirect to thatsqingdao.com) by multiple IPS:

Declined Declined, please use local blacklistVasilievVV 18:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


This domain was subsequently blacklisted locally on en.wikipedia. In investigating a removal request, I found that these domains were spammed cross-wiki:
There were also some more related domains:






--A. B. (talk) 20:42, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Generally not one to blacklist related domains, but in this case I'm fine with listing all 7. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 23:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Given no further comments, Crystal Clear action edit add.png Added – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 20:00, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mike. I have posted a response to the whitelist discussion [5] several days ago and recently noticed that you added (thatsqingdao.com) to the global blacklist. It does seem that (thatsqingdao.com) actually does provide current encyclopedic information on attractions, festivals, & local events. Can this be left on the local black list instead? Or better yet, completely removed? ~thanks for your consideration. LizGodfry 09:20, 18 May 2008 (UTC) (moved from User talk:Mike.lifeguard)

The site as well as the related sites have been relentless spammed across numerous wikis. Note that LizGodfry on en Wikipedia is a single-purpose account. Ohnoitsjamie 17:00, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

urbanlive.org

Domain



Account



Eeference

--A. B. (talk) 04:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


Yes check.svg Done -A. B. (talk) 04:14, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


vipflux.com and related spam

Spam domains






Google Adsense: 2615385364803304, 8224821733389100


Related domains











Accounts

--A. B. (talk) 13:38, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


Yes check.svg Done --13:50, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


Reference:
--A. B. (talk) 14:37, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

audado.com

Spammed on en and es Wikipedias

Domain:



Account:






Reference:

--A. B. (talk) 14:35, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


Yes check.svg Done --A. B. (talk) 14:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

www.vector.com.pl

Spammed on ten differend wikipedia's, continuing affair.

Domain:



Account (is the company itself)



Kind regards, MoiraMoira 06:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, thanks — VasilievV 2 06:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

shorterlink.co.uk



URL shortener. 143.238.211.63 11:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Crystal Clear action edit add.png Added & thanks. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

puratimba.com



Was added alongside vanvandeformell.com. It's a blog :( – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 23:28, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Links on all Wikipedias cleared. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 23:46, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Italian portal spam

Sites spammed








Related domains


Spammers









See w:WT:WPSPAM#Italian portal spam for more info. All the IPs are cross-wiki spammers. 143.238.211.63 12:51, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Bump. 143.238.211.63 13:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, got lost wading through all the reports. Looks good for listing to me. There are some links that will need removal; doing now... – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 21:30, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
OK, left itwiki alone; they may well want whitelisting. hewiki wasn't happy about it - I suspect they'll be re-added shortly. Nevertheless, these are clearly cross-wiki spammers. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 22:04, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Added Added  – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

web-app.net attempting to circumvent via redirect

  • web-app.us

Recent run in with this spammer can be found en:MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist#web-app_dot_net. Couldent find the origional listing info, however the redirect to web-app.net is web-app.us. thanks--Hu12 05:02, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Found last report User:COIBot/XWiki/web-app.net--Hu12 05:10, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Also is adding this site buyuyenicerik.com along with the redirect[12]. --Hu12 05:24, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


Domains


  • previously blacklisted
  • Google Adsense: 8510977985742886







Accounts













Not to be confused with
(unrelated owners)
  • webappworld.org
  • Web-App.org
  • web-app.info
  • WebAppWorld.net
  • web-app.mobi
--A. B. (talk) 06:32, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
I hate to blacklist open source software web sites, but this spammer has proven himself singularly disruptive and disputatious. If an established editor wants to use one of these links, I'll be happy to consider whitelisting.
Added Added --A. B. (talk) 06:40, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Humor: The bots that are catching this XWiki spammer are all written in perl. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 19:56, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

More abusive socks
























--Hu12 00:58, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

wdalaw.com



See also WikiProject_Spam case

Cross wiki spamming

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/200.88.87.77

Wendy Diaz and Associates Spam law firm spam. Thanks, --Hu12 17:54, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Added Added, thanks — VasilievV 2 18:25, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

iranhome.net

Spam domains














  • Note: coo.ir is a URL shortener domain similar to tinyurl.com






oxinads.com referral ID: 5807


URL shortener domain found while researching this incident



Related domains









































Accounts















Reference

--A. B. (talk) 02:34, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Ugh. Shall we go for a regex that blocks all commercefoo.blocspot.com and ecommercefoo.blogspot.com? The potential for collateral damage is strictly limited. 80.176.82.42 15:09, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
My 2 cents: I think for now we can hold off simply because the abuser did not spam that many commerce*.blogspot.com links -- >90% of his edits were flogging iranhome.net and other iran-titled domains. If we get more of the commerce*.blogspot.com stuff, we can revisit this issue. --A. B. (talk) 16:15, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Just to note that I consolidated some of these regexes for the sake of brevity.  – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 21:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

anti-jw.chat.ru



Pages replaced with that site by



on af, ast,

The spamlink had been temporaily added to the bl to stop him, (he obviously just started at "a")

