Talk:Spam blacklist: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:35, 3 March 2009

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 single project should go to that project's local blacklist. Exceptions include malicious domains and URL redirector/shortener services. Please follow this format.; Also, 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.

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.

Projects

Information: List of all projects; Overviews; Reports; Wikimedia Embassy; Project portals; Country portals
Tools: Spam blacklist; Title blacklist; Email blacklist; Rename blacklist; Closure of wikis; Interwiki map
Requests: Permissions; Bot flags; New languages; New projects; Username changes; Translations; Speedy deletions

[edit]

snippet for logging: {{sbl-log|1413834#{{subst:anchorencode:SectionNameHere}}}}

Proposed additions

Latest comment: 15 years ago12 comments7 people in discussion

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.

A ton

Hi!
Concerning (discussion and) sbl-diff:
Afaics there are some to "greedy" conditions now, e.g. \bad\.(?:com|biz|us|org|net)\b is blocked atm. So I suggest to exchange the entries by the longer list

\b10bux\.net
\b5centminimum\.com
\ba-n-cash\.com
\baaa-mails\.com
\bad(?:5\.biz(?:ad-fortune\.com)?|-fortune\.com|onlyptc\.us|qds\.com|sbux\.org|smaker\.net|sneed\.com|vertisingcentral\.biz)
\baglocomails\.com
\bahacash\.com
\balertpay\.com
\bal(?:lcashmail|lyousubmitters|miyachts|tsurf|wayspay)\.com
\bam(?:erican-mails|igoemail|ity-cash)\.com
\ban(?:-cash|nies-biz|s-advertising)\.com
\bap(?:ache|pealing|ple|polo)mails?\.com
\bar(?:ab-gpt|abbux|adiasgarden|cane-mails|csurvey|cticmails|rowheadptr)\.com
\basonewishes\.com
\ba(?:tom[-s]|uction-e)mails\.com
\bawsurveys\.com
\bba(?:byloncash|n-mail|nboocash|ybux)\.com
\bbank-mails\.(?:com|net)
\bbe(?:anybux|arshare-mails|autymails|eptr|etrmails|stflymails|ta-cash|ttybucks|yondemails)\.com
\bbest-hyip\.be
\bbgpaymails?\.com
\bbi(?:gdollar-mails|ggestdollars|gluck-mails|gpaymail|lliondollarmails|zbizs|zsonline)\.com
\bblacklistptc\.blogspot\.com
\bblue(?:maniacs|rwebmail)\.com
\bbo(?:a-|bo|ffopaid|rat|ss-)mails?\.com
\bbondjamesbond\.net
\bbournemouthbreeze\.com
\bbravevolitation\.com
\bbu(?:gcash|sinessptr)\.com
\bbux(?:\.to|a\.in|euro\.com|galore\.com|junction\.com|out\.com)
\bcamel-mails\.com
\bca(?:n-discount|ndy-mail|nnabismails|t-mails|t-ptr|tch-cash)\.com
\bcash(?:-kitty|4(?:all|hits)|n?bux|eden|fiesta|nclicks|origin|out|pointclicks|posse|read|sea)\.(?:com|co\.cc|org|net)
\bcasino-mails\.com
\bcgcash\.info
\bch(?:arm-mail|erokeeptr|icago-ptr)\.(?:biz|com)
\bchobit[-s]?mails\.(?:com|net)
\bclass(?:-act-clicks|ical-mail)\.com
\bclick(?:-mails|-monkey|-wizard|2earnmoney|4coins|buxx?|cent|evolution|fantasy|ingmoney4u|oly|s(?:-4-cash)?|topsites)\.(?:biz|com|net|org)
\bclixy\.net
\bclo(?:nebux|set-clickers|udmails|verclicks)\.(?:com|net)
\bco(?:ast-?mail|inclicks|lor-mail|mpactmails|okie-mails|operativemail|pymails|smicwealth|splaymails|verclicks|wboy-mail)\.(?:com|info)
\bcr(?:abmails|ash-cash|azy-4-cash|azyclicks|eam-mails)\.(?:com|us)
\bcy-mails\.com
\bearn3\.com
\begyptp(?:ost\.org|tc\.com)
\bhardbuxs\.co\.cc
\bisabelmarco\.com
\bneobux\.to
\bp2cdaily\.com
\bperfectbux\.com
\brocashbux\.info
\broudycash\.com
\bsandraclicks\.com
\bthinkbux\.com

if all domains mentioned in the thread should be blocked.

Perhaps it'd be best to state what the problem is. The example you cite doesn't seem to actually be a problem. If there is a real problem then it should be fixed. If not, then no solution is required. — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 04:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

There was no spamming of "ad.com" (or .org, ...): So it should not be blocked. Apart from that there are many sites (which we don't know), which are blocked by this entry; See e.g. [1]. ("foo-ad.org" is matched for any "foo"). AD is an abbreviation e.g. for "alzheimer desease".

Additional to that there's a third bug concerning "egypt..." (org vs. com). It was easier for me to build new regexps than searching for all bugs in the already built regexps. ;-)

And as a small thing: For performance reasons grouping of regexp should be done primarily at the rear of strings, and not at the beginning. -- seth 12:28, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think the work folks are doing to improve efficiency is good.. At the same time, I hope that as folks regroup stuff and alter regexes for efficiency that it will still be possible for non-regex admins to correlate blacklist entries with our blacklist logs. If not, then the efficiency gain may not be worth making the changes. --A. B. ^(talk) 19:05, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yes, the log is highly important. But by using [2] it should be no big problem to get the right entries (blacklist and log) for a given url. So actually we don't have to take care of transparency of the list itself. The more important thing is the log. -- seth 22:28, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Just Do It :D — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 01:50, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ok, see also this request. I hope that everything is alright now. -- seth 23:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

freeunlimitedweb.com

Not spammed all that much (and a domain that I have a website at), but due to its nature of being a free webhost, it could well be a potential candidate to list here. AC --Sunstar NW XP 14:27, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

freeunlimitedweb.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)

Thanks but no thanks. — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 01:49, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

no2low.com

URL shortner.

no2low.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)

--Jorunn 09:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Added. --Erwin(85) 09:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

lmgtfy.com

lmgtfy.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)

letmegooglethatforyou.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)

Can be used to bypass the blacklist. Also, please blacklist the redirect: letmegooglethatforyou.com --Kanonkas 20:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

This requires the &l=1 parameter, so I suggest blacklisting \b(?:lmgtfy|letmegooglethatforyou)\.com.*[?&]l — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 20:35, 3 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Proposed additions (Bot reported)

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

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.

