Talk:Spam blacklist: Difference between revisions
Herbythyme (talk | contribs) m →commonpurpose.org: un! |
→commonpurpose.org: More urls cross wiki |
||
| Line 202: | Line 202: | ||
Note: already blacklisted in portugal (pt?): [http://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist&diff=9746137&oldid=9742062&rcid=10209173 diff] (and hence picked up by COIBot). --[[User:Beetstra|Beetstra]] 17:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC) |
Note: already blacklisted in portugal (pt?): [http://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist&diff=9746137&oldid=9742062&rcid=10209173 diff] (and hence picked up by COIBot). --[[User:Beetstra|Beetstra]] 17:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC) |
||
:{{Added}}, thanks — '''<font color="#0033FF">[[User:VasilievVV|Vasil]]</font><font color="#40C040">[[User talk:VasilievVV|ievVV]]</font>''' 17:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC) |
:{{Added}}, thanks — '''<font color="#0033FF">[[User:VasilievVV|Vasil]]</font><font color="#40C040">[[User talk:VasilievVV|ievVV]]</font>''' 17:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC) |
||
*'''nourishkefir.co.uk''' |
|||
*'''commonpurpose.org.uk''' |
|||
*http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/88.106.207.152 |
|||
*http://bg.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://bs.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://ca.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://cs.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://da.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://hr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://id.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://ja.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://ru.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://sl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
*http://uk.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250 |
|||
Should add these also, related to the above. --[[User:Hu12|Hu12]] 14:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
===libertas.sm + libertas-newssanmarino.blogspot.com=== |
===libertas.sm + libertas-newssanmarino.blogspot.com=== |
||
Revision as of 14:48, 19 March 2008
For more information on what the spam blacklist is for, and the processes used here, please see Spam blacklist/About.
Please post comments to the appropriate section below: Proposed additions, Proposed removals, or Troubleshooting and problems, read the messageboxes at the top of each section for an explanation. Also, please check back some time after submitting, there could be questions regarding your request. Per-project whitelists are discussed at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist. In addition to that, please sign your posts with ~~~~ after your comment. Other discussions related to this last, but that are not a problem with a particular link please see, Spam blacklist policy discussion.
Completed requests are archived, additions and removal are logged.
- 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
snippet for logging: {{/request|921350#section_name}}
If you cannot find your remark below, please do a search for the url (link) in question with this Archive Search tool.
Spam that is only affecting a single project should go to that project's local blacklist, if available: ENWP
Proposed additions
|
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. Completed requests will be marked as done or denied and archived. |
User page spammer
See also WikiProject_Spam case
- \bdailyserver\.com\b
- \bconference-coordinator\.com\b
- \bgtp-icommerce\.com\b
- \bbellaerotic\.com\b
- \bdiscountcouponsguide\.com\b
- \bnewcharlotterealestate\.com\b
- \bthenewthinme\.com\b
- \bresellitforprofit\.com\b
- \bactionprintinginc\.com\b
- \bvalentines-day-hot-deals\.php\b
- \bbody1\.co\.uk\b
- \binmotionhostingreview\.org\b
- \bwatchanytv\.com\b
- \blinks\.com\b
- \bpokermarketingcode\.com\b
- \bpokerdeal\.org\b
- \bsite5review\.org\b
- \bsecuritysystemsreview\.com\b
- \bunblockedfacebook\.org\b
- \blightgate-imagery.com\b
- \bcheapturkey\.org\.uk\b
- \bicmeler\.org\.uk\b
- \bzeolitedirect\.com\b
- \b1ThinkHealthy\.com\b
- \bwatchavatarchapters\.net\b
- \bloyolaneworleansonline\.com\b
- \bscrantonuniversityonline\.com\b
- \bgizmoactivemobile\.com\b
- \bsityodtongla\.com\b
- \bgiftgadgetgateway\.com\b
- \bpregnancy-period\.com\b
- \boeinet\.org\b
- \bcureyeastinfection.net\b
- \bhugegamestore\.com\b
- \bfamousstamps\.org\b
- \blocateaprinter\.com\b
- \bhosticanreview\.org\b
- \bapply-for-a-credit-card-now\.com\b
- \bbuyplumbing\.co\.uk\b
- \bgizmoactive\.com\b
- \btahitinonijuice\.info\b
- \bnoni247\.com\b
- \bcontractpal\.com\b
- \bdiscountcouponsguide.com\b
- \bseattle-washington-bankruptcy-lawyer.com\b
- \bseattle-divorce-lawyer\.com\b
- \bfreebiefree\.com\b
- \bgames2relax\.com\b
- \brakeback\.com\b
- \bhosticanreview\.org\b
- \bmoleskinsoft\.com\b
- \ballneonsigns\.com\b
- \bthesitebox\.com\b
- \bericton\.com\b
- \btresamigosworldimports\.com\b
- \bturborevs\.org\.uk\b
- \blooknooks\.com\b
- \bcrystalimage\.us\b
- \bwonderjewels\.us\b
- \bsunlight-bingo\.co\.uk\b
- \binstylepatio\.com\b
- \bghilliesuitsonline\.com\b
- \bmonsterbreakbilliards\.com\b
- \bvideosytal\.com\b
- \bgadgets-club\.com\b
- \bVisual8\.com\b
- \balltomkredit\.se\b
- \bapxalarmreview\.com\b
- \bunblockbebo\.biz\b
- \bmolsoncanadian\.ca\b
- \bholidayclick\.co\.uk\b
- \bneighborhoodbistro\.com\b
- \bdir\.vc\b
- \bthe-clap\.com\b
- \bbolly\.in\b
- \bsell-my-house-fast\.org\b
- \blocateapsychologist\.com\b
- \bqualitygamers\.com\b
- \bturborevs\.org\.uk\b
- \btopcanoe\.com\b
- \bbumriches\.com\b
- \bsurewomen\.com\b
- \bnewhopemedicalcenter\.com\b
- \bfunny-stuff-central\.com\b
- \bkaffe1\.no\b
- \bkeynoteresource.com\b
- \bcaveon\.com\b
- \bsupremedefense\.com\b
- \bcarshelpingamerica\.org\b
- \bopenzend\.com\b
- \bno1tele\.com\b
- \bafghanunited\.com\b
- \bnelsonmortgages\.co\.uk\b
- \bguitarlesson\.ws\b
- \bstretch-mark-cream\.us\b
- \bdirectoryofonlinepoker\.com\b
- \buspublicrecords\.com\b
- \bmycincinnatiohiohomeinspector\.com* \b
- \bohiohomeinspectorhome\.com\b
- \bohioinspector\.com\b
- \bsoberseek\.com\b
- \bbarcodecreator\.eu\b
- \bcedarwooddoghouses\.com\b