\banti-jw\.chat\.ru\b

Probably it should stay on the bl, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 21:43, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

(note, I have not yet added it to the log, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 22:22, 19 May 2008 (UTC))


Given that it seemed to have happened not only on (af) and (ast), (en),(es), and the fact that he obviously (seen on via the big brother channel) just started at a to replace all articles with that link, I think the link should stay blacklisted, I will add it to the log now. Thanks, --birdy geimfyglið (:> )=| 17:05, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Thanks birdy!  – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:09, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Natureperu.com



Placed on articles about Coca by:



.Koen 15:54, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Caught by the linkwatchers as well, covered in User:COIBot/XWiki/natureperu.com. Suggest discussing there, more info there. Good catch, .Koen! --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 15:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Added Added. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 16:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

referenceforbusiness.com

Please consider blacklisting referenceforbusiness.com. It's the sister site of previously blocked stateuniversity.com block discussion here, owned by Advameg Advameg discussion here. A search on referenceforbusiness.com yielded its insertion into over 20 articles on the English-language Wikipedia, including Company American Pop Corn Company, Frederick W. Smith, Dwight Schar, and List of acquisitions by Symantec. I have not found a specific spam user, but I think instead the site is typically added as a reference by editors who are adding cites to articles and come across referenceforbusiness.com as a Google result for obscure topics. --Zippy 05:55, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

If this is a solely en wp issue then the blacklisting should be local (here) thanks --Herby talk thyme 16:35, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for the suggestion - I was not aware of the en.wikipedia list. I did a check, and links to referenceforbusiness.com also appear on de.wikipedia, nl.wikipedia, fr.wikipedia, it.wikipedia, ja.wikipedia, and zh.wikipedia, albeit to a reduced degree compared to en.wikipedia. (links go to search results) --Zippy 22:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


175 links on top 10 wikis (here). Certainly needs looking at - out of time myself now --Herby talk thyme 15:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

  • I'm unsure what to do here. There is heavy linkage - some clearly inappropriate, but other use seems legit. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 02:12, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
    • I have serious doubts about the suitability of this domain as a reference or external link. I would be inclined to remove it wherever possible, but I'm still unsure whether blacklisting (esp. globally) is warranted. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 02:41, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
This type is really difficult to deal with. There is certainly some valid use of the link, there is some excessive use of the link.
If we list it some valid editors will be affected, if we don't it is likely the linkage will grow & grow. Other views very welcome, thanks --Herby talk thyme 08:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
I can see RfB as being a valid use as in "a user in good faith adds it as a citation for an article," but I don't think referenceforbusiness.com is ever valid as a reference, due to verifiability and reliability concerns. I'm having a hard time coming up with a case where I'd not remove it as a link. --Zippy 11:36, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm moving that way I think. I can see why it might be an idea to use it but equally I would have thought any really important stuff should be found elsewhere? Those interested may want to look here as well. --Herby talk thyme 11:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
All over, there are discussions on talk pages about the suitability of this domain as a reference. I don't think it is ok for that purpose. But I'm not sure that necessitates blacklisting globally. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 12:32, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
After looking at some more uses, and looking into the background discussion some more, I'm thinking this may be similar to the case of ezinearticles.com - there might be some good content in there, but it is not a reliable source on the whole. I'd want some more input before proceeding. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

spirited-expeditions.com



Repeated cross-wiki spamming in articles about Lago de Atitlán.

[28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] --87.178.150.157 22:34, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Added Added  – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 22:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

searchx.1gb.in

This was inserted only a few places as far as I know, but it was pages like chr:Wikipedia:How to edit a page and simple:Wikipedia:How to copy-edit. The website is of no value to any Wikimedia wiki.







--Jorunn 08:21, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Added Added \bsearchx\.1gb\.in\b  – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


geocities.com/satanismresource

Domains




Accounts

















Reference

--A. B. (talk) 03:42, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Added Added --A. B. (talk) 03:48, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

banknotes.com spam

Spamming wikipedia since July 2005.