List	Last update	By	Site IP	R	Last user	Last link addition	User	Link	User - Link	User - Link - Wikis	Link - Wikis
vrsystems.ru	2023-06-27 15:51:16	COIBot	195.24.68.17		192.36.57.94 193.46.56.178 194.71.126.227 93.99.104.93	2070-01-01 05:00:00		4			4

Proposed removals

Latest comment: 15 years ago60 comments16 people in discussion

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.

www-2.net

I can still not add source information to my donated pictures because (my own dowmain) www-2.net is still blocked. The previous discussion is (archived here, Summary: Yes, www-2.net will be whitelisted). For example I have donated this photo to Wikipedia and accept merciless commercialisation but I wish to reference the source on www-2.net where users can find the original photo and other versions thereof. Wikipedia encourages referencing and there are many examples of pictures that have a link to the author's own website, see: [3] [4] [5] [6]. I again respectfully request www-2.net to be removed from the spam blacklist. Y23 22:32, 8 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

I thought that it was going to be whitelisted on commons (here)? You should upload your images on that server (so that they are available on all wikis using commons), and you can add your link there. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} (en: U, T) 22:51, 8 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Bedankt for the quick answer, Dirk. I am requesting removal of the spamblock alltogether. While I will -- in future -- upload pictures to commons, I would like to source-reference the already existing ones first. I am not sure why I am treated differently than other photographers (see examples above), but respectfully ask for mercy. Y23 00:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

This is whitelisted on Commons already. Any images elsewhere should be moved there. Since you can add links for sourcing on Commons, I don't see the need for links elsewhere. Images on English Wikipedia should simply be uploaded to Commons. — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 01:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

How do you move images? Can I delete images? Do I have to update articles? Why make me jump through this hoop? I already promised to comply with the rules -- and in future upload images to commons. What is the advantage for wikipedia of keeping www-2.net blacklisted? Y23 03:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Please, I request a removal from the blacklist!! 124.197.37.39 05:48, 14 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

The link is whitelisted on Commons, where else do you need the link and for what? --Jorunn 06:12, 14 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

I would like to reference my already existing photos. 124.197.37.39 11:35, 15 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Generally images should be on Commons. If there are images on other Wikimedia wikis they should preferably be moved to Commons. --Jorunn 22:25, 17 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

If someone at another project views a commons image, the information from the Common's infopage gets integrated into that project (with a header saying that this image is from the commons). If someone clicks the link at that project, will it go though commons' whitelist, or stop at that project's or meta's blacklist? --w^L^{<speak·check>} 02:36, 24 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Neither. The blacklist does not react to link clicking, but to page editing. - Andre Engels 11:42, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

genovagay.com

genovagay.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)

Request reconsideration for website: www.genovagay.com The link was blacklisted, although it is very important since the city is going to host the national gay pride next June. Blacklisting a webiste with useful information for the Glbt community appears to be a really not ethical thing to do. Moreover the website is no-profit. Useful guide for the town that should be removed from the balcklist and restored for infos about the city.

The website was not blacklisted for its content, but for it being spammed. Please keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a linkfarm. There's no need to link to each useful site. That's not our goal. Would articles benefit from linking to this site? I don't think so, but please prove me wrong. --Erwin(85) 20:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello. Althou the site was considered spamming, I believe articles would benefit a lot from this link, as it is the onlz way to discover "tourist guide of the city of Genova", there is no other available online. Very important from all those users looking for practical information about the city according to various issues, not only glbt. Please reconsider removal from blacklist.

Declined. The information you mention could very well be useful, but I don't think it's useful for Wikipedia. The domain has been spammed and I see no reason to remove it from the blacklist. --Erwin(85) 14:11, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

As Wikipedia is a source of information, and Ican see on the page of Genova thereareseveral links t genova guides i see no reasons whyglbt communitycannothave proper info for them if it is considered spammingjust remove links and leave just one — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.96.32.154 (talk)

en:Wikipedia:Spam#Inclusion of one spam link is not a reason to include another: "Many times users can be confused by the removal of spam links because other links that could be construed as spam have been added to the article and not yet removed. The inclusion of a spam link should not be construed as an endorsement of the spam link, nor should it be taken as a reason or excuse to include another." --Jorunn 21:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello. I don´t think here we are taking seriously the issue. This might have been a case of spamming, which we do not know as the link was inlcuded in pages related to the city of Genova, but we have to realize know that the above mentioned website is a useful source of information, providing additional references which some hundreds thousand of people in a couple of months will find for sure useful. The national edition of gay pride will host some half a million of people next June, which will need hotels, restaurants and so on in a city that almost lacks this kind of services. Blacklisting this domain is rally not ethical. If thought to be spamming, kust remove the link from some pages and leave it in one, or something. Kind regards.

asianmediawiki.com

asianmediawiki.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)

Request for removal of asianmediawiki.com. One of the largest & independant Asian film/drama resources on the web. Last year external were links provided from wikipedia to asianmediawiki, without knowledge of wiki customs. Our website would be particular useful for more up to date listings in the Asian media realm on wikipedia. thanks --RamenLover 20:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Please keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a linkfarm. If useful information can be added to an article rather than linking to an external source, we prefer the former. In light of the history of abuse I see no reason to remove it from the blacklist. If a long-time contributor requests removal we will consider it, but for now this request is

Declined. --Erwin(85) 20:37, 18 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

On the assumption that RamenLover isn't going to be adding links willy-nilly any longer (& the domain is monitored) let's remove this. Any further additions should be in consultation with other editors, for example those involved in WikiProjects. In particular, links should not be added only as a pointer to further encyclopedic content on asianmediawiki.com. Instead, that content (in particular, the biography sections) should be integrated into the Wikipedia article. Wikipedia is not a linkfarm; the domain is already in dmoz. — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 00:32, 19 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Let's not. Claims by website owners that links to their sites would be a valuable asset to Wikipedia can be taken with a pinch of salt, and the proposal seems to be that we use it as a source, when it clearly fails the reliable sources tests. JzG 22:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

I see multiple requests to stop adding these links, all ignored:^[7]

Additionally, the requester is apparently affiliated with the site.^[8]

The related domain, lunapark6.com has also been a problem and should be blacklisted, if it hasn't been already:^[9]

lunapark6.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)

Google Adsense ID: 1356639199611839

--A. B. ^(talk) 19:58, 24 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, OK that was a mistake. Added both. — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:30, 3 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

knightrider.3dn.ru

knightrider.3dn.ru

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)

Remove a site from the black list, and post links to sites on the topic, ie Knight Rider (Russian), Knight Rider 2000 (Russian), Knight Rider 2008 movie (Russian), Knight Rider 2008 teleseries (Russian), Team Knight Rider (Russian).