- \bsaxen\.co\.uk\b
- \bproductlaunchformulareviews\.com\b
Large amount of abuse. Since these are now BL'd on the en.wikipedia, the threat to other wikis has increased. Thanks, --Hu12 15:09, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
On hold, since no global spamming yet — VasilievVV 15:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
associatedcontent.com
See discussion at:
- en:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#Associated_Content_links.2C_get_paid_to_spam
- en:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2007_Archive_Sep#http:.2F.2Fwww.associatedcontent.com
- en:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2007_Archive_Jul#Associated_Content:_another.2C_bigger_Suite101.com.3F
- Associated Content, Performance Bonus Program and Payment
For comparison to the suite101.com case, which is essentially the same problem:
Most recent discussion at the admin's noticeboard shows a clear consensus to blacklist this site. Essentially, the problem is that anyone is allowed to post their own articles there, with no editorial oversight. Additionally, authors there get paid by the pageview, so there's a clear incentive to spam links to them. At current count, there are 731 links on en.wikipedia, 13 on fr, 7 on de, and I haven't exhausted my searching options yet.
I believe that blacklisting won't remove current links, but it should at least help us stop more from propagating. We've dealt with this site in the past, and removing the links just resulted in even more showing up. Once we have this under control, we can decide what to do with all the existing links. (Likely the only page that we should allow to keep a link there would be en:Associated Content (and other language versions, of course).) Infophile 16:33, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
- I understand where you are coming from however I think more investigation is required on this. I've looked at some on fr wp (I can get the basics in French better than German!). The links seem like they are added by bona fide registered users. Certainly there is an en wp issue & the site probably should be blacklisted there but this list is for current cross wiki link placement & I think some thought is needed before that can be said with certainty, thanks --Herby talk thyme 16:43, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
- I think the consensus formed was that there really should be no reason to link to this site. Any good faith links may simply be users not understanding the policies well enough. In any case, I'll put up a request at the enWiki blacklist for the time being. Infophile 17:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Spamsearch results at w:User:MER-C/associatedcontent.com. 121.221.153.138 08:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yup, cross wiki. I want that tool...--Hu12 15:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- I am not convinced on this one. I checked out the Commons links today - there is nothing at all spammy about the few that are there. I see en wp has an issue with this, I am not certain it is a meta one --Herby talk thyme 18:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
SEO and adsense related
See WikiProject Spam Item
\bmysteryshoponline\.com\b
\beggnogworld\.com\b
\bdrinksmix\.net\b
\bmixdrinx\.com\b
\bmysteryshopforum\.com\b
\bpomegranateworld\.com\b
\blufe\.org\b
- Cross Wiki
- http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/24.27.178.252
- http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/24.27.178.123
- http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Beitr%C3%A4ge/87.187.13.117
- http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciaal:Bijdragen/75.34.9.232
Got some of the cross wiki spamming, however the toolserver crapped out. But I think it obvious with just these few. --Hu12 20:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Declined: crosswiki spam in your links I found only for mixdrink.com and it was in June 2007 — VasilievVV 07:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
More URL Shrinking Domains
provided by a spammer on the en.wiki page for TinyURL.
This list includes the domain name provided by the spammer & others domains which were listed as available options on the site.
\bhumbleurl\.com\b \bhumbleurl\.net\b \burlhash\.com\b \burlhash\.org\b \burlsmash\.com\b
--Versageek 23:42, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
- Shortified and
Added, thanks — VasilievVV 06:58, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- Another of interest offto.net --Hu12 02:44, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
commonpurpose.org
Cross wiki, see COIBot report, now disruptively added to en.wiki, I think only by one IP.
commonpurpose.org
Note: already blacklisted in portugal (pt?): diff (and hence picked up by COIBot). --Beetstra 17:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- Added, thanks — VasilievVV 17:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- nourishkefir.co.uk
- commonpurpose.org.uk
- http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/88.106.207.152
- http://bg.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://bs.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://ca.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://cs.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://da.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://hr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://id.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://ja.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://ru.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://sl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
- http://uk.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/217.150.113.250
Should add these also, related to the above. --Hu12 14:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
libertas.sm + libertas-newssanmarino.blogspot.com
Cross wiki spamming
libertas.sm
libertas-newssanmarino.blogspot.com
IP inserting the links:
-Jorunn 00:41, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- Added, thanks for reporting — VasilievVV 06:48, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Adsense spammer
From en:WP:AN.