Domains





















Accounts







































References

--A. B. (talk) 04:26, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Added Added --A. B. (talk) 17:34, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposed removals

Symbol comment vote.svg This section is for archiving proposals that a website be unlisted.

logisticsclub.com

Dear Wiki and concerned person, the above mentioned url was blocked but I don't know why. This web site belongs to Logistics association in Turkey. Aim of this web site is to band together the logistics sector, university student and demandant sector of logistics and to provide information about logistics and transportation and warehouse, to announce related conferences and seminars. There are three different url for this club logisticsclub.com - logisticsclub.org - lojistikkulubu.com - loj*istikkulubu.org all of this url amount to the same web site, two of them Turkish web address. Consequently this site of Logistics Club is not spam, why all web address of Logistics Club are blocked. Now we want to add a subject "Lojistik Nedir? (in english What is the Logistics)" - www.logisticsclub.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2 with web address into References section of http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojistik this head. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Farukcaliskan (talk • contribs) 11:58, 22 Apr 2008 (UTC)

See request. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 12:05, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Declined Declined per original request --Herby talk thyme 08:03, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

piscator.interfree.it

Dear Wiki and concerned person, the url piscator.interfree.it has been blocked since a few days and no changes are possible to the article "Erwin Piscator" in de:WP [74] therefore anymore. I may not be familiar with every single website hosted at interfree.it but I know that piscator.interfree.it is certainly a reliable source of a well-established Italian theater company. The article on the German theater director Piscator should definitely contain a link to this theatre since it is a significant part of the reception history of Piscator's theater if an Italian company carries his name today. Could you please therefore remove piscator.interfree.it from the blacklist? I would be grateful for help since the Piscator article is currently evaluated within the featured article process. --KWa 11:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

In practice the entire interfree.it domain was blacklisted with no obvious reason given. For now I de-activated the link however when we discover the reason it may be listed again. However you should be able to edit for now --Herby talk thyme 11:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your prompt reaction! I will observe the further development but I hope that the domain interfree.it does not have to be completely blacklisted (maybe blocking certain ominous subdomains would be sufficient). It would be kind of regrettable if we could not add links from articles to established theater companies. --KWa 12:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
The reason for the blacklisting was probably related to this edit. Korg 16:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
That is very helpful thanks. The trouble is that that does not show what are effectively sub domains. If you check this you'll get 238 links. However - for simplicity - taking de wp with 11 links they represent 10 different websites (here). Hard to justify the entire overall domain. --Herby talk thyme 16:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree, I do not think it should be blacklisted. However Nakon may have more information for us, so I'll ask him to comment here. Thanks, Korg 19:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

interfree.it

Given the above I propose removing this domain from the blacklist (it is currently de-activated). Nakon has indicated that he will not be returning to this page and the info supplied by Korg suggests there may have been some misunderstanding in the request. It seems perfectly possible that some section of interfree.it was the intended target or that it was not understood that it represented so many sub domains.

There probably is excessive linkage to this domain however it is linkage to a very varied collection of subdomains in practice. It may well be that some of these should be blacklisted however allowing this global block of the higher level looks to me to be more likely to cause problems than to solve them. Comments welcome & I'll give it 24 hours. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:48, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, removing is fine. It would be nice to know what the relevant subdomains are -- do we know what they are, or is Nakon the holder of that info? – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 12:44, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Based on Korg's info above I guess Betacommand is the one who knows what it was they wanted to block? I still think blocking these higher level domains & so the sub domains is fraught with problems even if they are basically undesirable. At the very least there should be some real discussion & examination of the consequences --Herby talk thyme 12:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Removed Removed given no further comments --Herby talk thyme 15:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Herby. Korg 18:24, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