Due to past problems with excessive linking to this domain, I do not believe this request should be fulfilled. However, if you believe that links to your domain will enhance the content of our projects, you should suggest inclusion of the link on the relevant talk page. If a trusted, high-volume editor supports the use of this domain because of its value on our projects, I'm sure the request will be carefully considered and the domain may well be removed.

Until such time, this request is

Declined. — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 00:33, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[br][br]Reply

I at all do not know English and I communicate only through online the translator. I am assured that it is necessary to increase quantity of references to the project. But I do not understand with whom you me ask to communicate. Whether could communicate and deal with you this question from my name. Tell (in English): "that the site has got to the black list casually and because of a spam-boat". I understand that the given request probably difficult, but I have no possibility without your help to solve the given problem. 22:07, 26 February 2009 (UTC) RUSSIAN: Я совершенно не знаю английского и общаюсь только через онлайн переводчик. Я уверен, что следует увеличить количество ссылок на проект. Но я не понимаю с кем вы меня просите связаться. Не мог ли бы вы сами связаться и решить этот вопрос от моего имени. Скажите (на английском): "что сайт попал в черный список случайно и по вине спам-бота". Я понимаю что данная просьба возможно трудная, но я не имею возможности без вашей помощи решить данную проблему.

Realgems.org - whitelisting again?

The following discussion is closed.

Dear friends, here I submit the actual debate on Wikipedia de:

http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_Diskussion:Spam-blacklist&oldid=56885190#realgems.org

Kind regards, F.N. Berg / Mike from Realgems.org
replaced text by link to (a mostly English) discussion on de-wiki. -- seth 21:06, 19 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

F.N. Berg. You say that wikipedia is helped by the images that you have on your website. As I can hardly imagine that the majority of the images that you have on your website are under any form of copyright, may I suggest that you a) upload images to commons (if the link is whitelisted there, then it can be used there on the description pages to give the source of the image), b) enhance the articles across wikipedia with the images that you uploaded. In short, I do not see the use of linking to these images from wikipdia articles, as people who find the wikipedia articles are likely to use google to find your site as well. We don't link because we need to link to pages, we link because the off-wiki site has information that can not be incorporated into wikipedia. As I said, you can upload images, and uploading images means incorporation .. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} (en: U, T) 20:33, 19 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Seth, many thanks for putting that long chapter into a link form. I'm not (yet) that Wiki expert...

Dirk, many thanks for your proposals. I will think about that. Be assured that nearly each photo on realgems is copyrighted (by dealers, collectors, jewelers, institutions). They simply gave me permission to use them because they (more than 100) are convinced that I do a good job - obviously in contrary to a few admins here. I don't know if Wiki is helped by "my" pics but I'm sure that Wiki's visitors are helped. Why? Because there were thousands of visitors to my site every month, coming via my former Wiki links. Well, I was happy to serve them, happy having created something useful - for free. Fine that "...uploading images means incorporation..." but how can I add something (e.g. texts or text parts or pics) if my site is being blocked? Didn't you know that I was "indefinately blocked" by some U.S. friends? I couldn't even add a word to my former Wiki homepage! Seems that I am regarded as a very criminal subject - put and cooked in one pot together with really bad guys.

Yeah, there are hundreds of visitors (yesterday: 329) who found my site on Google but as I always stated: I just wanted to be of assistance to Wiki articles / projects by my links. When I start a Wiki search for "moon" I don't want to find statistics of impacts or the contents of moon sand but nice and interesting pics of craters or the surface or so. Same with your visitors who use the Wiki project "tourmaline" e.g. Meanwhile I cannot condense why some admins don't want to (or cannot) understand that. F.N. Berg 22:03, 19 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hmm, then uploading is not a very good option, indeed. Although I do think that wikipedia would be helped with pictures. Uploading would be to one specific server (commons), and if uploading is a serious option, then on that wiki the link can be whitelisted. That is the type of unblocking we are discussing in that regard.

Let me state, I am sure you are doing a good job, and I know your site has nice images. I don't think that the admins here think you are doing a bad job either, however, the way you were linking was not in line with our policies and guidelines, and that was the reason that it was blacklisted. We are, after all, writing an encyclopedia, not a directory service (and that thousands of wikipedia readers are tunneled to your site every month is not in the interest of the wikipedia article ...

I think I understood correctly that your site is in German, right? Which would make it less useful on non-German wikis (I am not saying 'useless'!). I guess it would boil down to what those local wikis think. Can I invite you to find a wikiproject that is concerned with your links (on en, the main page is en:Wikipedia:WikiProject, a directory is linked from there to find an appropriate wikiproject; the interwiki-links (list at the left bottom of the screen, can lead you to other wikis having similar systems). Ask the appropriate wikiprojects on a couple of large, representative, wikis (en, es, it, ja, ...) if they think that the links are of interest to their project (the German vote you already have), giving them the link to this discussion here. If editors from there return here voting that the site is indeed of interest to their projects, then I guess we can proceed in delisting. How does that sound? --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} (en: U, T) 22:44, 19 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Dirk, dear, thanks for your kind and friendly assistance and proposals. One one hand I am happy having not too many visitors because I have to pay the web traffic costs myself, on the other hand I would like helping and assisting Wiki to inform people about matters like gems' colors and rough versions etc.

