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This is an archived version of this page, as edited by A. B. (talk | contribs) at 19:02, 4 August 2007 (→‎Site under Title: Brass India: hmmm...). It may differ significantly from the current version.

Latest comment: 16 years ago by A. B. in topic Proposed removals
Shortcut:
WM:SPAM
The associated page is used by the Mediawiki SpamBlacklist extension, and lists strings of text that may not be used in URLs in any page in Wikimedia Foundation projects (as well as many external wikis). Any meta administrator can edit the spam blacklist. There is also a more aggressive way to block spamming through direct use of $wgSpamRegex. Only developers can make changes to $wgSpamRegex, and its use is to be avoided whenever possible.

For more information on what the spam blacklist is for, and the processes used here, please see Spam blacklist/About.

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.

Projects

snippet for logging: {{/request|640821#section_name}}

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

Worthy of note: en:Wikipedia:Grief

Proposed additions

Latest comment: 16 years ago101 comments31 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.


Domains used by Universe Daily

  • ericapacker.com
  • Can this be removed from the block list? www.nakedaustralians.com  ?

dm-cqsf.cn and other

Please add spam links from this pages: .dm_awd .dm_aid .dm_asd .dm_aod

  • Not done Sorry, but your links are broken. Without information / evidence, hard to be convinced they deserves ban. Hope you managed it already locally. --Aphaia 17:23, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

languedoc-france.info

There are 428 links to languedoc-france.info according to Anti-Spam search, quite possibly many of them are genuine non-spam, but IP 168.224.1.14 is spamming the link cross-wiki. A few examples:

--Jorunn 22:20, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done - Andre Engels 01:25, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Hopefully the IP has stopped spamming by now. Could you please unblock this domain again? Otherwise all articles with genuine links cannot be edited without removing the link :-( Regards, --Birger Fricke 00:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Hi, I'm James McDonald, the webmaster of www.languedoc-france.info. I've been advised that I got added to your spam blacklist and this seems to be true. I checked some of the English links and could not see any that resempbled spam. Perhaps you would care to do the same for a random sample. I've contacted a couple of people - overenthusiastic fans - who might be responsible for adding foereign links, and while denying spamming have undertaken not to add any more. In the circumstances I wonder if you would be kind enough to remove my site from your blacklist. Thanks 66.108.0.58 01:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
A little more information about those "overenthusiastic fans" and "their" editing pattern:
  • Domains registered to James McDonald that have had links on various Wikiedias; they cover a very broad range of interests:
  1. languedoc-france.info
  2. cathar.info
  3. renneslechateaubooks.info
  4. bestfrenchfilms.com
  5. st-ferriol.com
  6. heretication.info
  7. votejedi.co.uk
  8. votejedi.com
  9. springald.com
  • Additional domains registered to James McDonald:
  1. jamesmcdonald.info
  2. ferreolus.info
  3. realstandards.info
  4. esperaza.info
  5. st-ferriol.info
  6. carcassonneflat.com
A small cluster of accounts appear to have added the preponderance of links to these domains. There are a number of overlaps in the sites they choose to link to; the coincidences are striking given the breadth of topics:
1. en:Springald has a link on his user page to bestfrenchfilms.com and has added links to:
2. 168.224.1.14 (a shared IP registered to Pfizer) has added hundreds of Mr. McDonald's links across dozens of Wikipedias (a sample:[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]):
  1. renneslechateaubooks.info
  2. languedoc-france.info
  3. cathar.info
  4. st-ferriol.com
  5. springald.com
  6. bestfrenchfilms.com (Added by --A. B. (talk) 21:23, 20 July 2007 (UTC))Reply
  7. realstandards.info (Added by --A. B. (talk) 21:23, 20 July 2007 (UTC))Reply
3. Multiple single purpose accounts have added links to these domains:
4. Another shared Pfizer account:
As to how many of the total number of languedoc-france.info links have been added by others, I looked at the first 11 articles with languedoc-france.info links on en.wikipedia. I found:
  • 8 links added by accounts tied to the accounts above:
  1. en:Aigues-Mortes[22]
  2. en:Albigensian Crusade[23]
  3. en:Aragon[24]
  4. en:Aude River[25]
  5. en:Bernard Gui[26]
  6. en:Bernard of Clairvaux[27]
  7. en:Bezu Fache[28]
  8. en:Blanquette de Limoux[29]
  • 2 links added as good faith edits by regular, established editors:
  1. en:Alet Cathedral[30]
  2. en:Abbevillian[31]
  • 1 link moved from another article as part of a major move of text between articles; I was unable to determine who had originally added the link to the original:
  1. en:Antisemitism in Europe (Middle Ages)[32]
I recommend temporarily removing languedoc-france.info from the blacklist until all the links can be cleared, then re-blacklisting it along with:
  • cathar.info
  • renneslechateaubooks.info
  • bestfrenchfilms.com
  • st-ferriol.com
  • heretication.info
  • votejedi.co.uk
  • votejedi.com
  • springald.com
  • realstandards.info (Added by --A. B. (talk) 21:23, 20 July 2007 (UTC))Reply
Established editors who wish to add particular links to articles can always request local whitelisting of particular pages.
--A. B. (talk) 15:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
In cleaning up the 19 cathar.info links on the larger Wikipedias, I found most of the links were added by the accounts above.[33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46] 3 other links were included when new articles on other wikipedias (it:Bogomilismo, it:Catarismo and oc:Catarisme) were started using material translated from en.wikipedia articles.
Most interestingly, I discovered still another related editor, Trollwatcher, adding many links to Mr. McDonald's sites. [47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55] Trollwatcher was indefinitely blocked in early 2006 as a sockpuppet of banned user John1838 and J1838. 82.22.236.111 (listed in my earlier post above) was also blocked as one of Trollwatcher's accounts. See:
Trollwatcher was also apparently adding links to a later-blacklisted "attack site", doubleblue.info, now expired but previously registered to someone with a springald.com e-mail address. This site's content has since been ported to dweec.com (registered to "Malleus Dweecificarum" and "Dweec Hammer" at a bogus Syracuse address and telephone number). See:
The prolific Pfizer IP listed in my earlier post above, 168.224.1.14, later added a link to dweec.com. [56]
Finally, please see this cheery note on Mr. McDonald's website at www.languedoc-france.info/23_likesite.htm:
  • "What you can do if you like this Website ... Add links to pages on this site from Wikipedia."
--A. B. (talk) 20:55, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
In response to a request from Mr. McDonald on my talk page, I looked into the edit histories further, especially of the Pfizer IP168.224.1.14 across all Wikimedia projects. Observations:
  1. Spam warnings: 7 [57][58][59][60][61][62][63]
  2. Comment made by 168.224.1.14 at en:Talk:Catharism:
    "For more see the cathar section of my website www://languedoc-france.info."[64]
  3. Additional account: Mr Christian[65]
--A. B. (talk) 21:23, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Additional domains spammed in connection with languedoc-france.info

Following up on the discussions and diffs above, please blacklist these additional, related domains that were spammed:

  • cathar.info
  • renneslechateaubooks.info
  • bestfrenchfilms.com
  • st-ferriol.com
  • heretication.info
  • votejedi.co.uk
  • votejedi.com
  • springald.com
  • realstandards.info

Thanks, --A. B. (talk) 17:20, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

independencia.net

Cross-wiki spam. 168 links in the 57 largest wikis.