usbig.net

This is a genuine, well-respected organization. It is not clear to me why it would be on the blacklist, and its appearance here renders editing several articles impossible. Guido den Broeder 20:25, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Same request for: basicincome.com, freiheitstattvollbeschaeftigung.de, globalincome.org. Guido den Broeder 20:34, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Extensive cross wiki link placement resulted in this listing - see here. I would certainly not be inclined to remove these for now, views --Herby talk thyme 07:47, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Er, well, they are relevant to all wikipediae. Guido den Broeder 01:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Guido, are you connected with any of these? --A. B. (talk) 22:11, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Seems possible --Herby talk thyme 07:07, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
No. I am a member of BIEN and of the Vereniging Basisinkomen. Those two are not blacklisted. Guido den Broeder 07:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Still waiting for a decision; I see no attempt to explain why these links are blacklisted. Guido den Broeder 09:52, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
No attempt, Guido, you are involved in the links, and therefore, at least on the en wikipedia, should not be adding them yourself, but engage in discussion on talkpages. Morover, this, and the other links, were added to several wikipedia, and at least for usbig.net, it seems that was also you (the IP is in Scandinavia, probably NOT you). There is an item on en:WP:COIN concerning your edits as well (and if I see correctly, also a ArbReq?). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 11:21, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
You are talking complete nonsense now. Please stop these fabrications. Guido den Broeder 11:54, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
The fact that these links were added by the same account to more than one Wikipedia is nothing special, it happens all the time. Since there is nothing wrong with these organizations, please remove the links from the blacklist, they do not belong there. Guido den Broeder 12:11, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Nothing wrong? In quite some of the diffs cited in the reports the number of links more than doubles (2 examples: diff, from 7 to 17; diff, from 7 to 16 (the latter pure copy paste, as it also duplicates a link)). Thát is excessive linking, we are writing an encyclopedia here, not a linkfarm. And as you will see if you look around here, most of the cases where one account adds a link to several wikipedia, that has to do with some form of promotional intention (and that is even possible for non-profit organisations).
So there is an explanation why these links are blacklisted. Now I would like to hear for these links why they provide good information, which would give a reason to remove, but maybe we should consider whitelisting specific information on the servers. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 12:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
If the number of external links in an article is found excessive, the local Wikipedia will deal with that. Nor do I care about 'most of the links around here'. These Basic Income organizations are well respected, they are not one-person hobbies. USBIG regularly organizes congresses, and has been around for many years. All have received press coverage. Guido den Broeder 13:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
If it concerns more wikipedia (and we are talking about 6 wikis here), then it becomes a meta-issue. And still, also some respected organisations (big musea, e.g.) have found it necessery to push their link to a large number of wikis (for whatever reason, because they wanted to be linked, or because someone in the web-department wanted more sites linking to his site so that the board sees the web-department is working properly and more funds are transferred to the department). All that behaviour is inappropriate, even for a big organisation. The only problem may be en:Joe Jobs, but that is difficult to prove. As I said below, I have removed the sites from the global blacklist, I do believe they are usefull, and I hope we don't see this behaviour again from these sites. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 13:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I had a look at the sites, and I removed the links. I hope that now no new accounts will wake up to again create the linkfarms. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 12:55, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Guido den Broeder 13:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Dirk Beetstra, a correction. No ArbCom on my EN WP admin topic ban: GDB had proposed (I think wrongly directed there by a help page somewhere) and RArb was declined. Subsequent AN/I did not gather other admin support for continued topic band (thus I recinded) and there has now been quite a vigorous RfC discussion which seems (for now) to have run its course. If there is no evidence for GDB adding inappropriate links (spamming or COI) since early April, then I agree with your "loosening the reins" for a bit and seeing how things pan out for the future :-) Davidruben 18:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

comicradioshow.com

This is a comic-fanzine since 1997 that try to make the the art of comic popular all over the world. There is no commercial interest exept for the artists themselve. I didn'd foud any reasons or comments (whatd does "+1" means) why the ComicRadioShow should be on this Blacklist. Maqz 11:32, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Here is the background for the blacklisting: User:SpamReportBot/cw/comicradioshow.com --Jorunn 12:42, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Aha, there are the reasons, but au contraire mon capitan!! This happends too fast for me! I and many other useres posted Links to the ComicradioShow (myself since 2004). I/others added them for interesting Information and aspects of the subject: For Example The 9/11 Comic-Report, The Goethe-Comic, The News that Batgirl-Series will be an homosexual superheroine. ComicRadioShow-Links are no Spam! The Next should be the one to the actual (Paul) Klee Comic! (Article2679) --Maqz 16:05, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia articles can not have external links to every comic, song, video, book, computer game, painting, opera, etc. that covers a (vaguely) related topic to the article. Wikipedia isn't a web directory, please read de:Wikipedia:WEB. --Jorunn 22:14, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
I already read de:Wikipedia:WEB yars ago, and I am aware of this fact not to link everything with my Site. I do not run a site like youporn and I do not sell any Comics for my benefit. You decide to put me on a Spam Blacklist, that forbids EVERY worthy Link (yes they still exist!) from my site from now on. But I have enough actual and permanent Comic-Information (Reviews, Interviews, Essays ect.) that are worthy to put into wikipedia (national and international). Please think about this and put me out of this general Blacklist, because there is a link, that is not relevant to the topic, there will be enough wikipediannd who will do a specific decision for this one link, not for the whole Site. --Maqz 09:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
You are the site owner? 80.89.65.153 cross-wiki-contribsIP inforobtexgblockglist Thanks --Herby talk thyme 07:17, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
??? You're welcome! Nice tool! So what dose that mean? I do contribute in more Topics (exept the Text at Timestamp : 2006-07-27T08:14:47 Julia Boenisch, 2006-07-27T08:07:39 Peter Boenisch (→ Familie : ) i do not know. What do you want from me. No Participation anymore. Deleting all contributions i made in all those years? The Articles too? Do i missunderstood this Wikipedia Thing? I don't think so! Please get me off this Blacklist. --Maqz 12:21, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Please remove this listing ASAP. --Asthma 02:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

