Jump to content

Talk:Spam blacklist

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
This is an archived version of this page, as edited by A. B. (talk | contribs) at 01:20, 21 April 2007 (→‎Proposed additions: snesclassics.com and related spam). It may differ significantly from the current version.

Latest comment: 17 years ago by A. B. in topic Proposed additions
Shortcut:
WM:SPAM
The associated page is used by the Mediawiki SpamBlacklist extension, and lists strings of text that may 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. Please post comments to the appropriate section below: Proposed additions, Proposed removals, Troubleshooting and problems, or Other discussions; 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.

Completed requests are archived, additions and removal are logged.

Projects

snippet for logging: {{/request|567855#section_name}}

If you cannot find your remark below, please do a search for the url (link) in question with this Archive Search tool.

Proposed additions

Latest comment: 17 years ago44 comments17 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 (google.ca, not http://www.google.ca). Provide links demonstrating widespread spamming by multiple users. Completed requests will be marked as done or denied and archived.

reexamine.info

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Linksearch&target=www.reexamine.info&limit=500&offset=0 - the site is currently 404 but hosts copies of the Watchtower and other Jehovah's Witnesses publications, without any distinction between those that are in copyright and those that are not. Since copyright goes for a minimum of 50 years from the death of the author, a large number even from the 1920s may contain material still under copyright. We have had at least one OTRS complaint, ticket 2007021310020955, complaining about links to copyright material on that site. Just zis Guy, you know? 13:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

There are 287 of these links on en.wikipedia. I suggest maybe leaving a note at en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Jehovah's Witnesses about the issue. I'm not sure who's going to delete these links; I suspect some deletions may be controversial, especially given that these are pages on religion.--A. B. (talk) 23:33, 25 February 2007 (UTC)Reply
Here's a long blog entry from April 2004 about the history of this site:
The reexamine.info homepage consists of one sentence: "Closed for maintenance"
Waybackmachine.org's archives for reexamine.info redirect to reexamine.org:
--A. B. (talk) 15:32, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Reply
I just spotchecked one of the links -- notwithstanding the note on the homepage, the link worked (although it loaded at what felt like 14k modem speeds):
  • www.reexamine.info/60s/g68_Oct_8.pdf
    • Note: this is a 1968 publication still under copyright
--A. B. (talk) 16:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Reply
Given that it's under a DMCA takedown notice, and it's a dissenter's website being used as reference without explicitly stating that, I think it should be gone. Just zis Guy, you know? 21:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)Reply
Has at least the english wikipedia been notified of this? en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Jehovah's Witnesses. Its not really spam, but yeah it seems to me to be suspect, but this is something that can be fixed just by talking things through and (possibly) removing the links. We have to remember that this list is not only for the english wiki. Eagle 101 22:02, 28 February 2007 (UTC)Reply
I just left a note:
I suggest someone review it and clarify anything I may have misinterpreted. --A. B. (talk) 18:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

What is the status of this? —— Eagle101 Need help? 18:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

  • Definitely needs to go as a prolific violator of copyright (validated; not all are copyvios but it is clear they don't care), not sure whether it's counted as spam, though. Depends if you want ot be legalistic, I guess. Your call. Just zis Guy, you know? 20:52, 5 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

http://*.orkut.com/Community.aspx?* and http://*.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?*

A really large amount of users at Portuguese Wikipedia persists to insert spam links to yours on communities from orkut. This may stop it without block the entire orkut (like personal profiles from orkut at userpages). Examples: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] 555 16:44, 25 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ok, before I blacklist something like this (that may get a bunch of people upset), lets have a bit of discussion if this is a good idea or not... I welcome any input. Eagle 101 16:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Reply
I would recommend blacklisting and selective whitelisting Naconkantari 19:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
In Portuguese Wikipedia these links are prohibited by community policy. Porantim 23:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)Reply


hai2u.com

Shock site. Example. --Slowking Man 01:07, 22 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I guess I need to ask this, do we have a standard to blacklist ever shocksite that we come across. As far as I have been thinking, I would just treat it as normal vandalism, unless we are getting multiple IPs or multiple wikis. I'm not sure though on what is appropriate for this, and I invite others to please comment. Thanks. Eagle 101 21:15, 23 March 2007 (UTC)Reply


3 proxy sites

spysurfing.com used to bypass the blacklist on obsessedwithwrestling.com by:

hidemybrowsing.com used to bypass the blacklist on obsessedwithwrestling.com by:

proxyhole.com used to bypass the blacklist on obsessedwithwrestling.com by:

Both accounts sockpuppets of JB196 who has a long term abuse report, and has spent weeks spamming en:Xtreme Pro Wrestling, en:Rob Zicari and en:Extreme Associates each time the semi-protection wore off. 81.155.177.63 01:32, 25 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

hidemybrowsing.com and spysurfing.com don't appear to support hotlinking (the posted links returned errors). proxyhole.com did return the site. fwiw --Versageek 02:09, 25 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
This diff for spysurfing and this diff for hidemybrowsing work fine for me. 81.155.177.63 02:20, 25 March 2007 (UTC)Reply


theigdb.com

Many different users (mostly IPs) have added links to this site on many videogame entries, for many months. Examples of users include [36],[37],[38], [39], and so on. These users seem to have no interest in improving Wikipedia, only to use it for traffic, in some cases even suggesting it is an official site. When I do a linksearch for theigdb.com, I come up with nothing, yet doing a regular search comes up with many articles which presumably have all contained links to the site recently.(Dreaded Walrus on Wikipedia)

Mmm, let me think on this. —— Eagle101 Need help? 20:14, 31 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
Oh, and something I didn't think of trying previously:
A Google search for theigdb.com -wiki has a grand total of 8 results, two of which are the official site, and another of which is thediscworld.co.uk, which appears to be the former location of the site. This number is dwarfed if we search only on Wikipedia, where even with the nofollow on, there are 27 separate results on User:Veinor's Link Count records. --212.139.17.187 17:15, 1 April 2007 (UTC) (en:User:Dreaded Walrus)Reply
Oh, and one more thing. I thought I should provide more links to the contributions of the people who have done almost nothing other than inserting those links (rather than just the four above), taken from the Link count pages:
[40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [46], [47]
There could be more, as I didn't look through all of the pages, but that should give the gist of it. --212.139.17.187 17:33, 1 April 2007 (UTC) (en:User:Dreaded Walrus)Reply

www.jobklub.com

This job web site has been extensively spammed to the English Wikipedia [48] [49] [50]; [51] (started on a smaller scale 30 March) Notinasnaid 11:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

The ips are very similar, (try a small rangeblock?) but in any case I will stick this on en:User:shadowbot. —— Eagle101 Need help? 13:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

pwp.netcabo.pt/jmmg/

This domain have a lot of subpages redirecting to "oseculoprodigioso.blogspot.com" already blocked. See:

Note: don't block "pwp.netcabo.pt" That domain is for homepages of netcabo ISP clients. Block only "pwp.netcabo.pt/jmmg/" Mosca 18:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)Reply


www.bobobobobobobo.homestead.com

This site has been constantly removed and added, reverted back and forth, for quite some time now on the English Wikipedia. While only 3 users, (2 users and 1 IP, though one user and the IP are sockpuppets by one main user, Jelly Jiggler) it's caused one hell of an edit war for a few months now. He fails to understand that it is spam and fan sites are not really reliable external links (just because it has avatars, chatrooms, forums, fanfiction, fan art, and YouTube links that user feels it is "informational"). I'm determined to stop that user from putting it up again. Examples:

  1. User:Jelly Jiggler "pupper master" - [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58]
  2. As User:Don_Patch5000 "sock puppet" (as seen on Jelly Jiggler's and this one's userpage) - [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] [65]
  3. Now as an IP User:63.3.0.2 - [66] [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] [72] [73] [74]

And that's about it. Pardon my stupidity, but I've never done this before, so should I link to my talk page on the english wikipedia and confirm it's me over there (like the POTY thing)? For now, I'll only link to my talk page... Thank you all very much for your time. User talk:Tohru Honda13 22:32, 8 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

wikimouche.com, mouche.fr, gobages.com

Multiple IP are adding this links to french wikipédia (like here [75]). Is that possible to blacklist it? Thanks. --84.101.128.204 08:29, 9 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Can you show some examples of spamming from these domains. Thank you. —— Eagle101 Need help? 04:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Please note that there is a conflict between two french Wikipedia contributors about external links in the article "Pêche à la mouche". Resolution is in progress. Some persons think that wikimouche.com should be allowed in the article. 87.90.19.232 22:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

rexresearch.com

I have recently found and removed a lot of links to rexresearch.com, an "alternative" energy (read: energy from water) website. It is being re-linked by a number of users of varying degrees of well-meaning, including [76], [77], [78]. The main problem is its linking to articles on mainstream coneptes, notably coal, where they are promoting a "oil from coal - free!" essay: [79] on enWP, [80] on itWP (looks to have been copied and pasted form the same spam on enWP). There are also links on frWP, deWP and other projects, some seem to have been the result of copying and pasting from enWP. The links are pretty blatant POV, and they are being reindserted by fringe science supporters. Just zis Guy, you know? 18:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Are we getting spammed by it, or is this more of a content dispute. (is it the same user or person maliciously spamming us?) I don't mind blocking, but would a little chat with the editors help? —— Eagle101 Need help? 21:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
There are a couple of anons in the history adding it, and at least two current editors, and it's on several projects. It's more astroturfing than spamming, but it is current. Just zis Guy, you know? 07:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

goodoldtoronto.com spam

Link:

  • goodoldtoronto.com

Spammed by 5 different accounts across 29 different articles on en.wikipedia:

Also spammed cross-wiki:

See en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#goodoldtoronto.com spam for more details if needed. (Permanent link)
--A. B. (talk) 22:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done —— Eagle101 Need help? 20:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

china-zeichen.de

This website is frequently added to articles like "Schriftzeichen", "Kanji" and others and is obviously optimised for google & partners without providing any content. --Chrislb 20:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Not done (for now) Please show me evidence of spamming. Thank you. —— Eagle101 Need help? 20:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

leenk.org, dwarfurl.com

Two unrelated URL redirection sites similar to tinyurl.[81][82]
--A. B. (talk) 13:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done —— Eagle101 Need help? 20:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

doctorscloset.com

Added to 17 different articles on Wikipedia by 3 different IPs despite warnings[83] and a block.[84]

See en:User talk:71.196.163.52 for more details if needed.--A. B. (talk) 19:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done —— Eagle101 Need help? 20:55, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

FindMySpecialist, Inc. spam on Wikipedia

24 articles spammed on en.wikipedia by multiple IPs despite warnings:

Note that 69.236.245.245 was used on a different date to spam the doctorscloset.com links just listed above; that IP belongs to a hotel and these two spam schemes appear to be unrelated. Domains spammed:

  • dmv.org
  • affiliateprograms.com
  • unitedstates.org

Redirect site (suggest also blacklisting):

  • departmentofmotorvehicles.com

See en:User talk:67.96.71.2 for more details if needed. --A. B. (talk) 20:10, 19 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

So I'm assuming that FindMySpecialist is just the company that seems to be spamming these? —— Eagle101 Need help? 21:01, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Correct -- FindMySpecialist, Inc. apparently owns the domains. --A. B. (talk) 21:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

www.retropresse.net

Hello, please block www.retropresse.net which is a commercial site for old issues or reedited issues from people magazines.

--Gdgourou 09:40, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

87 article-space edits, 54 articles, 11 warnings, 8 domains, 6 accounts, 1 block on en.wikipedia:

Some cross-wiki spam also:

Domains known to have been spammed:

  • bamboo-blinds.org
  • celebritygetmeoutofhere.co.uk
  • homeinteriors.co.uk
  • itsnature.org
  • secretofmana.info
  • snesclassics.com
  • sonycarstereos.co.uk
  • translatedarticles.com

May also have spammed these at some time:

  • funny-finds.blogspot.com
  • gaming-memories.com

For more details, see en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#spam from snesclassics.com and affilitiated sites (permanent link)--A. B. (talk) 01:20, 21 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Proposed removals

Latest comment: 17 years ago76 comments27 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 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.

bonsaimenorca.com

I’m the director of the bonsai School of Menorca, I was told by my webmaster that bonsaimenorca.com was blacklisted in Wikipedia, it seems that we have something called Cross-wiki , I don’t know who did that, probably one of our students. We are one of the oldest Bonsai Schools in Europe and we don’t want to be in any type of blacklist. I don’t know the way to remove the links and get our domain whitelisted.

Thanks for your attention

I am a bit on the fence with this one, on one hand we did get whacked with this about a month ago (here), but on the other hand this site may have some good sources, not any that I've personally found though. Eagle 101 05:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

libraries.theeuropeanlibrary.org

This has pretty recently been blacklisted. The site itself is highly respectable, and non-commercial; a joint site for the European National Collections of Rare Books, from the British Library on. Each library selects a few items in a standard formula (including images), & maintains it's own site. Many libraries are adding their full catalogues (see the about us page). Funded by the European Union, this replaces a previous gateway. It is likely to become a major scholarly rescource, and is already one of some significance.

The site has been added to many articles on en:Wiki rather crudely - mostly in 2005 by en User:CristianChirita - in fact he started new articles by just cutting and pasting the details table from the site. I have cleaned some of these up. All the new articles were certainly notable - most of the existing featured content, at only 4 items per country, will be so by definition. Many of the treasures from the smaller countries are not available online otherwise - of course the big Western countries have their own bigger sites.

This site should be whitelisted. Any "spamming" must, I think be well-intentioned, and usually valid. Needed links to images are being removed. Please remove from list, Thanks. 87.194.23.18 18:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC) (Johnbod on en). PS This is a VERY hard page to find. Took me 20 minutes on Wikimedia. Is this deliberate? If not some mention of Spam on the main page would be an improvement.Reply