Adsense pub-9515873777130697 .info's
pub-4598819753511212 some .com's related to Dot Com Infoway & Galatta.com
- dotcominfoway.com part of Dot Com Infoway Company
dotcominfoway.com
- galatta.com
galatta.com
shriyaonline.info
malavika.info
nayantaraonline.info
bhavanaonline.info
nishakothari.info
sandya.info
asinonline.info
snehaonline.info
renukamenon.info
kanihaa.com
jyotikaonline.com
vellitheraithemovie.com
jithanramesh.com
sherin-online.com
jothika-online.com
kettavanthemovie.com
kettavanthefilm.com
2checkout.com
dashaavtaram.com
vaaranamaayiram.com
bheema.info
bheemaa.com
sultan-the-film.com
dashaavtaram.com
kuruvi.info
billathemovie.com
graphwise.com
pazhani.com
paruthiveeranthemovie.com
ilayathalapathyvijay.com
simbuonline.com
aaryamovie.com
sivaji-the-film.com
atmthefilm.com
azhakiyathamizhmagan.info
zerust.com
kireedom.info
sulekha.com
madurai4u.com
iltsource.com
xyleme.com
jothikaonline.com
priyamudansneha.com
my-bharath.blogspot.com
galatta.tv
paruthiveeranthemovie.com
orampo.com
billa2007.info
kaalai.com
debtfin.com
americandreamwine.com
azhakiyathamizhmagan.info
- Accounts
- en:user:Johndci
- en:user:59.145.90.11
- en:user:59.145.89.17
- en:user:59.145.90.16
- en:user:DespoinaC
- en:user:Nm.praveen
- en:user:202.56.193.118
- en:user:203.199.195.66
- en:user:Spinks wiki
- en:user:Tamilfan
- en:user:72.44.1.125
- en:user:Hariharan wiki
- en:user:Avulpakir
- en:user:59.145.90.15
- en:user:Stephenlewis
- en:user:Praveen100
- en:user:61.95.184.217
- en:user:122.164.154.251
- en:user:128.230.233.236
- en:user:59.145.90.15
- en:user:Fchristo
- en:user:59.92.120.61
- en:user:122.164.155.38
- en:user:59.92.103.25
- en:user:59.92.103.13
- en:user:59.145.90.14
Dot Com Infoway is a marketing strategy and content developer, spamming Wikipedia on an incredibly large scale for several years. Both link and reference spamming. Also engages in link vandalism and article vandalism[1]. sites without adsense are "This site has been conceptualized, designed and created by Dot Com Infoway & Galatta.com " --Hu12 (talk) 16:08, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- I brought this here because it is a large-scale spamming campaign with at least some cross-wiki action. JzG 16:28, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- As a copy of the en wp stuff quite a bit of the above does not "work" due to template differences etc. Something that actually shows this as cross wiki would be helpful. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 16:37, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- And - digging some. I just tried 8 of the domains with eagle (top 20) & I have only come up with three non en wp links so far. --Herby talk thyme 16:46, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- Indeed, and I nuked a few that I found. But it has been going on a long time, across multiple accounts, and does extend to multiple projects. JzG 19:52, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- And - digging some. I just tried 8 of the domains with eagle (top 20) & I have only come up with three non en wp links so far. --Herby talk thyme 16:46, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- Full list [2]
\bdotcominfoway\.com\b
\bgalatta\.com\b
\bshriyaonline\.info\b
\bmalavika\.info\b
\bnayantaraonline\.info\b
\bbhavanaonline\.info\b
\bnishakothari\.info\b
\bsandya\.info\b
\basinonline\.info\b
\bsnehaonline\.info\b
\brenukamenon\.info\b
\bkanihaa\.com\b
\bjyotikaonline\.com\b
\bvellitheraithemovie\.com\b
\bjithanramesh\.com\b
\bsherin-online\.com\b
\bjothika-online\.com\b
\bkettavanthemovie\.com\b
\bkettavanthefilm\.com\b
\b2checkout\.com\b
\bdashaavtaram\.com\b
\bvaaranamaayiram\.com\b
\bbheema\.info\b
\bbheemaa\.com\b
\bsultan-the-film\.com\b
\bdashaavtaram\.com\b
\bkuruvi\.info\b
\bbillathemovie\.com\b
\bgraphwise\.com\b
\bpazhani\.com\b
\bparuthiveeranthemovie\.com\b
\bilayathalapathyvijay\.com\b
\bsimbuonline\.com\b
\baaryamovie\.com\b
\bsivaji-the-film\.com\b
\batmthefilm\.com\b
\bazhakiyathamizhmagan\.info\b
\bzerust\.com\b
\bkireedom\.info\b
\bsulekha\.com\b
\bmadurai4u\.com\b
\biltsource\.com\b
\bxyleme\.com\b
\bjothikaonline\.com\b
\bpriyamudansneha\.com\b
\bmy-bharath\.blogspot\.com\b
\bgalatta\.tv\b
\bparuthiveeranthemovie\.com\b
\borampo\.com\b
\bbilla2007\.info\b
\bkaalai\.com\b
\bdebtfin\.com\b
\bamericandreamwine\.com\b
\bactorvijay\.com\b
\bgauthammenon\.com\b