You can seek whitelisting on your local wiki. For de:wikipedia you can seek whitelisting at de:MediaWiki Diskussion:Spam-blacklist --Jorunn 08:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Whitelisting has been requested on de.wikipedia, see MediaWiki_Diskussion:Spam-blacklist#www.comicradioshow.com --Jorunn 10:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes, and there ist still the Request for deleting the comicradioshow from the meta-blacklist! Supporter-Request will be found on wikipeida.de.-Diskussion! --Maqz 16:43, 05 May 2008 (UTC)
Cross wiki insertions of the link:
The link has also been added to lots of articles in de.wikipedia by the site owner:
Sample edits:
Maqz and IP 80.89.65.145 has also been inserting links to humidoronline.de








--Jorunn 16:01, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Two more IPs that has been inserting the links:





--Jorunn 00:07, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Very impressive! So these Lists are good proofs of what? There is a international-Linking of an (my opinion!) important collection of german and international webcomic-collection or an actual and informative Interview with Comic-Artis Hermnann. (No Mass-Spam-Linking of all our 2600 Articles!) All other issues are reasonmable too! So where's the beef? AND it's NOT a Mass-Spam-Cross-Linking! Massiv linking has a higher Number of Links, hmmm?! Besides this you see, that all Article Admins do (or do not) acept the posted CRS-Link. This general Blacklisting is unnecessary and not productiv! One "Victim" of this is the banning of the Link to the Essay from Christoph Kubina (long time well acepted on the Comic-Article). (What does that humidoronline-sentence mean? Does that have anything to do with the comicradioshow-Blacklisting?) --Maqz 10:57, 06 May 2008 (UTC)

More than 90% of your crosswiki edits are for inserting those two links. You have added many external links to websites you run or are otherwise involved with, but very little actual article content cross wiki. You show no understanding for the need to limit external links and the fact that you shouldn't add links to your own website. You behave like a spammer, and that is why the link needs to stay blacklisted. --Jorunn 12:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

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. If such an editor asks to use your links, I'm sure the request will be carefully considered and your links may well be removed.

Until such time, this request is Symbol declined.svg Declined.I would also like to blacklist humidoronline.de; comments on that? – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:11, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I can't find that the link humidoronline.de has been inserted since September 2007. Maybe we don't need to blacklist the link now? I suppose the bot will report if the link gets inserted again. --Jorunn 00:07, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

petrsoukal.profitux.cz ; japonsko.profitux.cz ; petrsoukal.php5.cz

Dear Wikipedia,

I dont know why links to my pages: petrsoukal.profitux.cz japonsko.profitux.cz petrsoukal.php5.cz

are blacklisted. I just wanted to insert the links manualy (containing a lot pictures from my Ukraine, Marathon des sables and Fuji Mountain Race) in the sections of Wiki, where it make sence.

let me know petr.soukal@inmail.sk The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.214.115.209 (talk • contribs) 15:11, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

The reason for the listing is the excessive link placement recorded COIBot/UserReports/195.24.158.22|here & here for example. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 15:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

thanks, but what can I do to place the links again? all insers I did had the relation to the wiki contain? the contain is not spam and I had in average 20 accesses to ma pages via wiki. Kind regards Petr Soukal

We are writing an encyclopedia here, not an advertisement site or a linkfarm (may I suggest http://www.dmoz.org for that?). Declined Declined --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 19:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


photovolcanica.com

I request that an authorized editor remove my website from the global spam list. The site was automatically globally blacklisted as far as i can tell, presumably due to multiple international listings. The pages linked to were specific to individual volcanoes with detailed scientific referencing therein (please go to links to "Volcano Info and Photos on front page of website and then look at pages on stromboli, soufriere hills, erta ale, dallol etc. etc. to see the high quality of text involved). The smithsonian institute has commented on the high quality of the site and the site is established in the scientific community and is indeed linked to on many of the sites in volcano sections on wikipedia. Consequently the site is an important resource also for wikipedia users. Not all volcanoes have been linked into wikipedia anyway, since those with less valuable description were omitted. Request comment and removal. Thanks Dr Richard Roscoe