Please read what spam is. Thanks. Eagle 101 01:48, 14 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
Yes, done that (once again). Now please will you explain how that relates to this site? I have only ever seen fewer than ten links to it on en Wiki, which is perfectly legitimate for an official site covering twenty-whatever nations in the EU. How many links does WP have to the Library of Congress? Did you actually read what I wrote above? 87.194.23.18 02:59, 14 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
For as far as I know is the site not blacklisted on meta, but 'theeuropeanlibrary\.org' is blacklisted under en:user:shadowbot on en.wikipedia. As an explanation: the site does not comply with WP:EL (it is not accesible from all browsers, the site does not work in e.g. Opera), and was spammed (the definition of spam on en.wikipedia does not judge the contents of the site, just the way they are added) by several accounts connected to the a.o. en:Dutch Royal Library (which have a conflict of interest). These additions have been cleaned, indeed resulting in only about 10 occurances being left on the site.
When the site works with all browsers the site would indeed be a good and notable site, and would comply when used as a reference, i.e. when not being spammed to external links sections, or added by users with a conflict of interest. Hope this explains. --Beetstra 15:03, 16 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
To make editing here even less accessible, the edit link at right is not coordinated with this section of text: open "edit" two sections down! so, how could blacklisting be defended for the shared site of the EU's national libraries? The blacklisting process is whimsical, open to any "administrator" who elects to add a site, which is then methodically deleted throughout Wikipedia by followers who have not reviewed the material. A serious abuse, among many. 162.84.242.92 01:29, 17 March 2007 (UTC) (User:Wetman).Reply
Beetstra, thanks, that is helpful. i will follow up on en 87.194.23.18 04:45, 17 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
Re Wetman: The blacklisting was performed on en.wikipedia only after discussion with several people, and we all have this site on our monitor now. We are not happy with this site being blackisted, but the current situation (spamming under a conflict of interest) needed to be addressed. I have explained the reason why it was blacklisted and have repeatedly tried to explain the situation to the accounts in question. Only links were removed that were added by the spammers (which ALL have a conflict of interest). I did not even remove all of their links, I removed the links that were added by them and only had a tangential link to the subject they were added to, and/or were they were added to the external link sections. --Beetstra 09:45, 17 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
I must say I first became aware of the issue when I could not edit a page on an MS (I've now forgotten which) without removing the link to the only available picture of that MS. My recollection is that this had been added in 2005, but I might be wrong. 87.194.23.18 02:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
I would like to add, the first time I encountered the link, I actually looked where it went. That stalled my browser (Opera), which is not supported by the site (I could not even use my back-button to get back to the wikipedia), see here. The addition was in the external link section, where en:WP:EL fully applies (though I would consider it also suitable for external links in the text, and even in the references), and that guideline states that sites should accessible for all/most browsers. In that light we could remove all external links to this site (yesterday I did have the same trouble with the homepage of theeuropeanlibrary). The site is new, and it might become a good information site, but for now, it does not comply with wikipedia rules (and it gets spammed under a COI). I am sorry. --Beetstra 10:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

viartis.net/parkinsons.disease/ 2nd time

viartis.net/parkinsons.disease/ is an information web site concerning Parkinson's Disease. It is the most comprehensive web site on Parkinson's Disease - far more comprehensive than the Wikipedia article. Consequently, it appears on all of the Parkinson's Disease web sites including National Parkinson's Disease organisations and Parkinson's Disease patient forums.

1. viartis.net was blacklisted after being added to only one Wikipedia article on only one occasion, for 15 minutes, on the 13th August 2006.

2. The brief addition was directly relevant to the article, which concerned Parkinson's Disease, and was added merely as a reference to further detail concerning that subject.

3. There is not even one advert on the entire web site.

4. According to Wikipedia's definition of spam, it did not fulfill any of the definitions of spam. SeeWikipedia spam.

5. Rather than the viartis.net site being checked to see if it constituted spam, which it didn't, it's maintenance on the blacklist was due to merely asking the opinion of somebody who described himself as a minor editor, who had a personal grievance against the editor. When asked his opinion of viartis.net, he confused the issue by responding instead about a different web site.

There are no grounds for maintaining viartis.net on the spam blacklist because it plainly does not fulfill the definition of spam. Nobody has been able to contradict that fact. --XX7 22:16, 19 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ok, we just did this once above. If you can get agreement to add this link to that article, I will take it off of the blacklist, though I think that the whitelist is better suited for this. P.S. I'm sure I can find a similar source elsewhere as well :) Eagle 101 21:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
The request has already also gone on to the Whitelist. If approval for removing from the blacklist is needed on a particular article then any two editors on any article could unreasonably ensure without any reason whatsover that any article is blacklisted and remain that way. There are half a dozen related articles. So that would mean approaching editors of half a dozen articles with a web site that was blacklisted - a bit like somebody trying to get a job who first has to admit he's a criminal even though he's committed no crime. The decision should be with the Administrator of the SPAM blacklist based on facts and reasoning, rather than the arbitrary decision of what could be two anonymous editors. Whether or not it is added to any particular article after it is removed from the SPAM blacklist (where it clearly should never have been) is a later separate matter. If editors then object to its inclusion then so be it, as that would then be up to them, as it is on any Wikipedia article. If you are sure that you can find a similar source elsewhere that covers all of the content of ALL the pages, I challenge you or anyone else to do so, as I know in advance that you could not even come close. --XX7 22:20, 23 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
I would recommend not removing this site as it has clearly been used for spam. Naconkantari 03:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
What you have just written is ridiculous. You bring this discussion process on the spam blacklist in to contempt by your continuous failure, not only with this site, but all sites, to come to conclusions without there being any evidence to support you. You have provided no evidence at all in support of what you have written. "Clearly spam" is utter utter nonsense. The web site was blacklisted after being added to only one Wikipedia relevant article on only one occasion, for 15 minutes. It contains not a single advert, it is entirely non-commercial, and it does not promote anything. I have already requested elsewhere that you no longer are able to have anything to do with the spam blacklist because your attitude to what are supposed to be reasoned and factual assessments is instead one of arrogance and a complete disregard for consistency, reasoning and facts. --XX7 09:55, 26 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
Show me that other editors want it by linking to a discussion on the english wiki, talking about this link, preferably on the talk page of one of the articles that you want to add this site. Eagle 101 10:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
I have followed your previous suggestion by taking it over to the whitelist, where it has started to be discussed and has so far gained a favourable response. I will leave it there for a while. --XX7 21:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Eagle 101 wrote on the whitelist that this web site would be removed from the blacklist in a few days. That was weeks ago. This is dragging on endlessly, with nothing being done about it. Surely it is now time to remove the site from the blacklist, where it should never have been, so that this issue can be completely removed from both the whitelist and blacklist discussions. --XX7 11:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

cosplay-world.com

This website is one of the most important in my area and has a lot of historical archives from the past 10 years. I don't even know why I'm blacklisted! It is rather unfair to have to justify myself for being blacklisted for no apparent reason. Please remove my website from the blacklist.

It's not up to me, but out of curiosity, what is cosplay ? --XX7 14:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

People dressed like weird anime characters pretending to be some manga superhero --Jollyroger 08:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

->http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosplay

When I first saw this site I thought that it was very informative, although I wasn't sure what it was informative about because I didn't know what cosplay was. Now that other editors have kindly informed me about what cosplay is, it seems a bit odd, but then so are a lot of things. However, how it can possibly be on the blacklist is baffling. It provides detailed information about cosplay events, and does not have any adverts that I can find. For those people interested it would be a useful site. It's not up to me as I am not an Administrator here, but it really should be removed from the blacklist. It has no reason at all being there. --XX7 11:47, 22 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Spam_blacklist&oldid=536776#cosplay-world.com is why it is on the spam blacklist. I will think about if taking it off if a good idea or not. Comments are welcome, but please realize that this is not a vote, so please don't use bold words infront of your comments. Thanks. Eagle 101 22:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Can a web site not be added to different language Wikipedias ? What if for example, there was an article on The White House on numerous Wikipedias. Could the White House web site not be added to all of the different language Wikipedias rather than just English Wikipedia ? Regarding cosplay-world.com I doubt if there is any better in other languages, so it seems reasonable that they add the web site to different language Wikipedias. --XX7 22:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Its reasonable to a point, but after you spam it to multiple languages like here, we start to have problems. One it is very hard to track this activity, as most users tend to stay to their home wikis. If the site is in only one langauge I fail to see the benifit of adding this link to multiple wikimedia sites. This is a case where the site benefits more then wikimedia does. I'm willing to remove this in a month or so, and try again, but for now I recommend that we do not remove this site. Eagle 101 05:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