\bdirectorbalumahendra\.com\b
\bactresspooja\.com\b
\bactorsuriya\.com\b
\bactorarya\.com\b
\bmachakkaaran\.com\b
\bpazhani\.com\b
\brskworld\.com\b
\b75yearstamilcinema\.com\b
\bsuriya-online\.com\b
\bsneha-online\.com\b
\bbackwatersthefilm\.com\b
\bjeevaonline\.com\b
\bkannumkannum\.com\b
\bactorvijayonline\.com\b
\bjeeva-online\.com\b
\bgalattaglobalevents\.com\b
\bmeeravasudevan\.com\b
\bchiyaanvikramonline\.com\b
\bthoondilthefilm\.com\b
\bpoothefilm\.com\b
\bramanthediyaseethai\.com\b
\brmadhavan\.com\b
\bgauthammenon\.com\b
\btrsimbu\.com\b
\bbhavana-online\.com\b
\bvannathupoochi\.com\b
\bprashanthonthenet\.com\b
\binbathefilm\.com\b
\bnaankadavul\.com\b
\blailaonline\.info\b
\bharrisjayaraj\.com\b
\byaaradineemohini\.com\b
\bthiruvasagamthemovie\.com\b
\bactorvishal\.com\b
\blaila\.net\b
\btamilmathefilm\.com\b
\bactorarya\.com\b
\brameshwaramthemovie\.com\b
\bactresspooja\.com\b
\bdirectorbala\.com\b
\bvalavaan\.com\b
\bsathyamthemovie\.com\b
\bnandita-das\.com\b
\bnepalithefilm\.com\b
\bdhaamdhoom\.com\b
\bnandalalathefilm\.com\b
\bdesirable-pleasur\.info\b
\bviyabari\.com\b
\bsathyaraj\.com\b
\bsajinithefilm\.com\b
\bkiranonline\.info\b
\bsibiraj\.com\b
\brssurya\.com\b
\bmeenaonthenet\.com\b
\bthottathefilm\.com\b
\banandapictures\.com\b
\bdhurai\.com\b
\babhiyumnaanum\.com\b
\bvedikundumurugesan\.com\b
\bthalaimagan\.com\b
\brenukamenon\.com\b
\bradikaa\.com\b
\btrishakrishnan\.com\b
\bshriyaonline\.com\b
\bsangavi\.com\b
--Hu12 02:53, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- The spamsearch results for sulekha.com are where the majority of the x-wiki spam lies. 121.221.153.138 04:24, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
virtual.oradea.net
Cross wiki
virtual.oradea.net
IPs inserting the link:
--Jorunn 18:56, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- Seem to be on-topic link. Are you sure that it's spam? — VasilievVV 07:38, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- Could be an issue - the en wp ones are reverted by registered users so the links are not wanted. However no warnings have been given on en wp & I have now done that. I think this may be an issue but I'm not sure blacklisting is appropriate yet --Herby talk thyme 10:20, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- I am not saying the site is spam, I am saying the link has been added excecivly and in a disruptive manner, and that the insertion of the links is done with COI. See for instance
- or
- uk.wikipedia
- or
- or no:wikipedia where 79.113.31.213 was blocked for spamming 15. mar 2008 kl. 20:02 and then 79.113.31.193 made this edit: [10] 10 minutes later.
- or
- nn.wikipedia
- The link has been added to 40 or more Wikipedia articles (in most of them at least twice) about Oradea by IPs from the same ISP within one day.
- --Jorunn 10:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the additional info Jorunn. Based on that I agree, cross wiki & disruptive &
Done --Herby talk thyme 12:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the additional info Jorunn. Based on that I agree, cross wiki & disruptive &
Affiliate and referral spam
\bmoneybookers\.com\/app\/\?rid=
- see WikiProject Spam Item
amazon.com\/gp\/redirect\.html
rcm\.amazon\.com\/cm\?t=
amazon\.com\/.*&tag=
bastore\.amazon\.com\b
- see en.Spam-blacklist Item
These may or may not have been added here--Hu12 02:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- Any evidence that this is a cross wiki issues? Thanks --Herby talk thyme 10:22, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- Some examples (just a quick sample) of moneybookers
- http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moneybookers&diff=40411629&oldid=40411610
- http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moneybookers&diff=27817869&oldid=26824679
- http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moneybookers&diff=35638385&oldid=35413333
- http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moneybookers&diff=prev&oldid=24531370
- http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moneybookers&diff=prev&oldid=22815540
- http://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moneybookers&diff=prev&oldid=9079662
- http://ru.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moneybookers&diff=2438678&oldid=2353577
- any cross wiki search will yield amazon refferal/affiliate (gp, cm?t, astore and tag= ) results.