This looks like it could be a useful resource on some projects -- this non-commercial, scinetific site contains many unique photos. I suggest removing from this blacklist -- if the site's owner agrees to add no more of these links himself. Here are the relevant guidelines on the English Wikipedia; many others have similar guidelines:
What do others think?
--A. B. (talk) 12:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree - this is potentially useful, but I wouldn't want someone affiliated with the site to be adding links. That should be done by neutral editors when they feel that doing so would be of net benefit to the project. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:06, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm with Mike here. This is as much about conflict of interest as it is about anything else. Having the site owner place the links would be completely wrong. --Herby talk thyme 07:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for considering my request so far. I promise not to place any links to the site myself in the future and apologize for doing so in the past. I was merely trying to make the resource available to people in different countries since a lot of research effort has gone into it. There was no ill-intent involved and their was no attempt made to conceil the linking. I appreciate that you all seem to have taken the time to look at the actual resource to see that it is a bona-fide site. I will contact the relevant Wikiproject Volcanoes / Geology talk pages as suggested by A.B. once this issue has been resolved. Richard

Yes check.svg Done --A. B. (talk) 12:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

cabinda.net query

See:

We have a query from an obviously frustrated satellite broadband user (likely in Africa -- very slow satellite modems are all many African countries have) wondering why it's blacklisted. It was never logged -- does anyone know anything about it or does someone need to go through the blacklist's 2534 edits to find out how it got there? Or should we just remove it?--A. B. (talk) 15:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Searching is pretty hit & miss really the times I've tried it - date wise it is around the start of 2007. I'm guessing that we would be unlikely to learn anything much interesting. I've rem'd it for now. We can always remove the # if anyone comes up with some good reasons. --Herby talk thyme 15:50, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I've Removed Removed this for the sake of clarity otherwise in 6 months time someone will wonder what the rationale was! (Equally can archive soon then) --Herby talk thyme 07:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

musupaveldas.lt

This site was created and is maintained by public institution "Socialinės ir ekonominės plėtros centras" (en. Social and Economic Development Centre). SEDC is an institution which works with European Union structural funds (services can be found here: [78] (en.)). And musupaveldas.lt is one of the projects of this public institution. It has been supported by EU Phare and Interreg III programmes. Link to those projects can be found at the bottom of this page: [79] (en.). And a little from musupaveldas.lt in english: (link is blacklisted, so I added it with spaces) www.musu paveldas.lt/en/main/apie/projektas. So why is it balcklisted and can you remove it from the list? It is realy important source of information. Andrius.v 17:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Removed Removed, it was added because of bot reportVasilievVV 17:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

postimees.ee

en:Postimees (et:Postimees, fi:Postimees, de:Postimees, fr:Postimees, pt:Postimees, sv:Postimees, tr:Postimees) is the oldest Estonian language newspaper, established in 1857 and still the largest newspaper in Estonia. The on-line edition also provides content in Russian. On-line articles are needed for referens on all articles reletad to Estonia. Current problem is with fi:Leena Hietanen on Finnish Wikipedia. -- Petri Krohn 02:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, that's my fault. Crystal Clear action edit remove.png Removed – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 03:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

ezinearticles.com

An archive of miscellaneous articles, occasionally used by spammers to host their articles, but not in and of itself spammy and containing plenty of serious content like http://ezinearticles.com/?Delhi-Metro-Development-Plan&id=780872. The domain has been blacklisted twice (2006, 2007), but both additions were contested, and I think User:A. B. in 2007 summed it up nicely: While I think most of the ezinearticle.com pages don't meet our criteria for external links, I think we gain more by working through them slowly and identifiying spammy domains and spammer accounts than by just deleting ezinearticles.com links wholesale and blacklisting ezinearticles.com. The 2007 (and present) blacklisting, in particular, seems to have been triggered by a single spammer posting external links that would in any case fail WP:EL. Jpatokal 04:43, 12 May 2008 (UTC)