A lot of web sites are on many different language Wikipedias, such as The White House, Manchester United, Real Madrid, Michael J.Fox Foundation. This is despite all of these sites being in English. Why are they not blacklisted ? Why is Cosplay.com subjected to blacklisting when it has been added to different language Wikipedias in precisely the same way that these other sites have been added ? Cosplay.com appears to have been added to the relevant Wikipedia articles. If it had been added to a lot of articles on foreign language Wikipedias to which it was not related I could understand the objections. There presently appears to be one standard inconsistently applied to Cosplay.com that is not applied to many other web sites.--XX7 11:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

This is only some of the Wikipedias that the Real Madrid web site has been added :

Azeri Catalan Czech Danish German Estonian Spanish Esperanto French Croatian Korean English

As the Real Madrid web site can be added to Wikipedia in different languages, so should cosplay.com be able to. There are many other web sites besides this that appear on Wikipedias in many different languages. There is an obvious inconsistency in the treatment that cosplay.com is getting here. --XX7 15:25, 25 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Err yeah, but that website was not spammed. There is a difference between insertions all at one time, and a gradual build up, as various people find a site a good site. Arguments on how other links are being "treated" don't make much sense to me. Justify this link, the existance or non-existance of other links means nothing to me. As far as applying standards, no I'm not applying standards, I simply saw it get spammed one day and added it. Give me a day to figure out if there were any other spam insertions other then the that I mentioned. If not, I'm willing to take it off and give it a second try. Eagle 101 10:26, 26 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Real Madrid is one of the biggest sports clubs in the world, with daily tv and newspare coverage in many countries. It is therefore likely that there would be a gradual build up of its web site on different language Wikipedias. However, cosplay is a little known, obscure and unpublicised subject. It would therefore probably only end on different language Wikipedias if somebody made a concerted effort. I assume that an enthusiast or somebody with an interest in the web site merely did a thorough job of making it available. Without their effort, and left to chance it, realistically would not have ended up on the various Wikipedias. Simultaneoulsy adding to a lot of Wikipedias is the sort of thing that conmmercial spammers do, which is why it no doubt resembled spamming. Added to this is the fact that few people, myself included, would have a clue what it was all about. However, this site doesn't appear to have any adverts. I may be wrong, but it merely looks like a list of forthcoming events - a bit like a calendar of forthcoming sporting events. At present, unless there is more that I don't know about, it doesn't appear to be spam. --XX7 21:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

QFT. So, if Real Madrid buys a new domain and moves there, it would be wrong to insert a new link on all wikis just because that _might_ be spam? Come on, Eagle 101, you are too harsh, that site is definetely something useful. (Not that my words have any power here, though. ^_^) --Akral. 88.119.34.224 12:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

www.lost.eu

I'm trying to create a userbox for people who play the game Lost, to be used on Userpages, which as far as I know is quite allowed. I understand why it's blacklisted, but I'm trying to use it legitimately. Is there any way to blacklist the website only in the article namespace, or is there some way to get around the block? If not, can we remove it? -- Robert See Hear Speak 00:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Nope, and here is why it is on the spam blacklist. They have a contest going on, and people are spamming it from everywhere. Its probably not going to be removed until the contest is over. I recommend against removal. As far as whitelisting, I doubt they will do it for the same reasons. Just use a wikilink in the template. ——(admin) Eagle101 Need help? 05:27, 28 March 2007 (UTC)Reply


pavelnedved.110mb.com

Hi! This site is blacklisted for spamming. There was a problem with some users in the forum but now is all ok. Please can be removed from the list?

I did the original blacklisting here. I'm neutral as to if it should be removed or not. All I will say is it has been spammed. —— Eagle101 Need help? 03:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

alleydog.com

This site does not belong on the blacklist because it is an educational site with only positive (useful) intentions. The site was created and run by a Psychologist (PhD in Psychology) specifically as an educational site for psychology students and people interested in psychology. There is no malware, spyware, etc., associate with this site. The site is for educational purposes only.

Here is why alleydog.com is on the spam blacklist
#11 Jul 06 - bot spamming en.wp
alleydog\.com
I will think about removal. —— Eagle101 Need help? 20:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
An added note, please sign your posts using ~~~~. Thank you.—— Eagle101 Need help? 20:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
Ok, I've found more information here. Still thinking about removal. Does the site have any use? —— Eagle101 Need help? 00:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

nefac.net

I am not sure why this site is blacklisted, but it be great if it could be removed from the list. I would like to keep the link nefac.net/node/166 on the Charlotte Wilson page. 69.112.99.31 21:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

here is why the link is blacklisted, I recommend against removing it from the blacklist, but I do strongly suggest that you request local whitelisting, your situation is exactly what the whitelist is designed for. —— Eagle101 Need help? 22:24, 31 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
Ok done, thanks. 69.112.99.31 14:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

dcestonian.com

Trying to determine why this site has been blacklisted. It was pointed out the site was an origin for spam. I contacted the guy who runs the site, and he said he know nothing about the problem, or that his site had been blacklisted. Dcestonian.com is a non-profit community related web site.68.48.81.66 19:18, 1 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Here would be why. —— Eagle101 Need help? 22:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I see a bunch of links pointing to some Polish language pages. Not sure what this has to do with spam? Do I understand correctly that being blacklisted implies www.dcestonian.com spammed wikipedia?68.48.81.66 03:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

It means the site has been spammed on wikimedia foundation wikis, and that blacklisting was the only way to prevent insertion of that domain name. —— Eagle101 Need help? 03:29, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Entire List of fraternities and sororities in the Philippines

It seems like every website referenced for a Fraternity or Sorority on this page has been Blacklisted. I've tried commenting them out one by one, but after about the sixth, I'm wondering if any of them *haven't* been blacklisted. Could someone let me know the current status? 72.244.26.2 12:03, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

If you are referring to the english wikipedia, I don't have any problems saving the page. If you have a question about a specific link feel free ask. —— Eagle101 Need help? 15:51, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Also note there are no references on that page, all I see is a bunch of external links which may or may not fit with english wikipedia's en:WP:EL guidelines. :) But if you have questions about a link please ask. —— Eagle101 Need help? 15:56, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

isbn-check.com + books-by-isbn.com + isbn-check.de

These sites contain Amazon affiliate links. However that is not a reason to blacklist them. We do not allow people to add affilaite links to to WP, we do not have a "contagion" policy that says we cannot link to sites with affilite links, or most of our external links would have to go. This blacklisting has deprived WP editors and users of a useful tool, and should be reversed. Rich Farmbrough 10:59 4 April 2007 (GMT).