"...then on that wiki the link can be whitelisted..." ??? By whom? By the U.S. admins who blocked me indefinately? Surely not. And I cannot speak or read Russian, Chinese, Japanese or Thai or so...

"...and I know your site has nice images..." - and nice, worldwide reputation btw.

"...the way you were linking was not in line with our policies and guidelines, and that was the reason that it was blacklisted..." I know that meanwhile. I repeat again and again that I did that "spamming" because I haven't had ANY probs re my "spamming" from July 08 until Dec 08!

"...tunneled to your site every month is not in the interest of the wikipedia article..." Of course Wiki is no tunneling medium, especially not for my humble project. Therefore I have proposed (several times) to whitelist at least my links on Wiki's "gemstone" projects - but not only on German Wiki.

"...that your site is in German, right?" No, I do my job also in English. Have a look! Therefore all these comments and messages have been launched. If it was only in German, I never would have spent a minute to discuss the blockade of my URL. Believe me that a site only in German would have not caused such probs. I do that second, English version because I want to inform others about the interesting world of gemstones' varieties (mainly different colors). Can you imagine how many hours I spend / spent reading my dictionary for correct expressions???

Best, F.N. Berg 23:16, 19 February 2009 (UTC) (Mike / Realgems)Reply

The link will be whitelisted when a trusted high volume contributer on the wiki requests it whitelisted because he/she needs the link for an article.

Declined --Jorunn 11:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Would three trusted high volume German admins be sufficient to ask for a global whitelisting of my non-profit, private, educational website? F.N. Berg 12:24, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

I whitelisted the domain on de-wiki already a few weeks ago, because there are trusted high volume contributers, who wanted to use that domain in several articles. For example de:user:Ra'ike (who is admin at de-wiki btw.) requested whitelisting. And after all I really don't see a problem to unblock this domain. But to be sure, I recommend F.N.Berg to ask at a gem portal (or some other portal which comes close to that, maybe en:Wikipedia:WikiProject_Rocks_and_minerals) in en-wiki. If they don't dislike the domain, it should be removed from the global blacklist. -- seth 20:21, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Seth, many thanks for your comment here. It's an important step to pull me resp. my website out of Wiki's blacklist-pot, filled with notorious spammers, ignorants and other black sheep to whom I don't want to belong.

I am sure that other admins have meanwhile inspected my website and agree that the photos and other informations might be helpful additions at least to some Wiki minerals projects.

I repeat: One should have a close look at (on?) my tourmaline or sapphire pages and one might agree that the combination of faceted gems and their rough versions is not worth being "indefinately blocked" worldwide!

Kind regards, F.N. Berg 22:43, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Just found another admin (see below) who might support my whitelisting? A part of his statement: "Wikipedia's external link functionality exists primarily to assist readers and editors with verifying content - links to sources, good ..." User:COIBot/XWiki/toolquarter.com. JzG 22:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC) F.N. Berg 22:57, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi Erwin(85), you write on your personal page:"...I'm mostly involved with fighting cross-wiki spam and vandalism...". So you are a fine address for my request. Here is such a prove (s.a.): My external links on Wiki (all deleted in December, and my URL realgems.org being blacklisted) were added because I was sure that they would serve as a helpful addition to mineral pages / projects where too little photos of minerals and gems are shown. AND Wiki users like photos besides good infos. German mineral experts and gemstone enthusiasts have the same opinion (I got to know meanwhile).

After an inspection of my site - what is your opinion?

Kind regards, 84.128.243.54 10:43, 22 February 2009 (UTC) User:F.N. BergReply

(Moved from another section on this page) Hi, I don't have anything to add to the comments above. This request is still declined. --Erwin(85) 14:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

the site can be locally whitelisted by local admins when requested on the local wikis.
OK, that is fine.
That we don't see or did not see is not an argument for removal. Use for the projects etc. is more a reason.
That is not an answer. Sites don't get removed for certain pages, it is wikiwide or not.
OK, your site is in German and in English, so the site is probably less useful for Japanese, Catalan and Farsi (e.g.). Whitelisting on de is already done, I again defer you to the English wiki, find a local suitable project there, discuss and suggest the link. If they think it is useful there, then the link can locally be whitelisted. If two big projects support that (de and en), then that is probably a better reason for us to consider de-blacklisting, if it comes up to 3-4 bigger projects, then I would suggest total de-blacklisting .. until that time, here Declined. Please find you way to a suitable English wikiproject and let them comment here. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} (en: U, T) 17:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

1. Thanks to Erwin, having put my second comment into the right palce.

2. WIKIWIDE _ Haha... Exactly that is the problem of Wiki admins' actions: They blocked my site WORLDWIDE (by using something like a "red Button"), not having inspected my site for potential support of Wiki pages. E.g.: I tried talking about my source of actually 190 different tourmaline photos on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tourmaline#Tourmaline_images_worth_being_added_via_a_link.3F but my input was rejected.

"the site is probably less useful for Japanese, Catalan and Farsi (e.g.)" - ha ha... Do you really think that other links like Mindat or webmineral is useful for these languages? I cannot find something in Chinese on that sites, you?

"find a local suitable project there, discuss and suggest the link..." I found such a project: Gemstones! But, according to yourself, the users are ignoring my site... Why that? They ask for good gemstone images, don't they? "...Please find you way to a suitable English wikiproject and let them comment here..." - Yeah, I'm waiting for tough users who back my project, in contrary to you and your companions. Don't forget your Wiki founder's intentions to serve the whole world!

F.N. Berg 18:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Is this about adding your URL or about improving Wikipedia? It seems to me that it's the former. Spam of one site doesn't mean that related sites should be blacklisted as well. There was reason for this one to be blacklisted. Because of that we need a good reason to remove it again. Until a Wikipedian offers us one that won't happen. --Erwin(85) 19:10, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hoi Erwin, ADDING MY URL MEANS IMPROVING WIKIPEDIA! It is neither the former nor the latter: it is both! I hope at least you (except from German Wiki admins) do understand that meanwhile.

- "...There was reason for this one to be blacklisted..." The ONLY reason was that I added too many links to my own URL. Where is the difference between adding own links and adding links to other URLs? I could easily add hundreds of links to xxx.com - resulting in a blockade of that site. Is that a solution? Surely not! So what!