Both moneybookers (de, nl and fr), and amazon (too numerous) are global wikipedia issues, however, any use of affiliate and referral linking on any of the Wikimedia Foundation wikis is spam and unacceptable regardless. The regex only prevents affiliate/refferal linking and does no affect legitimate linking to these sites.--Hu12 16:37, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed & thanks Hu12, Done --Herby talk thyme 17:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
eclipse-china.com
They're back...
eclipse-china.com
- Previous incidents
- w:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2007_Archive_Oct_2#spam.eclipse-glasses.(com|net|eu) spam.venuscope.com
- Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2007/10#eclipse-glasses.com
And it's cross-wiki too. See [11]. 121.221.153.138 11:39, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yep - given the history Done & thanks. I guess we will now go through the "alternative" domains again! --Herby talk thyme 11:44, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Proposed removals
|
|
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 URL blacklisted, links to the articles they are used in or useful to, and arguments in favour of unlisting. Completed requests will be marked as done or denied and archived. See also /recurring requests for repeatedly proposed (and refused) removals. The addition or removal of a link is not a vote, please do not bold the first words in statements. |
nictoglobe
A. Andreas wrote: > Tim, > > Unfortunately , some(thing)one. succeeded to put the url of > nictoglobe.com in several spam blacklists, as you are ? responsible > for distributing these list, I urge you to correct these lists and > leave out our url. > > Nictoglobe is a genuine and reliable website delivering news and art > to a wide audience and is well recognized among (inter) national art > audiences. > > I regret that some(one)thing abused your blacklist system by putting > our url into it. > > Please let me know about actions you are able to take to correct this > mistake.
I do not maintain or administer any URL blacklists, I only maintain the software used to interpret and enforce them. If the problem is on a Wikimedia wiki, please take your complaint to:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist
If the wiki in question is not operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, then complain to the site administrator of that wiki.
-- Tim Starling
As I am suspecting some asian wiki to have produced this entry and I am not able to contact them, as they do not reply , I urge you to remove the blacklisted url,i.e. www.nictoglobe.com
Sincerely
A. Andreas Editor nictoglobe.com w:nictoglobe.com e:ajaco@xs4all.nl —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 145.221.24.7 (talk • contribs) 11:03, 18 Mar 2008 (UTC)
- In practice this website is not blacklisted here on Meta (nor on English Wikipedia). It may be blacklisted on a local list (if there is a wiki that you cannot place the link on). Thanks--Herby talk thyme 11:07, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
commonpurpose.org
I'm proposing the blacklist be removed. I added the links to articles that the webiste has expertise and research on (like "leadership) and was probably somewhat overeager! Happy to remove them, won't do it again! Link is relavent to articles actually about Common Purpose so would like to unlist. Acceptable? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.150.113.250 (talk • contribs) 12:15, 19 Mar 2008 (UTC)
- Ok - taking a look at this.
- The website seems unencyclopaedic for a start with a preference for selling leadership course - obvious fine that you do that but not relevant to Wikipedias.
- Equally the link placement is extensive (seen here). In each case 12 or so links were placed with no regards for the language of the wiki concerned based on the ones I've looked at. Others may wish to comment (the listing request is here). Thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:31, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
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). |
Discussion
Local blacklisting vs. global blacklisting?
Now that there is a local blacklisting capability, the question arises as to when to blacklist locally and when to blacklist here.
My personal opinion is that Meta should remain the primary venue for blacklisting. It's hard to predict who's going to spam more than one Wikipedia. While we now have a tool to find a given spam domain on the 57 largest Wikipedias, it remains problematic to find it on the 200 smaller Wikipedias or the other 450 to 500 Wikimedia projects (Wikiquote, Wikisource, etc.) There's value to all these other projects in listing stuff here.
I think the local blacklist option is good when one project wants a domain blacklisted and another project wants to use it. This happens occasionally when a given spammer makes himself intolerable on one project while the link is being used appropriately on other projects.
What do others think about this? --A. B. (talk) 03:08, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
- Generally speaking, I agree with you. I don't have a big problem with local blacklisting on a particular project as a way to immediately interrupt a spammer in progress, but standard procedure should probably be to follow that action up with a request for meta blacklisting.--Isotope23 20:42, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- As a crosswiki admin if I see spam pages created or bunches of links placed I immediately add them to local blacklists that I can access. It's quicker and easier than coming here (where I have not always been helpfully received) and there is at least one or two sites that I've blacklisted that have apparently valid links on en wp for example - just my 0.02 --Herby talk thyme 07:21, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- See Spam blacklist/About and use the block with the smallest possible range. Now local blacklists are available it's not worth the work of blocking here and potentially causing side-effects in hundreds of wikis until there is an established pattern of cross-wiki spamming. Perhaps automatic rejection until at least five wikis have been spammed. And not automatic acceptance after five, just eligibility. Jamesday 20:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting idea - how would you know a site was blocked by five wikis say? They do not tend to be well used (local blacklists) - I'm about the only one who adds to the 4 I have access to. The principle is fine - the practice? --Herby talk thyme 10:08, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- Metric criteria are nice I think. I don't think however we need to say "blocked from five or more wikis". I think that it is just okay "five or more wikis were spammed". Currently, my personal criteria is very low though - spamming to two or more wikis regardless languages (both sets of i. enwiki and enwiktionary and ii. enwiki and dewiki are enough for me, I mean). --Aphaia 10:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
- I am with AB on this: we should use meta as both the main blocking list and also a forum where people go to see if someone has been causing a wider problem. Otherwise it becomes impossibly complicated to block from here and the argument "it this a nasty spammer who xyz" becomes "who abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz". --AndrewCates 12:55, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Metric criteria are nice I think. I don't think however we need to say "blocked from five or more wikis". I think that it is just okay "five or more wikis were spammed". Currently, my personal criteria is very low though - spamming to two or more wikis regardless languages (both sets of i. enwiki and enwiktionary and ii. enwiki and dewiki are enough for me, I mean). --Aphaia 10:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting idea - how would you know a site was blocked by five wikis say? They do not tend to be well used (local blacklists) - I'm about the only one who adds to the 4 I have access to. The principle is fine - the practice? --Herby talk thyme 10:08, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- reset
In the past I've not been well received on this page so have tended to avoid it and operate local blacklists where I have the rights. However I am increasingly interested in this as at least a clearing house for queries influenced in part by A.B. I have posted to a couple of Foundation mailing lists & I'm hoping to hear other views. I'm happy to review/discuss possible spam issues here whenever I'm around - cheers --Herby talk thyme 13:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- If we don't blacklist by default here, then there should be a list or some mechanism (perhaps a bot) that tracks all the entries on the local lists so that other projects can check their links against what's been spammed elsewhere.