--Jorunn 21:44, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

I have cleaned up the many, many links in the other, smaller Wikipedias (those that aren't in the top 57). Due to schedule constraints, I'll leave it to someone else to remove the links in the top 57. --A. B. (talk)
es, fr, de and en hasn't been cleaned up yet, the others are cleaned up. --Jorunn 10:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Done - Andre Engels 06:52, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
This is the web site of a party. Why do you remove this link from the article dedicated to that party? 84.50.240.140 16:25, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
It will not be possible to save any edits to the articles until the blacklisted link is removed. (The articles about the party seems to me to have been written by the same person/s who added all the links to the website of the party, and they might not be as unbiased as one would want.) --Jorunn 19:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Jorunn, Why isn't it possible, doesn't this seem to be trying to kill a fly with a cannon-type action?
==Was this an error?== (see below, comment bout bindependencia.net -)
Anyways, if not an error --as the person from Estonia commented above-- doesn't this procedure of eliminating this respected website from its own Party name seem extreme?
If an error, is it because of this:
As I was told in the alarm-notice, I had a look at the spam list and actually found a similar link to the one mentioned above -only with an initial b added to it - so: bindependencia.net Could you kindly do something not to get the above mentionned independencia.net-link mixed up with the bindependencia.net-link?
Best regards,
---WikiInWikiOut 21:10, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
This domain was spammed to dozens of Wikipedias and to articles totally unrelated to anything to do with Puerto Rico. In the case of the links I removed, where the link was in an article on the actual political party, I stripped out the "http://" but left www.independencia.net for readers to see. They won't have a live link, but they can always paste the address into their browser to visit the site. Elsewhere, I deleted the links. I think Jorunn made a good call in asking this domain be blacklisted. In terms of cross-wiki spam, it was probably one of the twenty worst to be blacklisted here so far in 2007. --A. B. (talk) 21:44, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
If one looks at the Estonian article about the party one can see that the link was in both the infobox and in a link section. I removed the link section and stripped the link in the infobox to just www.independencia.net. I did not see the need for any web adress to be mentioned twice in that short article.
The reason I nominated your link to the spam blacklist was 200+ links to independencia.net all over Wikipedia, specifically those that was added to the articles about direct democracy yesterday, like this one in the Swahili Wikipedia.
I do not know the case of the bindependencia.net spam, but if it is worse than the independencia.net case they sure have kept themselves busy. --Jorunn 00:34, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
There is no such bindependencia.net, \bindependencia\.net is the regex used to blacklist independencia.net. --Brownout(msg) 00:47, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
There seems to be somthing very fishy here, User:Brownout, don't you think?

Why has the Puerto Rican Independence Party's Wikipedia page been persistently "cleansed" of even the www.independencia.net regardless of whether the link is stripped or not? Also, have you seen the vandalism attacks this Wiki article and its fraternal pages in other languages have consistently suffered?

Have you seen that apparently they are trying to add the Puerto Rican Independence Party's website (independencia.net) to various Wiki pages so it gets "blacklisted"?

Can you please investigate this suspicious matter?

Thank you,

Gogggggle 05:25, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Why was this website blacklisted, this doesn't seem to fit the spam definition by any stretch of the imagination, isn't that so?

66.50.202.162 22:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Anyways, do you know why someone eliminated the website link from the Puerto Rican Independence Party's Wiki article if your objection is to the Puerto Rico links?

Anyways, regarding another issue, if someone added the links to the Puerto Rico Wiki (with whatever intention), isn't that completely valid. It is a government-sanctioned instrumentality and there are many other links to other Puerto Rico government instrumentalities in the English Wiki on Puerto Rico.

I really don't see this as Spam, do you? Isn't someone being unfair with that link?