- "...we need a good reason to remove it again..." Is it no good reason that thousands of Wiki users have clicked on my links to see interesting gemstones images???

I could easily show you all my website traffic data, from launching until yesterday.

F.N. Berg 20:07, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Common Problem

We all know that a lot of link spamming happens every day. Some is detected by users or "spam hunters", some by automatic detection. OK so far but what if a user adds too many links to a special URL because he/ she knows/thinks that such a link is helpful and a good addition to a Wiki project? I tell you what usually happens: The links are deleted, the URL put on the blacklist, put together into the pot where really bad sites are cooked. Those who declared link additions as spam, are usually backed by other admins to keep up a questionable consens within the Wiki community (my personal opinion), especially if they live in the same country (my personal impression). Such a blacklisted "kosher spammer" has no chance to fight against a possibly unjust decision except he/she finds other admins "with good Wiki reputation" who asks for whitelisting because he/she needs that specific, blocked URL. What if one cannot find such admins because those who are interested in that subject don't have time actually for a close inspection of that blocked site?

If someone opposes against his/her blacklisting, it often happens that admins feel that someone simply goes on their nerves. Result: final blocking of the nickname so that one cannot even add a comment on his/her own personal Wiki page - reduced to silence so to say. If that person logs in under a new nick, that fact (creating a necessary, new identity) could possibly being used against the complaining user.

I am such an extensive "spammer" who added a lot of links to my own URL (www.realgems.org) and was indefinately blocked. That blacklisting happened worldwide, at the same time. I assume that one admin must have put something like a red button to block my link additions worldwide.

My (or a worldwide Wiki) problem is that other Wiki admins (e.g. on Spanish Wiki or Japanese Wiki) were not asked for their opinion (I assume). If Wiki.en admins think that blocking of my URL was OK, it's fine by me but what about other national Wikis like German Wiki? Their admins came to the conclusion that my links to my URL "www.realgems.org" were/are a really helpful addition to some Wiki gemstones pages/projects.

- I just had to delete "http://" from my URL. The complete URL is still regarded as spam, and the Wiki spam filter blocked my entry... So I'm trying it again, without "http://"

F.N. Berg 16:41, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Heh, "My (or a worldwide Wiki) problem is that other Wiki admins (e.g. on Spanish Wiki or Japanese Wiki) were not asked for their opinion (I assume)." Indeed, F.N. Berg, you assume, and when you were adding the links you were also not asking them if it was OK. Please stop making these silly requests, you were adding the links everywhere without discussion, which is in most guidelines of which I can read the language strongly suggested, and hence were stopped. I just had a look at your English contributions on en:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Gemology_and_Jewelry, you are more advertising your site and complaining in stead of asking for a review (and I see that most people have ignored that). FYI, there are admins and active users here from en, nl, de, es, no, wikibooks, wiktionary.

Declined, and please don't think about circumventing the blacklist because you insist on linking. We are not here to promote your website or to link to it, linking is because local editors think it is useful. I have not seen, except for de, any proof for that. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} (en: U, T) 17:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hoi Dirk, I hope you don't belong to those old people who still have objections that Germans still exist after WW2. Typical for some Wiki admins like you: putting down my requests as "silly". Please tell me why my requests are silly! I'm not "adding links without discussion" - why do you think I have added my newest request on this DISCUSSION page? Do you really state that those who have added links to e.g. Mindat.org have asked the Chinese or Russian Wiki admins if a link (one of hundreds btw) would be appropriate? :-))

- Well, meanwhile I'm convinced that straight Wiki preconditions, combined with ignorant admins like you, withhold worldwide Wiki users from seeing all these gem varieties presented on my website.

Let me express my personal intention again: I want to inform people about the varieties of faceted gems! If this does not fit into your or Wiki's intentions, it's OK for me but a shame, regarding the basic Wikipedia aims - to inform people!

If you belong to those guys who still think I just want to promote my own site: I do that realgems.org project without financial interests, just for educational purposes. Did you know how many U.S. scholars visit my site every day - using my stuff for their education?

But what can I say against this combined aversion to a German's efforts to provide his stuff to serve the world!

F.N. Berg (forgot to log in)

No, indeed, you are not adding links without discussion, but you were doing that. If you want to compare with mindat.org, in the top 10 of editors who have added mindat.org I see highly respected local editors (admins), in the top 10 of realgems.org, I only see .. 10 IPs. That is what makes the difference, for mindat.org I know that it gets used by established users, for realgems.org I have no such proof. And that is what we ask, over and over, go to the wikiprojects, or find on different projects established editors, ask them, and if they indeed see the use, if so .. then they can come back and ask. I already told you, that many U.S. sholars visit your site .. can also mean that you do your advertising well. And not having a financial interest is not a reason either. Opinions of knowledgeable local, established editors do.

I'll take 'ignorant admins' as a personal attack, and you suggestion that I have something against Germans is also not the way forward. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} (en: U, T) 18:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Dirk, yes, others obviously don't make an input on this discussion. I'm asking myself why...

- "top 10 of editors" - well, as far as I have seen there is mainly one admin who added links to my friend's (Jolyon Ralph, the Mindat owner) website: Vsmith from the U.S.

- "...top 10 of realgems.org..." - well, my site was launched in June 2008.

- "...gets used by established users..." - How can "established users" use my site for their projects if my site is blocked worldwide?

- "...what we ask, over and over, go to the wikiprojects..." - I went there: "gemology project" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Gemology_and_Jewelry#Ammolite but got no comment about my involvement.

- "...that many U.S. sholars visit your site .. can also mean that you do your advertising well." No, not such a low level, please. I haven't placed any advertising anywhere. I don't need any advertising because my pages are found worldwide via Google. Just have a try and type "poldervaartite" or "serendibite" or whatelse on Google search - not to speak about Google image search. My Google ranking is rather surprising (at least for me), given the fact that I launched my educational site in June 2008.

- "...And not having a financial interest is not a reason either..." - I can see everywhere on Wiki that exactly this is a major point for being blacklisted!

- "...and you(r) suggestion that I have something against Germans is also not the way forward..." so you don't have anything against Germans who were born after WW2? Fine! In this case please excuse my words.