Addition is Nixeagle's per this request.
To me, this is the same as a blog; not something we should be linking to, and I'm just as happy to keep it blacklisted globally. If en.wikipedia wants to use it they can whitelist. For reference, whitelist requests here and here (which led to this withdrawn request for de-listing). – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 05:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
The point of my remarks quoted above was not that I thought most ezinearticles material had merit. To the contrary, I believed that 90% were pure junk and the other 10% were self-published, making them unreliable sources. Furthermore, from my experience, 90% of our links to that site had been spammed by article-writers. I was advocating that we take our time, see who had added these links and then look to see what other spam they'd added; a fast deletion of links without investigation would have obscured evidence of other spam. There was also the simple issue of cleaning up all those junky links before blacklisting the domain; massive spam removals take time and I wanted to avoid someone causing widespread frustration among editors by just blacklisting first.
Here are my detailed assessments of this domain; it's a lot to wade through, but then it took several hours to prepare:
As for the 2006 and 2007 discussions linked to above, neither involved blacklisting. I was involved with both; they were discussions of the ezinearticle problem. We try to be conservative about blacklisting, so this spamming problem was discussed multiple time and other methods tried before we threw in the towel and decided there was no alternative to blacklisting. The ezinearticles spammer that triggered our ultimate decision was merely the final straw, not the primary cause.
If the author is an acknowledged expert, I remain open to whitelisting an individual page locally as was done in this one instance:
--A. B. (talk) 12:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
I looked at the town planning ezinearticle cited above. Click on the author's byline in the ezinearticle and it takes you to his list of ezinearticles:
  • Ahmedabad Travel Guide
  • Assam Travel Guide
  • Augmentation of Water Utility in Urban Areas
  • Aurangabad Travel Guide
  • Bathroom Interior Ideas
  • Bhopal Travel Guide
  • Bhubaneswar Travel Guide
  • Bikaner Travel Guide
  • Choose The Color of Your Dream House
  • Coimbatore Travel Guide
  • Construction Of Multi Level Flyovers
  • Darjeeling Travel Guide
  • Delhi Metro Development Plan
  • Earthquake Resistant Buildings in Seismic Zones of India
  • Fire Protection Systems for High Rise Buildings
  • Gwalior Travel Guide
  • How to Furnish Your Home
  • How to Interior your Bedroom?
  • Hyderabad Travel Guide
  • Integrated Commercial Colonies in Haryana
  • Interior Design
  • Interior Design Styles
  • Interior Your Room Walls
  • Interior your Dream Space
  • Jabalpur Travel Guide
  • Jammu Travel Guide
  • Kashmir Travel Guide
  • Kitchen Interior and Decoration
  • Kottayam Travel Guide
  • Landscape Designs and its Benefits
  • Ludhiana Travel Guide
  • Madurai Travel Guide
  • Mahabaleshwar Travel Guide
  • Multi Level Parking Module in Urban Areas
  • Nashik Travel Guide
  • Planned Colonization in Towns of Haryana
  • Principles For Providing Green Areas in Urban Centres
  • Promotion of Green Building Construction Technique
  • Property Purchase Precautions
  • Pune Travel Guide
  • Punjab Travel Guide
  • Rain Water Harvesting System
  • Rajkot Travel Guide
  • Scope for Group Housing Project in Haryana
  • Scope of Cyber Cities and Cyber Parks in Haryana
  • Shirdi Travel Guide
  • Thiruvananthapuram Travel Guide
  • Vijayawada Travel Guide
  • Vishakhapatnam Travel Guide
  • Why We Need Interior Designer?
In some of his articles, the author's includes the title, "SEO Manager". These are unusually nice articles linking to nice web sites owned by his clients: a travel site, a town planning firm and a design firm. I don't have a bone to pick with this guy -- he's doing a very good, ethical job of search engine optimization and I respect his work. I can find no evidence that he's ever spammed Wikipedia. But I don't think he's an expert in any of these fields and therefore, I don't see that his articles meet our very tight standards for encyclopaedia-quality, reliable sources.
--A. B. (talk) 13:10, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Declined Declined per review (I agree with A. B.) & A. B.'s comments --Herby talk thyme 12:48, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

www.islamhouse.com

I found www.islamhouse.com website in the spam list. I think its addition is wrong. there were only 7 links in en.wikipedia and 8 in ar.wikipedia. If some are inappropriate they should be removed rather than blocking the site. The site is nothing to do with spam, it's library of important Islamic books and valuable sources. For example the Qur'an in N'ko can be downloaded from it and many rare books and languages. Please remove the site. Maymana 16:01, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. The fact that you have placed the links means it is not blacklisted here. However it has been removed but not removed from the log - I have no idea who did that --Herby talk thyme 16:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Weird one. Blacklisted twice over the last year - presumably removed twice but neither log entry removed which makes life "interesting". I'll remove them now but I guess if this comes up again it should be listed & stay listed --Herby talk thyme 17:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
If anyone says it is spam you will blacklist it? The site is not spam. Do you check sites before blacklisting? Maymana 20:11, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Maymana, the site does not have to be spam, if numerous accounts are pushing a link, it may still qualify. Also good sites can be pushed by site owners or maintainers to improve their linking, or their page rankings. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 21:44, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I see. As an important reference site please consider other means if it happens again. Thank you. Maymana 16:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

brookesbedroom.ca



This should not be blacklisted: it could be useful on ANY and all Wikimedia projects - apart from those internal wikis and the content is quite suitable for all. No reason for this to be blacklisted under any circumstances. Yes, one or two miscreants tried to spam the domain and got it blacklisted, but it shouldn't be blacklisted at all; the site is suitable for educational purposes, as are all its other sister sites hosted by avenueblue.net. --Lintgroand 15:49, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't see a record for this, may be old, it was added here by user:Amgine with as edit summary 'WoW weirdness' .. a Willy on Wheels effect. I will comment both of them out.
Link pushing can be a reason to blacklist, if the situation is uncontrollable, and WoW is not our normal 'one or two miscreants'. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 15:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
You're kidding, right? What educational purpose could linking to this have? The request is here. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 15:56, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Indeed, undid commenting out the items. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 15:59, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
  • I'm not familiar with this Willy on Wheels character, and there is NO reason to blacklist ANY avenuebleu.net site. The sites are useful for any Wikimedia project. The spambot who linked to the sites isn't even affiliated with us, and our site should not be blacklisted at all. --Lintgroand 16:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