- Ideally, the bot (or human volunteers) would also run periodic checks using a faster, expanded version of http://tools.wikimedia.de/~eagle/linksearch to see if locally blacklisted links are showing up on any of the 700+ Wikimedia projects. (I say "faster, expanded" since that tool checks up to the 57 largest Wikipedias and may take several minutes when checking 57).
- Also, it's hard to rule out cross-wiki spam when our best tool just checks 57 of our 700 projects.
- --A. B. (talk) 14:01, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- PS, Call me lazy, but maybe it's just easier to just blacklist by default here as opposed to setting up a new coordination system.--A. B. (talk) 14:01, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- When I was involved into the maintenance of this list, some years ago, I got such complaints by email periodically. It takes a time to reply them courtly but firmly. I think this kind of complaints are better to deal by the local people at first. Also I'm afraid this list affects too much websites. So I don't support "anything on meta and at first" tactics. And as for maintenance, this page is huge and editing is a pain. Single-website affecting spams are better to go to their local list, I think. --Aphaia 07:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
- Aphaia, right now, it seems like this list is running pretty smoothly without much admin effort. As for its maintenance, that doesn't seem to be much of a problem now. As for e-mails, I'm not an admin, but because I make so many requests here, I get them too. I just refer them back to this talk page, suggesting that they make their case here before a wider audience; I also make sure at least they get answer from me here if not from others. The admins that work on this list seem to have thick skins, are undeterred by complaints and are always willing to do the work. As for this list affecting many websites, you're right and that argument cuts both ways. This list also protects many web sites from known spammers.
- When I was involved into the maintenance of this list, some years ago, I got such complaints by email periodically. It takes a time to reply them courtly but firmly. I think this kind of complaints are better to deal by the local people at first. Also I'm afraid this list affects too much websites. So I don't support "anything on meta and at first" tactics. And as for maintenance, this page is huge and editing is a pain. Single-website affecting spams are better to go to their local list, I think. --Aphaia 07:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
- PS, Call me lazy, but maybe it's just easier to just blacklist by default here as opposed to setting up a new coordination system.--A. B. (talk) 14:01, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- In any event, what's the mechanism we're using for coordinating to ensure that spammers locally blacklisted in one place aren't spamming in another? Who's doing this work now? We must have a system in place to track this before we deprecate this list to use for proven cross-wiki spam only.
- A useful parallel is the whole open proxy issue. For several years, different projects have battled open proxies separately resulting in a large duplication of effort. An open proxy blocked on fr.wikipedia (perhaps our best OP-fighters) would then be used by other spammers, vandals or POV-pushers to cause problems on nl.wikipedia or ja.wikibooks. Only now is there some convergence on a meta-level solution. Meanwhile, we seem to be moving in the opposite direction with spam. Meta has a critical role to play here, whether it's blacklisting globally or just tracking globally to catch cross-wiki spam. Either way, we must not abdicate our role and our responsibility (especially to the smaller wikis which have proven so vulnerable to spam). --A. B. (talk) 17:16, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Here's another time to blacklist at meta: links to blatant copyright violations. For example, when the domains associated with this discussion all finally get identified, they should probably be blacklisted here even if we only find it on one project. That's because these sites are all blatant violations of different magazines' copyrights; we can't afford to have links to these sites if we can help it. (See the discussion of "contributory infringement" at en:Wikipedia:Copyrights#Linking to copyrighted works and en:Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry). --A. B. (talk) 23:34, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- Agree completely - I do think we need to hammer out some approach to Meta blacklisting policy probably by extended/clarifying this. For anyone new arriving here (Meta sysop or another project user) this page is frankly unhelpful. My time is under considerable pressure at present but I do see this as a high priority and any help will be appreciated.
- We would be able to clarify cross wiki spamming as a concept, the fact that some site should probably be blocked at a Meta level anyway such as above or sites that may compromise machines etc. We can also make blocking url shorteners a policy for example --Herby talk thyme 08:00, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Besides of all ... I eventually found this page: Spam blacklist policy discussion. Since this discussion is lengthy and it becomes clearer we need to have a global policy of inclusion for maintaining this page, are we better to move the discussion place? Or better to stay here? --Aphaia 22:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm for here, because if it's spam to one wiki odds are it's spam to most of them. Say, you have a marketing company that uses aggressive JavaScript, if each user on en.wiki who has been there complains, odds are it'll still be aggressive to fr.wiki. Yamakiri 23:03, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Ok - I agree with Yamakiri's point generally. If they spam one wiki they probably aren't useful to another one (& if they are whitelisting is an option).