F.N. Berg 19:39, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Additional question: you wrote "...for mindat.org I know that it gets used by established users, for realgems.org I have no such proof..." How can you say that? You have knowledge about the use of Mindat links? OK, fine, not talking about your source. BUT: How can you say anything about use of my (deleted in December) links? If there are no links, where have you found a proof that nobody used my links? Simply strange...

F.N. Berg 20:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Berg, we are monitoring 734 wikis, which put every link addition in a database. mindat.org is added by a lot of users, however, realgems.org I don't see many regulars using that link, e.g. the additions of user 84.128.190.14 of the link realgems.org:

(1) -> 2008-05-30 17:02:39 de:Roter Beryll http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=44945954&oldid=39517544 de:User:84.128.190.14 www.realgems.org/edelsteine_liste/bixbit%20info.html (85.214.111.90)
(2) -> 2008-06-15 07:35:17 de:Chrysoberyll http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=44945299&oldid=42808540 de:User:84.128.190.14 www.realgems.org/edelsteine_liste/chrysoberyll.html (85.214.111.90)
(3) -> 2008-07-11 13:37:12 de:Quarz http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=44944879&oldid=44931367 de:User:84.128.190.14 www.realgems.org/edelsteine_liste/quarz.html (85.214.111.90)
(4) -> 2008-07-14 03:41:41 en:Beryl http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=205863699&oldid=205627517 en:User:84.128.190.14 www.realgems.org/list_of_gemstones/beryl.html (85.214.111.90)
(5) -> 2008-07-14 21:56:55 en:Quartz http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=205859594&oldid=205263416 en:User:84.128.190.14 www.realgems.org/list_of_gemstones/quartz.html (85.214.111.90)
(6) -> 2008-07-15 21:38:01 en:Chrysoberyl http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=205861901&oldid=205418988 en:User:84.128.190.14 www.realgems.org/list_of_gemstones/chrysoberyl.html (85.214.111.90)

So that includes your already deleted links. I can withdraw the same info for mindat.org, and I have compared that data. Have you ever tried to click the history tab, on top of this page? You see that all your additions are there recorded. It is visible who used which links where and when. If those statistics would have included regulars, then we would probably not have blacklisted, but by far most of the additions (108 of the 135 in the db) are by your IPs ONLY. I did not say that your link was never used by other users (though it seems probable), but if you can show me other users ... --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} (en: U, T) 21:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Realgems.org - a useful website for Wiki users?

Kevmin, you wrote: "The information present in your webpage is already covered in more detail by the information on this page and is references. Thus if your page is not being utilized as a reference, and its amin purpose is driving up visits to your site, it is link spam."

Let me explain why I am doing my best to support the Wiki mineral and gemstones pages: I always thought that Wikipedia is a worldwide online resource for information and education. Therefore I added external links to my own website on a lot of Wiki pages/projects. I did that from July 2009 until December 2009 without being accused being a "spammer". Then, in December, the Wiki "spam robot" found out that there were too many links added, and announced it as "spam". Since then all my links were deleted by someone, and my Wiki "homepage" blocked so that I couldn't respond to accusations. Then I changed my nick into "F.N. Berg" and started to inform Wiki admins about the real aim of my link additions: to serve the world with a lot of gemstone images!

You say "The information present in your webpage is already covered in more detail by the information on this page and is references..." Let me explain why I still think that my links were a useful addition to these mineral / gemstone pages: On all Wiki pages which deal with gemstones or their minerals (like sapphire, ruby, rare gems etc.) one can only see the mineral data, perhaps sometimes enhanced with one gem image. The links show only websites which provide mineral data and mineral images. No faceted gemstones images which surely are of interest of Wiki users. Therefore I thought it would be helpful to add links to Wiki mineral and gemstone pages so that Wiki users can see a lot of faceted gems - in addition to the Wiki images!

No "driving up visits to your site..." because I do my site for free, for educational purposes! I pay my website traffic costs myself, no sponsor, no asking for financial contributions like many other sites.

Therefore I think that the deletion of all my external links was unjust and not in the Wiki founder's sense.

F.N. Berg 19:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I indeed also saw the history on en. Kevmin and Vsmith have commented on the link. Wikipedia is an online resource of information, and it is clear that the locals (may I again remind you that Vsmith is a geologist, he knows about gemstones) have deemed your site inferior to mindat.org. Sorry. F.N. Berg, let me put it simple, without their support we are not going to remove your site from the blacklist' Forget it. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} (en: U, T) 21:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

"...Vsmith ... (is a geologist, he knows about gemstones) have deemed your site inferior to mindat.org." I NEVER TRIED TO COMPARE MY HUMBLE WEBSITE WITH MINDAT.ORG!!! Mindat.org serves mineralogists, I serve gemstone enthusiasts!!! Why is that so complicated that Vsmith don't understand that simple fact!

"...without their support..." So one or two or more U.S. admins who are not able to see the difference (re importance) between minerals and gemstones images can act as worldwide Wiki kings, blocking my source (of more than 2,000 images) so that the rest of the world is treated like children whose papa decides what is suitable for them or not?

Dirk, that is exactly the problem: That people who have once decided something, might have severe problems to revise their decision. In the meantime I was told by others that I'm not standing alone re this Wiki admins' problems...

Meanwhile the discussion does no more deal with the efficiency of my former links but with my behaviour or the stubbornness of some pigheaded people. IF some "major" guys would have inspected my site they cannot tell me or the public that all my gemstone images would not be useful for Wiki users who search for minerals and gems AND related images! That is a very simple fact and nobody can tell me the contrary.

One should see the difference between mineral enthusiasts and gemstone lovers. You and your colleagues seem to have a limited view only from the mineral side. Others, many others, regard(ed) my link additions as very helpful for gemstone enthusiasts. Would be interesting to see your comments on the English Wiki project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Gemology_and_Jewelry#Ammolite...

But I see that the discussion with Wiki.en is obvously useless. If it is your final aim to delete and block my Wiki input on your English Wiki furthermore, it must be accepted by me. There is another, bigger world out of English Wiki.