Here is the reason why these are on the blacklist. These sites got abused. Also as far as I know, you can use ISBN 1234567890 to link to book reviews etc, so right now the way I see it, is we are preventing spam, and not losing very much in return. If you want to leave a location for users to go to see how to obtain the book just use the ISBN number. I'd recommend against removal for now, it was actually abused. —— Eagle101 Need help? 15:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Interestingly this one was here on meta at Meta:Book sources - I had to remove it before I could revert an additional link placed (in passing the page does have rather a lot of links - should it be watched more/semi prot?) --Herby talk thyme 10:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

yoyita.com

I have just tried to add a link on wikipedia to yoyita . com (can't even use it here) (the link was present previously, but now catches the attention of the blacklist with further edits). This site is thoroughly useful to the article I was editing (contrapposto), and seems to be only informative. Now, the list does contain \byoyita\.com, whatever that is (regex word boundary?). Can I ask whether this regex is intended to blacklist the URL I am trying to use, and, if yes, why? Jameshfisher 12:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

here and here are why. I recommend against taking this off the list, and I suggest that you request local whitelisting for a deeplink of that site. (by deep link I mean 'yoyita.com/blah'). —— Eagle101 Need help? 23:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

oratory.rajah.com/testfolder/index.php?archive=1461

See above (for en:World Championship Wrestling article) ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ 04:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Please see this Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2007/04/Additions:_Done#tnawrestling.com before removing, thanks! --Beetstra 07:31, 10 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
not on blacklist. --Beetstra 07:34, 10 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
It's still flagging up as blacklisted. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ 15:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Done - byproduct of this problem should be fixed, if there are problems mention them in this section below my last post. Cheers! —— Eagle101 Need help? 16:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

gargoyles.dracandros.com

I wish to propose this site, just recently blocked above, for reconsideration. The site is a wiki, pertaining to the television series Gargoyles. It contains relevant information, and could be usefully linked to from pages on the English Wikipedia that are subpages of w:Category:Gargoyles. In particular, the pages "List of Gargoyles characters" and "List of Gargoyles episodes" could benefit from links to GargWiki pages to provide information on characters or episodes only briefly covered in those pages. At least two of the vandals responsible for the inclusion of the site on the blacklist (those editing on Wikipedia) seem to be the same person, and this person's biggest mistake seems to be linking directly to the main page of the site instead of to the appropriate articles. I assume that much of this individual's spamming would end if the appropriate links were included. One instance of vandalism of the separate Gargoyles wiki, http://gargoyles.wikia.com/, while reprehensible, seems to be in response to link spamming by administrators of that second site. Please do not blame the site itself for the actions of a few misguided individuals. (Incidentally, I am both an editor of the English Wikipedia under the name Supermorff, and a moderator of GargWiki under the same name.) -- 4.254.144.51 01:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I just blacklisted this, so I won't say for sure, but I'd like to leave this one on for at least a week. Ask again then. The blacklist is designed to prevent problems like the one above. Perhaps after the members of the group see the "this link is blacklisted" message, they might not do it again when it comes off the blacklist. —— Eagle101 Need help? 11:20, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Hello, this is the owner of gargoyles.dracandros.com . Just want to add my two cents; neither I nor any of the administrators of the wiki approved this wikispam. Whoever was responsible for this was at best overzealous, and at worst trying to make our site look bad. Please reconsider having this site on your blacklist. -JEB
It is now one week on, and I am once again requesting that this site be removed from the blacklist. In the meantime, one Wikipedia user has added links to a related site in an apparent attempt to circumvent the blacklisting. I assume that such instances would stop if appropriate links were added to appropriate pages (it seems the blacklisting itself isn't enough). I would like to reiterate that this user is not affiliated with GargWiki (as far as I can tell). A project page decrying link spamming now exists on the wiki, and will be accepted as official policy pending a vote by members. -- (Supermorff) 86.131.16.191 16:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
I'll assume you're referring to this [85], [86], [87], [88], [89], [90]. The next logical step would be blacklisting the conduit site, should the spam persist – not taking the other one off the blacklist. Also, sites are not blacklisted only when the people involved in them instigate the linkspamming. They could very well be visitors, fans or anyone who knows and likes the site and wants to use Wikipedia's notability to divulge it. The whole point of blacklisting is to hinder spam by preventing abusive linkage to be saved. Seeing as the blacklisting was circumvented, this indicates that the spam will continue once the site is off the list. Lemmos 21:11, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

ainfos.ca

The \bainfos\.ca filter is removing legitimate links from ainfos.ca (not bainfos.ca). For example, a link was removed from W:Popular Indigenous Council of Oaxaca "Ricardo Flores Magon" today. Further, bainfos.ca doesn't even seem to exist. - 70.145.240.170 13:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

done - Thats a bad regex, it was added because it was listed as a url redirect service, and when I did my scan of it manually I thought it was. It is fixed. Actually I take that back this link was actually spammed on multiple wikis by one account. Blacklisting it was the only way to prevent more additions, let me think about it. You may view the problem here. :) —— Eagle101 Need help? 21:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

www.immatain.shim.net

This is a village website in Israel that should be attached to the article Immatain, not linkspam. --89.1.162.137 06:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Playstationdude

I was telling people on playstation talk pages about the new wikiproject on playstation products. I didn't know it would be considered spam. I stopped posting copies. To view the project click here. 74.60.40.113 14:26, 14 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

www.pkcropcircles-ufos.knows.it

Trying to edit List of Ufologist but this link keeps getting marked as spam (:O) -Nima Baghaei talk · cont 19:01, 14 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

www.tufoic.ne1.net

Trying to edit Tasmania UFO Investigation Centre but this link keeps getting marked as spam (:O) -Nima Baghaei talk · cont 18:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

www.tutorialspoint.com

My site was blacklisted because of creating a hyperlink on non-english page. This was purely a mistake and would not be repeated at all.

Tutorialspoint.com provides useful content which have been appreciated by all the site visitors. Tutorials on AJAX, ebXML, UDDI, XML-RPC, EVM, PMP Exams, Six Sigma are really useful for the beginners and more tutorials like Ruby on Rails, AJAX and PHP etc are under pen and will be uploaded soon.

TutorialsPoint.com has intention to contribute a lot to WIKIPEDIA projects as well. For example content available on Wikipedia for "Ruby on Rails" and AJAX, ebXML need revision and TutorialsPoint.Com is planning to give their time to make these topics more rich for Wikipedia visitors. Plus TutorialsPoint.com is giving Wikipedia's Reference in almost all tutorials available at tutorialspoint.com.

So a humble request is to remove this useful site from blacklist.

Best Regards TutorialsPoint.Com

False, looks like your continuing to spam wikipedia by by spamming amrood.com (under this very same IP) see [91]. Both tutorialspoint.com and amrood.com are confirmed the same owner, (Adsense pub-7133395778201029). I would recomend to the reviewing admin to deny this request and also add amrood.com to the blacklist as well, as this too is the same confirmed owner. thanks. --Hu12 09:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
For a full list of IP's and associations please review this talk page data--Hu12 09:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
also talentgroups.com is also the same Adsense pub-7133395778201029. entries on the english wikipedia, see [92]. also please block this as well. --Hu12 09:56, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

You are very correct amrood.com and talentgroups.com are on the same IP address. But I'm not concerned about AMROOD.com and Talentgroups.com you can blacklist those sites and it is true that continue spaming was not intention behind putting a link on wikipedia but I was thinking that someone is removing my link intentially so I had put my link once again when I saw that someone has removed my link. Because there was no warning message or any alert so I could not understand that it will lead to spamming. Later I realized my mistake and I'm feeling very sorry about that mistake. But TutorialsPoint.com is a useful site and I would request you not to put this site in blacklist.

Best Regards TutorialsPoint.com

Crosswiki spamming of tutorialspoint.com; TutorialsPoint.com on es: by 206.126.170.20 here, TutorialsPoint.com on es: by 206.126.170.20 here and TutorialsPoint.com on es: by 206.126.170.20 here. Also another TutorialsPoint.com on eo: by 206.126.170.20 here. Regards--Hu12 12:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
oh, and the link to talentgroups.com added to simple.wikipedia.org by IP 206.126.170.20. --Hu12 12:37, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I have agreed that tutorialspoint.com's link were added on non-english sites but my intention was not spaming. I had seen links for another english sites like w3schools.com which is similar to my site so I had added my site links also where other non english sites like w3schools.com is linked. If you think w3schools.com is spamming then definitley I'm culprit and you can ban tutorialspoint.com as well otherwise for the benefit of beginners I would request you to remove tutorialspoint.com from blacklist. Before adding my link I was not aware that it will lead to spam as I have said I thought that someone is removing my link so I had added my link once again. So please take it as a mistake which has happend without proper knowledge. I'v hosted tutorialspoint.com for a noble cause to help others like you are helping.