- However (& thanks Aphaia - I must have found that page in the past because I'd got it on my watchlist) we have Spam blacklist policy discussion & Spam blacklist/About and yet still no real clarity about policy or help for those who are not used to these pages be they admins or other users. My postings to both Foundation-l and the list for Meta met with nothing much so I guess it is up to us to hammer out guidelines policy etc. Until early October my time will be limited but I'll do what I can. I think it may well be worth a fresh start rather than trying to make changes to what we already have? --Herby talk thyme 11:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
My 2 cents. I'm sysop at 7 wikis. I would always use local blacklist (for instance, a spanish page isn't likely to be spammed on russian wiki), but if I see crosswiki spam as I JUST spot for [12], I'd come and global block. Local lists exist for a reason, and it's easier to keep track of. Global list should be used only when global blocking is needed. drini [es:] [commons:] 14:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- Beyond the 57 Wikipedias searched by Eagle 101's cross-wiki search tool, this blacklist is also relied on by 650+ other Wikimedia Foundation wikis (Wiktionaries, other Wikipedias, etc.). So for Spanish projects, there are these additional targets for Spanish-only spammers for which we don't have much visibility unless someone manually runs a linksearch domain-by-domain, project-by-project:
- That or if we're lucky and Luxo's x-wiki user search tool finds the spammer using the same IP or user name on other projects. (That tool is sometimes off-line; at other times it misses contributions on some wikis).
- I think another, less important factor to consider is how non-Wikimedia sites might use a domain. All 3000+ Wikia wikis plus a substantial percentage of the 25,000+ unrelated wikis that run on MediaWiki software have chosen to incorporate this blacklist in their own spam filtering. A site selling an obviously bogus get-rich-quick scheme or magnetic underpants as a cancer cure has no value to any of our projects nor to any of the 1000s of other wikis our blacklist affects. You might as well do everyone a favor and globally blacklist such a site even if it appears on just one Wikimedia project. --A. B. (talk) 15:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- Picking up Drini's point, local blacklisting is great. However it is dependent on admins locally being
- Aware of it
- Understanding regex adequately
- Being interested in the prevention of (inappropriate) external links
- If any of those criteria are absent then so is local blacklisting effectively.
- Equally on A. B.'s point, there are some sites that just aren't needed by the Foundation (or most other folk) such as the batch of adult sites I just added. In such a case it matters not whether they spammed one or many wikis they should be listed here not locally I think.
- We do need a sharpening of policy (referred to above) which - when excess time is available! - I certainly aim to take a look at. --Herby talk thyme 16:10, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- Coibot's monitor list is quite efficient at spotting crosswiki spam, however it requires that someone actually look at the reports and notice it (as I did with uarticles.blogspot.com, which was recently meta-blacklisted). It has a 'stalk page' feature which picks up domains added to watched pages using the spamlink template.. I imagine it could stalk the local mediawiki blacklist pages as well. I'm a bit reluctant to give it more tasks at this point as it and it's related linkwatchers are resource intensive, consuming about 2/3rds of the resources on a 4proc/4gig Sun Ultra80. --Versageek 16:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- Local blacklisting is good for preventing abuse, and it's not a bad idea to reserve this list for those sites which are unambiguous and likely to be widely appreciated as a blacklist service by most or all local admins, such as the porn and meds spam domains and URL redirectors. JzG 19:03, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- Picking up Drini's point, local blacklisting is great. However it is dependent on admins locally being
External link exclusion list
What would people think of renaming the spam blacklist to something a bit less inflammatory for people? This came up on a discussion from otrs from handling people that are upset that their links get put here etc. I'm not saying any of them shouldn't be here, but if it was called something else it may make people less upset. External link exclusion has the benefit of moving the emphasis towards our own editorial decisions, rather than labeling their site also. The message being that we don't think these links are right for an article/project page, not they are *spam*. Anyway, I'm not married to that name or anything. - cohesion 01:58, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- External link blacklist is clear. Hillgentleman 02:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- Unless a proper redirect is set up (not just an article redirect), such a move is going to break thousands of third party mediawiki installations. Most people using the spam blacklist extension will have this in SpamBlacklist_body.php:
$this->files = array( "http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spam_blacklist&action=raw&sb_ver=1" );
- Angela 02:23, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- I think a name change is a good idea, provided it can be done properly as Angela has pointed out.
- Hillgentleman's "External link blacklist" sounds good and "External link block list" sounds still less perjorative.
- --A. B. (talk) 03:09, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- I like block list better. People think everyone (google etc) use this list, and maybe they do, but the more we can make it seem like we're not publishing a spam blacklist for the whole internet the better, I think. (while still providing the service to external sites as Angela notes, which I think is good of course.) :) - cohesion 13:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- I would certainly like to see this change, it would save quite a lot of confusion (& some offence I guess). "External link block list" would be my choice too --Herby talk thyme 08:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
- What should we do to move this forward? People (spammers) constantly email otrs complaining about libel, slander etc wrt this being called a spam blacklist. I'm not saying it should work any differently, but not having that terminology would be very helpful. And apparently google and others do use this a lot, according to them anyway. - cohesion 20:50, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
- People can complain as much as they want :). You may want to change error message, but it's not enough reasonable to rename — VasilievVV 20:29, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Linksearch tool
In the event that others aren't familiar with it, there is a linksearch tool available on toolserver. I've added it to the text for special:linksearch on Meta, for convenience. ~Kylu (u|t) 22:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
spamlink template
en:User:Shadow1 and I are working on the linkwatchers. At the moment we are running them on 722 wikis (which is 'all' by the count of about one and a half week ago). User:COIBot is watching these 722 wikis, and reports when a link is on its monitorlist (and those links are generally there when it is spammed, see the explanation on en:User:COIBot). On the english wikipedia we use a spamlink template for reporting external links, which directly links to a number of search engines, and to a number of reporting systems, including COIBot. Would the template be of interest here? --Beetstra 09:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- A link to the template would be useful? Getting reporting a little more consistent on here would make our lives a little easier too - it is not always clear what the extent of the problem is (nor sometimes the exact site name). Thanks --Herby talk thyme 10:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- I created a version of that template here a few months ago: Template:Spamlink. It may need to be updated with the latest, greatest features - but it is here. --Versageek 11:41, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- I have updated the template to a more meta-like form. When you use '* {{spamlink|example.com}}' it displays the next line:
example.com
In order:
- First what is in the template,
- Linksearch for meta and the 5 big wikis (en, de, fr, en.wiktionary, fr.wiktionary, see Table of Wikimedia Projects by Size),
- 'LinkReport' is a report generated by an IRC bot by Betacommand, it is a save of a current linksearch on en.wikipedia.