F.N. Berg 22:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yes, that is what we ask you, find people who do see its use on en. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} (en: U, T) 23:20, 1 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Dear mr Berg, I saw you advocating your website (nl:Overleg:Toermalijn) on the Dutch Wikipedia. Please be aware that normally, discussions are supposed to take place in Dutch there. Please note that Wikipedia articles are not meant as start pages. External links are (temporally) tolerated when information is not yet available in Wikipedia, or tolerated when they serve as a source for the information in the article (in which case they should mostly be temporally too until a published source is found - imho). At the Dutch version we are usually more strict about external links than our English counterparts. If you want to share your database of pictures for educational purposes, you could upload them to Wikimedia Commons under a free license. In that way they can be used in all Wikipedia articles directly. Regards, Woudloper 09:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Dear Woudloper, I feel good that I got the first response on my worldwide spreaded request to whitelist my links on national Wikis. Very sorry that I could not write in Dutch. I once (from July 2008 until December 2008 when my URL was blocked worldwide) thought that a simple link addition on some international Wiki mineral or gemstone pages (also the Dutch pages) would be helpful for Wiki users to find more interesting photos, in addition to the Wiki pages.

I understand the Wiki problem that one should be involved in making articles or helpful additions to Wiki pages. I did that: I created three pages (Tugtupite, Jeremejevite, Benitoite). The problem, and this seem(s?) to be the major problem, is that I cannot add images to Wiki Commons. Why? Because I can create my website only with photo permissions from the image owners. When they give me their kind permission to show a pic, they ask (of course) for showing a link to their website and the copyright - understandable. There is NO OTHER WAY to collect all these gemstone pics to create a unique website which shows faceted gems and their rough versions! Understand? So I cannot add "my" pics to Wiki pages. THEREFORE I added all these links so that Wiki visitors can see the pics. That's not complicated to understand I think. Best regards, and thanks again, Mike / realgems.org F.N. Berg 14:11, 3 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

If the image owners are happy to let you use their images then do suggest that they take a look at Commons which would allow others to see them over a large number of projects. Thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:34, 3 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi Herby, yes, not the worst idea but presenting 2 or 3 pics is not comparable with being allowed by Wiki to see all the pics on my site. I'm sure that a lot of image copyright holders would agree showing their images on Wiki Commons (within my articles) but I don't think it would be suitable for me to spend hours / days for asking for permission as long as I am regarded as a Wiki "spammer". F.N. Berg 15:04, 3 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I realise it would not be suitable for you, however it would be far more suitable to our project than dealing with your link placement. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think we've wasted enough time on this. The answer is No. — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:40, 3 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

toolquarter.com

toolquarter.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)

Dear administration of Wikipedia, today I found out this link is on the blacklist of Wikipedia. I see no reason for this. Adding it to the articles concerning the Tool band, seems to be impossible now, altough this website could add something to the articles. It's all about discussing on ToolQuarter, but that's what makes Tool the band it is today. It's a complex band and people often want to share opinions and visions about it. The article on Wikipedia is far too objective on the band. I'm sure people interested in the article about Tool would be interested in reading some other visions on the music. Their are several essay's to find on it and these texts can make a difference for the articles here on Wikipedia. For instance this writing on the song 46&2; *url here*/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=144. I don't see why this couldn't be interesting for Wikipedia. ReinVO

Declined. Fan sites and the like are not generally appropriate, Wikipedia's external link functionality exists primarily to assist readers and editors with verifying content - links to sources, good, links to forums and other stuff which does not pass our guidance for reliable sources, bad. Here's why it was added: User:COIBot/XWiki/toolquarter.com. JzG 22:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Cleanup

Not a request, but a message: I have started a cleanup of the oldest entries in the list. See Spam blacklist cleanup for (very short) reasons of why I have removed some and kept others. - Andre Engels 09:41, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

greaT! ;-) -- seth 11:54, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Good idea, but can we have some kind of template that would help to cross-check for debates and reports? JzG 19:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

@JzG: I'm not sure what you mean here.

@Andre: Entries should be removed according to the normal criteria - I don't think just being a 404 or something is a good reason, nor is just being an old entry (it seems to me that these are your reasons - feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). In any case, I'd much prefer discussion about the criteria for removing old entries before actually doing so.

I think it might be a good idea to re-evaluate the "words" section at the top as well as moving single-wiki spam entries which predated the per-wiki blacklists to that wiki (mostly enwiki).

As well, a note as much to myself as anyone else: Spam blacklist cleanup should be archived to a subpage in the normal fashion such that it can be found easily.

Thanks — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 02:02, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

@Andre: You should log all removals in our log. We may need to find that information in future. -- seth 10:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

@Mike.lifeguard: The reason I am removing links to 404s and such is that those sites are not used any more; this means that they are very unlikely to be spammed as well. In fact, many of those are not even owned by the same party any more; thus, they are basically blocking random websites (or non-websites). Removing them, in my opinion, makes the blacklist shorter without making it less effective (less effective meaning that fewer spam sites are blocked or more 'good' sites are.

@seth: Good idea, I will do so next. - Andre Engels 09:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Troubleshooting and problems

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).

User: namespace abuse

Latest comment: 15 years ago9 comments4 people in discussion

This section is for reporting abuse of userpages for promotional purposes; 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). Abuse across several wikis should be reported here; please provide links to example behaviour. Completed requests will be marked as {{added}} or {{declined}} and archived.

PetrZaxarov

User:PetrZaxarov

(commons: userpage | talk (←links) || Edits: +/- | logs ← PetrZaxarov ← logs || search)(Reports: COIBot)
(Tools: GUC | stalktoy | CA) (Search: Google | → links ← )

(enwiki: userpage | talk (←links) || Edits: +/- | logs ← PetrZaxarov ← logs || search)

Spammed user talk or user page and on Meta also another page, commons, meta, simplewiki (own user talk), mediawikiwiki (own user talk), ru:wb (own user talk), ru.wiki (own user talk), en.wiki (own user talk). Account is global (from 20th) and I found no other contributions than these "important" infos about him with the spamlinks anywhere. Best regards, --birdy geimfyglið _(:> )=| 07:37, 21 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

User:DosChild

(commons: userpage | talk (←links) || Edits: +/- | logs ← DosChild ← logs || search)(Reports: COIBot)
(Tools: GUC | stalktoy | CA) (Search: Google | → links ← )