Hope you will understand the situation and will give a chance to tutorialspoint.com. I don't advocate for talentgroups.com or amrood.com so you can blacklist those sites.

Best Regards TutorialsPoint.com

Just checked the IP Address 206.126.170.20 which does not belong to my at all. Even this IP address does not belong to India where I reside and from where I manage my site. Not sure if these links were added by me or by any opponent of my site who wanted my site to be blacklisted.

Please block this IP address and put my site into whitelist.

Best Regards TutorialsPoint.com

206.126.170.20 (en:talk • en:contribs • en:links • en:count • en user logs • en user page logs || WHOIS • RDNS • traceroute • RBLs • tor • search) appears on at least two Internet blacklists. It's registered to Convergys, an American multinational with a big (20,000+ employees) outsourcing operation in India. Note that the IP used above, 122.169.135.190, also appears on two major blacklists.[93] I recommend checking to see if it's an open proxy. --A. B. (talk) 20:17, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for this verification, further I would request you to block this IP address because my service provider is Bharti and I do my site maintenance from Bharti IP Address only. I'm not sure if Convergys is an ISP or not.

My further request is to remove my site from blacklist. As I said earlier my intention is to help students out here and not to spam useful sites like wikipedia. I had added my link to wikipedia following w3schools.com which has more than 50 links on wikipedia.

Best Regards Tutorialspoint.com


I'm expecting a positive response from admin side. I request please review my site once and if you feel its a useful site for students and IT beginners then please remove it from black list.

Best Regards TutorialsPoint.com

Not done, clear evidence of cross-wiki spam. Naconkantari 15:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Dear Kantari, I had accepted that it was a mistake and not intentional spamming. As the site is an education site and not any entertainment or commercial site so it should not be blacklisted. If in future it repeats from tutorialspoint.com the definitely site can be banned forever but I've accepted my mistake here. Second other cross spamming was done by someone else which is clear from an IP address which does not belong to me.

Considering the site as educational site and a mistake from my side please give me a chance and remove my site from black list.

Regards TP.

Don Murphy sites from above

The issue has been resolved through a private conversation between Don Murphy and Cary Bass.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 23:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done yeah already fixed :) —— Eagle101 Need help? 21:05, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yuri Bandazhevsky

His website has been blacklisted for unknown reasons, although Yuri Bandazhevsky ([94]) is an important scientific concerning the Chernobyl disaster (he created the first laboratory in Belarus dedicated to the disaster). Due to the very specific nature of his work, I doubt his link to was spammed since it could be relevant only on his own page and maybe on the Chernobyl disaster page. Note the very controversial nature of the Chernobyl disaster, which might have motivated someone in trying to censor Bandazhevsky. bandazhevsky.da.ru/ Professor Yuri Bandazhevsky site which has been blacklisted without discussion on his talk page. Lapaz 16:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done Fixed, it was a regex error, not an attempt to "censor" :) Cheers! —— Eagle101 Need help? 21:07, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

totalvideogames.com

I am requesting that this page is removed from the list. A interview here is vital to Devil May Cry 3 and without it the whole section will end up unreferenced there is no alternate source for this interview. Please note that Devil May Cry 3 is a current Featured Article Candidate. -Dark Dragon Flame (in Wikipedia) 04:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

internet-srs.biz

A lastmeasure site. Was linked at en:Troll (internet). Mangojuice 17:33, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Troubleshooting and problems

Latest comment: 17 years ago19 comments10 people in discussion
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).


Bug with the spam blacklist?

I have attempted to revert the following vandalism:[95] , which is vandalism because it contains not only unsourced but false and difficult to understand material which was intentionally inserted.

However, when I attempted to save my page after the reversion, I relieve an error that says I have violated the "Spam blacklist". I am not adding any hyperlinks by this reversion, so I do not understand what the problem could be.

Thanks in advance, User:Bobo The Ninja on the english wikipedia, 16:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Done Blacklist prevents all saving, not only when you add a link, also links that may already be in the document. The warning you get tells you which blacklisted link triggered the filter, and that link should be removed. Hope this helps. --Beetstra 16:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
So am I supposed to delete the offending/blacklisted link (or at least the http://www. part) even if it was inserted/written by someone else?--84.145.222.231 17:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Yes, it is a wiki after all, and can be ruthlessly edited by others... Nobody owns anything on these wikis :). If you think the link is legit request local whitelisting. —— Eagle101 Need help? 17:36, 9 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

republica.com

The block in republica.com is also blocking republica.com.br, an important Brazilian website dedicated to political analysis. Dantadd 14:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

On what wiki, just request whitelisting, unfortunatly we cannot restrict the regex to prevent matches on .br. I will double check in time and see if perhaps I can come up with an advanced regex that might do the trick, but for now just simply request whitelisting on en:WP:WHITELIST (assuming the english wiki). Eagle 101 00:10, 25 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
Done there is now a more advanced regex in place. —— Eagle101 Need help? 02:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

blog.myspace.com

Please help.

I try to edit the en:Galactus page, but it keep saying that "The following text is what triggered our spam filter: h**p blog.myspace.com".

I have no idea where this link comes from. I have not added, and I had no problem editing the page before it all of suddenly showed up. - DCincarnate

DoneI assumed you were referring to the english wiki, and I found the link. The problem is now fixed :). Eagle 101 00:08, 25 March 2007 (UTC)Reply



PressArchive.net

I keep getting an error of a blacklisted site, and it's preventing me from saving my work. I don't know what it's talking about because I'm not adding any links, and it will give me the error when I'm just reverting vandalism too. Bignole 12:02, 25 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Right what article are you trying to save? Just find what the link is (the blacklist message will tell you) and remove it. The article should save afterwards. If you have problems with this, just tell me the article, then I will help you out. Eagle 101 10:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

haloeastereggs dot co dot nr?

I can't undo vandalism to Easter egg (virtual) because it tells me that a site is on the blacklist. I can't even name the site here, because the meta-wiki refuses to let me save this comment because the site is on the blacklist, but here it is with some slight obfuscation: www dot haloeastereggs dot co dot nr. I can't find anything on the blacklist which would appear to patternmatch this. - Brian Kendig 02:35, 1 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I took the link off for now, so you can save, its likely a bad regex. —— Eagle101 Need help? 02:56, 1 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Done fixed, you may re-add the link. —— Eagle101 Need help? 02:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

en:U-boat

I tried saving an edit & got the Spam blacklist warning. I have no idea why. How do I fix it? 24.66.94.144 22:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC) And how do I fix that IP address? It's not mine...Reply

I have no problems saving. —— Eagle101 Need help? 23:14, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