- 'COIBot Linkreport' contains a summary of all use (by not-whitelisted users) on all 722 wikiprojects on Table of Wikimedia Projects by Size, since the moment of blacklisting/monitoring (see en:User:COIBot for more info).
- Eagle's spam report search searches for reports on en.wikipedia spam archives, and here as well I think.
- interwiki link search: 20 and 57 search in resp. the 20 and 57 biggest wikis.
- LinkWatcher search searches in en:User:Shadow1's database (only en at the moment, probably at some time also for more/all wikipedia).
- Wikipedia search searches for the existence of the page with the url name on en, de and fr.
- google search searches for info on the site on google.
- Veinors pages contain also link-addition information
- domaintools gives info on the domain
- AboutUs.org gives info on the domain
- Yahoo backlinks, search engine results.
I guess it contains pretty much all the tools needed to investigate the link, latest additions and current use. Hope this helps. --Beetstra 12:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Looks good - we'll see how it goes as it gets used. Given the nature of it I'll probably semi protect it I think - thanks --Herby talk thyme 12:43, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- I think it is protected (or did you just do that?). --Beetstra 12:55, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- By the way, to keep yourself more or less up to date, you can watchlist User:COIBot/LinkReports, that gets updated when COIBot saves a report (about every 5 minutes). It may get you one step ahead of a spammer (though take care interpreting the report, COIBot sometimes picks up links by mistake). --Beetstra 13:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Protection - yes (when I am around I am not generally slow!). As to watching (& for me) the honest answer at present is "no time" - I would consider myself pretty active on three wikis at least so I tend not be short of work. When I get time I will check it out and see what I can do - thanks for your work & regards --Herby talk thyme 13:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Enwiki's blacklist ?
I just remind our sysops, that urls shouldn't be added here to stop "enwiki's spam". They have their own local blacklist, and listing urls here because they got spammed there is causing problems at other wikis. Please leave this ONLY for crosswiki spam, and direct enwiki petitions to en:MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist (this because [13] ) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Drini (talk • contribs) 20:41, 16 Feb 2008 (UTC)
- For reference: Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2007/04#Intellectual_property_dispute_.2F_deathcamps.org. --Jorunn 22:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- In fairness if you look at this page any time you will see that the regulars here always point to local black & white lists unless there is cross wiki evidence, thanks --Herby talk thyme 09:00, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Doesn't hurt to remind, herby. I see a lot of sites still blacklisted globally due to enwiki incidents (specially older ones). drini [es:] [commons:] 23:37, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Sure Drini - some of them could do with removing (if we knew which ones!) but those around at present won't list anything that is solely en wp as far as I know, --Herby talk thyme 08:05, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- For those with OTRS access: We have another complaint about death-camps.org, related to the reason it was blacklisted initially. --Versageek 23:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- I was just coming to ask the same question. I thought we blacklisted both to prevent the war? I just blacklisted on enwiki anyway, but this was widespread cross-wiki. JzG 18:51, 3 March 2008 (UTC) 18:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
French Wikipedia
I think french WP has problems and I hope is not a global problem of WP. This page (sorry, I was obliged to copy the original page in my website so that you can see) : "absurdité wikipedienne : la vérité décrétée par vote" http://www.tree-logic.com/WP_pourriel.htm. ) is considered by french WP as a spam. I think this page is absolutely necessary for the discussion of what should be a real encyclopaedia. It contains no aggression against WP. And why it shoud be a spam ? Because the page quotes Diderot, the inventor of the word "encyclopedia", to show that french WP is wrong when it refused to include alive knowledge, emerging knowledge ! Even more pernicious : a french scientific success 20 years ago (More than 100 articles in the press ) is refused because it was not published as french official academics do ! But official academics refuse to speak about french private inventions. And the pages of french WP are closely controlled by them !
I am an AI expert (Artificial Intelligence). Please read the french pages : Intelligence Artificielle, systèmes experts, Maïeutica and the discussion pages (I'm "JeanPHi85"). You will see the tremendous efforts that I made to obtain acceptation of 4 successive proposals.
I hope you are not an academic ! Please, answer me by email (my email : jpl@tree-logic.com) and not in discussion pages. One of these academics, Sylenius, clears my texts that does not like. In the page of "Petit Djul", a WP fireman (a high school student !), he even confessed to have hacked my website to create a link without my permission! Then he erased this confession. 82.250.145.94 09:48, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- As this site is not listed on Meta can you please take this to the appropriate page on fr wp (fr:MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist I guess). Meta is not in a position to deal with local issues, thanks --Herby talk thyme 10:13, 16 March 2008 (UTC)