(enwiki: userpage | talk (←links) || Edits: +/- | logs ← DosChild ← logs || search)

Same type of abuse, seen on meta, mediawikiwiki --birdy geimfyglið _(:> )=| 20:32, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

(commons: talk (←links) || Edits: +/- || search)

(enwiki: talk (←links) || Edits: +/- || search)(Tools: GUC | gblock | log | → links ←) | (Reports: COIBot)

Same type of abuse by the IP Special:Contributions/81.25.41.255

the two accounts confirmed socks by cu, --birdy geimfyglið _(:> )=| 20:41, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Spammed domains:

www.canon1000d.ru 
www.canon1000dkit.ru 
www.canon50dbody.ru 
www.canon50dkit.ru 
www.canon5d.ru 
www.canon85is.ru 
www.canoneos40d.ru 
www.canoneos450d.ru
www.canong10.ru 
www.canonsx10.ru 
www.meatsalad.ru
www.phoneall.ru
www.receptsous.ru
www.saladmeat.ru
www.saladveg.ru
www.siteons.ru
www.sousrecept.ru
www.vegsalad.ru
www.web-hostings.ru
www.web-siteon.ru

--birdy geimfyglið _(:> )=| 21:02, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

(edit conflict) This strange guy spammed with different links.

He started with

canon1000d.ru
canon1000dkit.ru
canon50dbody.ru
canon50dkit.ru
canon5d.ru
canon85is.ru
canoneos40d.ru
canoneos450d.ru
canong10.ru
canonsx10.ru

which don't exist. And the user continued with

meatsalad.ru
phoneall.ru
receptsous.ru
saladmeat.ru
saladveg.ru
siteons.ru
sousrecept.ru
vegsalad.ru
web-hostings.ru
web-siteon.ru

which exist. Maybe, the first part was meant to be something like a test.

I'll add the second part of domains to the sbl. But I guess, this block can be temporary. After say 6 months the entries could be removed from the list.

Added -- seth 21:21, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, maybe it was a test, however, they are confirmed socks and the IP and DosChild did spam the same links (second part You mentioned), thanks for adding, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið _(:> )=| 21:25, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I have now added the first part too, because he continues to created nonsense pages crosswiki with them, best regards, --birdy geimfyglið _(:> )=| 00:45, 24 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ocobian

User:Ocobian

(commons: userpage | talk (←links) || Edits: +/- | logs ← Ocobian ← logs || search)(Reports: COIBot)
(Tools: GUC | stalktoy | CA) (Search: Google | → links ← )

(enwiki: userpage | talk (←links) || Edits: +/- | logs ← Ocobian ← logs || search)

Spammed their user page on Commons. See Commons:User:Ocobian for the deletion log. I can't access the SUL tool, so I'm not sure if this is a cross wiki spammer. --Kanonkas 18:39, 3 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

comedorsantamaria.org.mx

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)

valueinvestingforum.com.mx

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)

sabinocapital.com

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)

himfg.edu.mx

(LinkSearch: meta | en | es | de | fr | ru | zh | simple | c | d | Wikipedias: top 25 · 50 · major wikis · sc · gs)(Search: Google | en (G) | fr (G) | de (G) | meta (G) | backlinks | → links ←)

himfg.edu.mx looks like the site of a teaching hospital (hence the .edu), so probably shouldn't be blacklisted. However, it seems the spamming was only on Commons and only from this account. I'll block it now. — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Discussion

Latest comment: 15 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

Screencasts

I was thinking of ways to get new contributors to the SBL & decided that simply not knowing what to do and how to do it is probably a big barrier for people. So, I'm going to make a series of screencasts to cover some of the tasks we do here, which should hopefully be helpful for recruiting new people.

Your comments about the one I've already done are welcome. Mardetanha has said this is helpful, so I think this will be a worthwhile project to continue. I've already learned a few things that should make the end result higher quality for the next ones. — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:32, 9 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Toolserver replication halted

FYI: cluster s3 won't be replicated to the toolserver for the time being, see mailarchive:toolserver-l/2009-January/001766.html. This affects the results of the toolserver's tools for most wiki's, e.g. tools:~erwin85/xwiki.php won't be up-to-date. The English Wikipedia is on cluster 1 and the German Wikipedia, Dutch Wikipedia and a handful of other projects are on cluster 2. --Erwin(85) 21:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

New hardware has been ordered & should arrive in about 2 weeks. s1 will be moved to the new server at that point, and s3 will be re-imported on it's own server. — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 01:59, 18 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Earlier today:

<ekimmargni> Do we have an estimate for hardware delivery? The masses are getting rowdy.
<DaBPunkt> later
<DaBPunkt> should be this month
<ekimmargni> that seems incredibly slow... is that a normal length of time for hardware of this type?
<DaBPunkt> for us: yes
<DaBPunkt> it's not only the delivery; somebody has to travel to amsterdam and montage [mount, or more properly, rack] it

— Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 23:53, 9 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Servers should arrive Monday & be racked later that week. It'll be usable the following week. Or so they say. — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 18:27, 19 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Expensive parser functions?

Expensive parser function count: 30/500

Can anyone figure out which parserfunctions we're using on this page which are expensive? We could perhaps avoid using them if so. — Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 01:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Template:LinkSummary uses #ifexist a few times. RockMFR 02:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

@@ Line 122: / Line 122: @@
 === lmgtfy.com ===
+{{linksummary|lmgtfy.com}}
+{{linksummary|letmegooglethatforyou.com}}
 Can be used to bypass the blacklist. Also, please blacklist the redirect: letmegooglethatforyou.com --[[User:Kanonkas|Kanonkas]] 20:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
+:This requires the <code>&l=1</code> parameter, so I suggest blacklisting <code>\b(?:lmgtfy|letmegooglethatforyou)\.com.*[?&]l</code> &nbsp;&mdash;&nbsp;<b style="color:#309;">[[User:Mike.lifeguard|Mike]].[[User talk:Mike.lifeguard|lifeguard]]</b>&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;<sup>[[:b:en:User talk:Mike.lifeguard|<span style="color:#309;">@en.wb</span>]]</sup> 20:35, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 == Proposed additions (Bot reported) ==