SBArchiverBot is deleting but not archiving stuff from this page

I notice this bot twice deleted the same completed additions from this page[96][97] but they never made it to Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2007/04/Removals: Done. I don't have time to do it, but it's probably worth looking at the bot's contribution history for other mistakes. --A. B. (talk) 18:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Nothing else went wrong. I'm going to try another run now to see what's up. Shadow1 19:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)Reply


strings of text that may not be used in URLs

Is it really necessary to mass block sites just because they have a certain string of words in the url? Examples: "casino-online" and "online-casino" are strings of words in the URL not allowed. I find this a bit annoying since there are several non spamming sites with these words in the URL, this makes it hard to make the best possible articles in the gambling section. One of many examples: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Blackjack#Why_is_it_called_.22Black_Jack.22.3F. Should we not consider adding the relative few sites who are spamming to the blacklist instead of not allowing any links at all to a lot of legit non-spamming sites? I suggest that "casino-online" and "online-casino" is removed from the blacklist 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Or just request local whitelisting :) Get whatever pages that you need on the whitelist. Those words are common spam keywords. Cheers! —— Eagle101 Need help? 23:06, 5 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Yes that would probably be a very good idear :-). However apparently some editors really don't like anything gambling related at all in the whitelist. Example: in the en:blackjack article just below the playing strategy chart the article contains this text: "...but requires a slightly modified basic strategy table (such tables can be generated using the external links)." This quote used to refer to an external link to the following page: online-casinos.com/blackjack/basic-strategy-calculator.php but it was removed from the whitelist during a "clean up". Then the whitelist cleanup editor went on an removed the link in the blackjack article because the site was blacklisted. Clearly the site was not really blacklisted at all - on the contrary it was whitelisted untill he decided to remove the link from the whitelist (for no good reason). As a result of this the quote above from the blackjack article is no longer true. Could you please look into this and perhaps add this site back to the whitelist as it added value to the article? Thanks you. 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Then re-request it on the whitelist, it may be an error. Cheers! —— Eagle101 Need help? 17:35, 9 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the help - I made the re-request. Cheers 10 April 2007 (UTC)

*.da.ru

I couldn't find the entry for da.ru (a hosting domain which claims to have over 300,000 entries/subdomains) on the list, but when i tried to save a page with http://rarities.da.ru/ (a museum about minerals) the link was blocked. Could anyone tell me why? nl:User:Hardscarf

Same here. I would like to preserve a (formerly existing) link to http://www.deriner.da.ru, a website for a turkish dam building project, and which is used at de:Deriner-Talsperre.--Hk kng 14:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Other discussions

Latest comment: 17 years ago50 comments23 people in discussion

tinyurl

Not sure where this goes. I have no connect to this article, but I came across http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_Bloodgood and one of the source links is so long that it writes over the picture, etc on this page, so I tried to add a "tinyurl.com" redirect to fix formatting, but it said I couldn't. Why? Can someone else fix the super long link problem if tunyurl is a no go? thanks 222.149.220.10 17:41, 14 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

As far as I can tell http://abc.go.com/primetime/daybreak/bios/moon_bloodgood.html would do. The link to the google cache doesn't mention "of Dutch and Irish descent" either. 129.125.102.126 04:50, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Category in black list source

I use the wikipedia spam black list in a mod I built for the SMF forum. Now there is a last line containing a Category class. What is that for? It breaks my mod. I have already patched my mod to fix that, but there are some old versions in the wild that are broken and they are not easy to upgrade since that requires an upgrade to the latest forum version. Is that last line really necessary? Kakao 20:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Referral Profiteering

Please consider a list of referral affiliate syntax to filter/substitute. The idea is to prevent people adding links to articles which they profit from. Typically this would mean linking to a relevant book on amazon instead of an isbn number. Spiral Staircase 18:58, 15 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Any ideas are welcome ;) Eagle 101 19:50, 15 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

For the less knowledgeable amongst us please explain what is meant by a "list of referral affiliate syntax to filter/substitute". I guess that it is something to do with links to book web sites. At present can a book that is relevant to an artcile include a link to the publisher's web site that gives more details about the contents of the book, which would be useful, or to online books retailer's sites for that book such as those on Amazon ? --XX7 15:12, 17 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

What's wrong with linking to the details of a book on Amazon or elsewhere, which will provide detailed information about that book, rather than an ISBN, which doesn't supply any information about the book. With the ISBN, somebody would then have to go and look it up on Amazon anyway. The diversion is pointless. --XX7 14:01, 23 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Details about a book are fine, as long as the link doesn't include a personal referral number that will allow the person who posted the link to profit if whoever clicks the link happens to buy that book. --Versageek 15:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

So does that mean that Amazon links such as the following are OK that give more details of the book without making money for an editor who has a personal referral number for it : Puccini : a biography. I added an Amazon link that merely gave more details of a book, yet it was immediately removed. --XX7 16:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

You did this on the english wiki right? If so, you might want to ask over there if its 'ok'. Try asking at en:WT:EL, thats a pretty active page, and editors there know quite a bit about the external link guidelines. Cheers! Eagle 101 17:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thankyou, I'll check it out. It does seem to be a subject that causes people to differ in their opinions. Some see links to book details on publishers and online retailers web sites as useful information. Others see it as advertising. Most less experienced editors don't seem to know what Wikipedia policy is on this. --XX7 12:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

  • Just put the ISBN, it it translated automagically into a link which can be used to get to the book from one of a large number of booksellers (also I think finds the Library of Congress catalogue and other details). No need even to use Wikisyntax, ISBN xxxxxxxx in plain text works. Links to Amazon or any other bookseller are strongly discouraged. Just zis Guy, you know? 18:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)Reply


artnet.de/artist

Hi! I just got "Spam protection filter"-ed trying to edit w:Joseph Finnemore for a link to "http://www.artnet.de/artist". (I didn't put it in, it was there in the original!? Can't even put in this msg.) The link seems to be legit, to an old print. (There are some very* interesting items on the blocked list, though). What's the prob with this link? Are there any workarounds for this site? Thanks, --Saintrain 17:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC).Reply

(* Reminds me of the quandry the old missionaries faced: How do you tell them what "sin" is but not give them ideas.)

Ask de:Benutzer:Hedwig in Washington in English/German and de:Benutzer:MaxSem please, they are responsible. see: http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Benutzer_Diskussion:Hedwig_in_Washington&diff=prev&oldid=26571641
Comment by Hedwig some days before: And now I´m waiting for complaints. Greetings 195.93.60.97 11:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
Bullshit, I never said that. It's your personal problem that makes you frustrated. Don't blame your own inability on other user.--Hedwig in Washington 18:53, 12 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
  • Is anyone here able - no, not you, Hedwig Troll from Washington - to answer the question of Saintrain and of all people, who will ask the same questions in the next years? Btw: de:artnet is a regular en:joint stock company and not suspected of producing spam (except by Hedwig and MaxSern. Unfortunately he speaks no German :-))
  • Examples: here <-- and and here from 22:34, 16. Dez. 2006 to 22:47, 16. Dez. 2006 . Does anyone find one single spamlink at artnet? You can win 5 Euros!
  • I guess, not the most engaged vandal is able to "produce" such a damage like Hedwig and Max, because these few examples from de can give only an impression to what is happening worldwide in wikipedia 195.93.60.97 09:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
Here is why the site is currently on the blacklist see here. If you can present good arguemnts on how the original blacklist conditions nolonger apply I will take it off. Regards. Eagle 101 06:38, 24 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
Hi it´s unbelievable. Thanks for that link. I planned to wait on the next asker and then to present the next 20 damages on de. But I had no idea, that Hedwig has destroyed 129 articles, only in de. How big is the damage in en? In Germany these people are bestkown as super trolls. (@Hedwig: Das gibt noch ein Nachspiel)
Note: You will not need artnet for illustrations like Da Vinci, Rembrandt or Dürer, but for all these thousands of artists who are only popular (or nearly forgotten even) in their own countries and who have made beautiful stuff like this [[98]. Can´t believe it, honestly. Regards 195.93.60.97 20:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
Nothing can be destroyed, it's a Wiki! So don't cry and don't accuse others of being super trolls, maybe you shall read the rules of Meta and DE-Wiki before complaining and don't try to threaten me. That's not helping your case either. As I said many times before (my email), convince me or let us try to unblock the site and watch it closely. But no, better complain about the system and Admins that don't speak German on Meta. Oh Lord. --Hedwig in Washington 12:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
I´ve asked you one time, see above, that should be enough. 195.93.60.97 22:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'm inclined to remove it. I'm not sure why artnet.de/artist was blacklisted in the first place; there's no evidence of spamming. The argument seems to be that it doesn't provide much information, so it seems they were just concerned with the quality of their references. However, it's better to reference a site with little information than not reference at all. I'll ask mzlla, who blacklisted it, to comment. —{admin} Pathoschild 01:03:48, 30 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