You have not provided a reason for de-blacklisting - where precisely would this be useful? Due to past problems with excessive linking to this domain, I do not believe this request should be fulfilled. We de-blacklist sites when trusted, high-volume editors request the use of blacklisted links because of their value in support of our projects. If such a situation arises, I'm sure the request will be carefully considered and this domain may well be removed.

Until such time, this request is Symbol declined.svg Declined. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

  • I think we were being trolled. The site is a generic porn site of no obvious merit whatsoever, the request is plainly fatuous. 80.176.82.42 14:20, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

e-library.net

I see Vasiliev removed this one based on his talk page discussion.

tatsoul.com
Please remove this. It is a legit company that offers quality products. Definitely should not be on the spamlist.


Background:

Vasiliev, can you fill us in on this one? These domains may be something individual projects will want to locally blacklist if they're not blacklisted here.
--A. B. (talk) 16:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I removed only related domains, because some of them are really useful or at least not harmful (we shouldn't blacklist some site unless it's URL shortener/redirecter). E.g. see ru:Википедия:Изменение спам-листа#www. istrodina. comVasilievV 2 17:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Just would say that any request for removal really must be brought to this page to get community consensus for removal in my opinion --Herby talk thyme 17:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree. Even when it is a straightforward removal, please direct people here so we can all see the changes that are made and the reasoning. I don't disagree, but requests should be made here. – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

www.aluminiumleader.com

This site was blacklisted for being added to such pages as aluminium, bauxite, ruby etc. However, it should be pointed out that aluminiumleader.com is a web resource dedicated especially to aluminium - the history of the metal, its invention, ways of production and utilization. Aluminium is produced from alumina and before that from bauxite. Aluminium oxides are rubies, sapphires and other precious and semi-procious stones mention in the part MINERALS on the site. That is why the links on this web site were added to the respective articles. It is an informative, encyclopaedic, interactive resource in Russian and English without any ads or promotions. Therefore, the site should be removed from the spamlist. LOscritor 06:02, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Note for other editors: The site was added to the blacklist by Beetstra on 14 April 2008. It appears to have been in response to the report User:COIBot/LinkReports/aluminiumleader.com. Adambro 06:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
The site was added (and mainly, the main domain, and sometimes readded) to quite a number of wikipedia (10-15?) by an ip (213.248.20.174) to external link sections (diff, diff ..). I concur, this site may be of interest on the russian wikipedia (the main language for the site), and maybe on en for certain parts of the data (though I am sure that there are non-commercial sites that have the same information - "Project of UC RUSAL, the world’s largest producer of aluminium and alumina."). For all the other languages its use is even more questionable. I would suggest declining to remove this site, whitelisting the domain on the russian wikipedia, whitelisting can be discussed on en as well (though that may only be for one or two pages on the whole server, flash content is discouraged on en), for other wikis also specific urls may be whitelisted, but the domain is unnecessery (we are writing an encyclopedia, not a linkfarm or an internet directory). --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 10:50, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I have to agree here. Whitelist it where needed, but there's no shortage of other (better) sites for that info, and this one was spammed. Declined Declined  – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 15:28, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
  • I have to disagree with a number of arguments against whitelisting:

1) "it is mainly for Russian Wiki" - The versions in Russian and in English are equal containing the same information. The discussed web site covers the activities of all major aluminium producers: American Rio Tinto Alcan and Alcoa, Australian BHP Billiton, Chinese Chalco and Chinalco whose working language is English. That is why news provided by Dow Jones subscription are of especial importance to aluminium producers and journalists who specialize on metals and mining. Therefore the link should be returned to the English Wiki at least 2) "Project of UC RUSAL, the world’s largest producer of aluminium and alumina" - all scientific and educational projects need sponsors. You do not delete the web site of the Bolshoi Theatre (www.bolshoi.ru) from the respective article only because it has a large banner of its sponsor on top of its home page. 3)"but there's no shortage of other (better) sites for that info" - could you, please, indicate any other web resource containing as comprehensive information as the site under discussion in terms of history of the metal, ways of its production and use, as well as latest news of the aluminium industry and market indices?LOscritor 11:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC) The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.248.20.174 (talk • contribs) 11:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)