For future reference, the previous discussions were in December 2006 and February 2007. It seems the users involved were concerned with the quality of their references, not spam. Note that widespread placement of a link in good faith to reference an article is not spam, as this quote by one of the requesting user suggests:
"the point is that 129 (see above) links are way too many. Period. That's masslinking and it's not conform with the rules. If it's unblocked, there will be 100 or more within a couple days. I understand the problem the guys have and I really wish it would be different, but unblocking is not the right thing to do IMHO. We should find different ways (websites) to show pictures and the written information is not very useful and doesn't help on the topic."
I'm further inclined to remove it, unless mzlla has another reason I haven't seen. —{admin} Pathoschild 02:03:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
I agree with your decision, no matter what. But don't expect me to clean the mess up again. ;-)) --Hedwig in Washington 20:29, 6 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Who else? And don´t forget a single one.
btw.: What´s up with user:mzlla? Is he dead ? 195.93.60.97 19:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Found this: It's a little mysterious: mzlla's last edit was in december 2006: 16:00, 7 December 2006 (hist) (diff) Spam blacklist/Log (?December - 4 sites added)
But that gives us time to prove other "spam" trollings by Hedwig, as kunstportal-bw.de 195.93.60.97 18:15, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

More problems

I can't add de:Cinderella Story and fr:Comme Cendrillon to this film A Cinderella Story. Thanks. --213.102.117.161 08:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done I believe I fixed this one, if I'm wrong, just let me know below here. ——(admin) Eagle101 Need help? 02:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Problem editing en:Old School (Film)

Under the Old School poster I wanted to add en:Elisha Cuthbert as one of the actresses starring in the movie but was prevented to do so by a Spam Protection Filter. Her name is listed on the movie's IMDB site:http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0302886/fullcredits#cast - 218.186.8.13 10:09, 28 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I can't find the article in question. Are you sure you gave me the right link. What happened here is that there is a blacklisted link in the article, and it needs to be removed before you can save the page again. ——(admin) Eagle101 Need help? 15:27, 28 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I had put the link at the title, but here is the article: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_School_%28film%29) When I try to put the name and link of Elisha Cuthbert (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elisha_cuthbert) as one of the film's stars I was prevented from doing so by a Spam Protection Filter.- 218.186.8.13 13:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done see the edit by —— Eagle101 Need help? if you want to see what I did. (check the history of the page). —— Eagle101 Need help? 00:01, 30 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

www.bolivia.at.tf

I attempted to edit en:Bolivia and this link triggered the spam filter. However, I can't find it or any link resembling it on the blacklist. Am I missing something or is there a problem with the filter? Also, the Bolivia page was last edited (with that link present) at 22:32, 1 April 2007 and I can't find any evidence that the link was added to the blacklist since then.--Dycedarg 21:02, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done I fixed it, though that link really ought not to be on that page. Its taking me 1 minute to load up a page on that. I'm sure there are better sites, but thats my personal opinion. For me to see any of the actual content of this site, it is taking me over 4 minutes (its still loading as I'm typing, and I'm on broadband). —— Eagle101 Need help? 21:37, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Ah it finally loaded. —— Eagle101 Need help? 21:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
I know it's a crappy site, but I didn't think that we put sites on the blacklist for having long loading times. I was just making sure there wasn't something wrong with the filter, and besides that the site does have useful information even if it takes forever to get to it.--Dycedarg 21:46, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Actually I don't see any real useful info, but you are right the domain should not be on the blacklist if its not redirecting people around the blacklist. (that was why it was on there to start with). —— Eagle101 Need help? 21:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

www.deathcamps.org

Please remove www.deathcamps.org. from the blacklist. It is quite normal site devoted to a history of nazi deathcamps and ghettos of times of the Second World War 80.134.79.55 Ben-Velvel

  • The hyphenated spammers have been emailing the OTRS list. I told them as far as the admins on enWP and several other languages are concerned the case is closed, we don't need their fight. I hope we are not going to reopen Pandora's box here. Just zis Guy, you know? 20:53, 5 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
  • The "hyphenated site" will soon be online again. Legal law must win against activities below the belt. Simplicius will have to excuse for his hasty proposal! Michael Peters (former webmaster of deathcamps,webmaster of death-camps). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.128.242.204 (talk • contribs) 19:46, 15 April 2007.
  • Here we go again! More shameless promotion of fraudulent websites! Enough entertaining these frauds at the hyphen site! Keep the fake website with the Hyphen blacklisted and end this insanity already. These countefeiters can't fool the people of the world. Justice won't be played out in the court of public opinion here on Wiki! The fake site www.death- camps .org was a fraudulent site and was removed for fraud and infringement. Enough said already! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fightonlinefraud (talk • contribs) 16:00, 16 April 2007.
Not done Naconkantari 15:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

en:Novi Plamen

Why is Novi Plamen magazine blacklisted?

Its not, I am able to edit the page. If there is a blacklist message it is do to a url in the article. (I'm assuming your problem is with the english wikipedia) —— Eagle101 Need help? 23:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

A link can't be added to any related articles, and it says it's blacklisted.

What specific page are you having problems on? —— Eagle101 Need help? 17:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

nezumi.dumousseau.free.fr/japon/japcontar1.htm

Why is this blacklisted? I needed to create a link to Hiroshi Araki's artistic creations...Urhixidur 21:27, 10 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Please post in the correct section. Naconkantari 15:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Adrian Noble

Hi, I translated the Adrian Noble pages from England and the Netherlands, and merged them into the German article. But now I cannot put the language link de:Adrian Noble on the English site. In the Netherlands and on the German site, there is no problem to make the correct links. I always get the 'spam' warning. What can be done about this problem? anne-theater 11.4.07

ulkerfenerbahce.com

What are you doing ? This site not spam. Sport Club Basketball name Ulkerfenerbahce and fenerbahceulker. (a little speak english) and

Please post in the correct section. Naconkantari 15:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

antu.com

Fenerbahce sport club official supporter site. --Antispam 12:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Please post in the correct section. Naconkantari 15:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

encyclopediadramatica.net/.org

These are alternate addresses of the currently ArbCom mandated blocked site encyclopediadramatica.com. Netscott 20:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, Done. MaxSem 20:40, 13 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

In the discussion on whether to maintain an entry on Dr. Judy Wood, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Judy_Wood, I included the URL to her website as one of my references but received a message that this website has been blacklisted. It will be very difficult to conduct an intelligent discussion of Dr. Wood without being able to include a link to her website. Please restore this link to the white list. Thank You. 04:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Just a question. If Encyclopedia Dramatica has been blacklisted after an Arbcom decision, and Arbcom is an instrument that rules ONLY on en.wiki, why has it been blacklisted on all wikis and not only on local blacklist of en.wiki? As far I can remember, it wasn't blocked for cross-wiki spam, but only for an arbitrary decision of a single community (en). --Jollyroger 09:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Spam_blacklist&oldid=567855"