BeautifulFeminine 22:33, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

I don't think anyone was being unfair. Here's some data:
Sample articles (there were 168 links just in the 57 largest Wikipedias alone, plus many more across the 200 or so smaller Wikipedias:
Sample IP accounts with their edit histories across Wikipedias:
Observations:
  1. No talk page discussion by the person adding all these links. No edit summary used. No engagement or attempts at consensus with other editors within each language community.
  2. Numerous links added across many Wikipedias in a short period of time.
  3. Link description was always in English or Spanish, not the language of the Wikipedia spammed.
  4. No other content was added besides the links themselves.
  5. No links were added to sites offering alternate viewpoints. Independencia.net does not offer alternate viewpoints.
  6. In the smaller Wikipedias, sometimes one of these links might be one of perhaps just 50 or 100 total external links in the entire encyclopedia.
  7. As with rival sites, independencia.net is a non-neutral, advocacy site. It's a very appropriate link for an article about the party itself. None of these are very "encyclopedic" for other articles. Should we add all of these links anyway? or just the links for the two big parties that usually win 95% of the vote?
  8. Rival sites (the other Puerto Rican parties):
    1. pnp.org: 5 links across all 250+ Wikipedias
    2. porpuertorico.com: 5 links across all 250+ Wikipedias
    3. ppdpr.net: 8 links across all 250+ Wikipedias
  9. Where I encountered a link in an article on the party itself, I stripped the "http://" off, disabling the link, software-wise, but still leaving it for readers to see.
  10. Wikipedia is not a linkfarm or a soapbox
--A. B. (talk) 02:25, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Dear A. B.:
I agree with BeautifulFeminine, there seems to be arguments pulled out of context in your arguments, A. B.
It strikes me that somebody who has the interest and time to explain to you why this has seemed so outrageous may go point by point to explain why your arguments don't necessarilly hold water if you scratch the veneer a little bit.
For example, you talked to her about the Socialist International page, but you forgot to put that in context, such as that the Puerto Rican Independence Party happens to be an integral part of the Socialist International, it's webpage seems to carry many articles about the Socialist International; also, the President of the Puerto Rican Independence Party happens to be the Honorary President of the Socialist International, so I would see many potential reasons for that link to be cited; it's all about context. Also, you could go to the extreme of arguing that some people added links without the ideal care for explaining the edit, etc. but that doesn't seem to have generated blacklisting in thousands of practically thousands of other countless links on Wikipedia.
Other important arguments that may be explained more thoroughly by this directly affected and/or with better understanding of this matter:
Most of the 50some Wikipedias you cite had a link to that party's website either from the Wiki about precisely that party or on the section of official websites associated to Puerto Rico, its government or its government's dependencies.
Links to other alternative points of view were apparently added just the same! Just look at the links to the Puerto Rico government site (allegedly occupied by two other parties).
You neglected to say that the Puerto Rican Independence Party seems to be --by all the inquires I performed-- the only political party with an English & Spanish language website, and the only one of the parties in Puerto Rico that are a member of the largest conglomeration of political parties in the world, that it seems to participate in international summits and meetings way above-and-beyond the other two principal parties; doesn't this seem to offer important context to the arguments you presented?
You say that the other parties obtain the 95% of the remaining vote but neglect to mention that theirt two at-larg legislators (I think Senator and Representative) are allegedly the ones who obtain by-far the most votes in all of Puerto Rico; doesn't this nuance your argument about vote percentages, even if that argument were to hold some water?
You don't mention that the Popular Democratic Party of Puerto Rico's website (Spanish-exclusive website, that is, explains on its cover that it has been offline and in construction for an extended amount of time.
You don't mention that the independence party of Puerto Rico has various articles about direct democracy and its particular understanding of democratic self-determination that could explain links to the Direct Democracy Wiki-Entry.
The same thing seems to apply to slavery and the political ramifications of hip-hop and other urban music spin-offs that the Independence party in question seems to have been related to directly or indirectly; did you check what the links in question were offering as context for what you have offered as arguments?
You talk about percent of votes but neglect to remark that an encyclopedia isn't necessarily going to establish entries at the same order of who wins what percent of elections; has this measuring stick been used against other Wiki-link additions? You neglect to say that this party is apparently BY-DEFINITION more internationally-focused and projecting towards international contacts, precisely because it is an independence party; that might put into context your remarks about the statistics you provide about other political parties in Puerto Rico.
You explain that in cases where you found a link to the party, you merely removed the http:// suffix, but from what I have been told and I myself have been able to see, various of the Puerto Rico Independence Wiki's were completely stripped of any allusion to its website, including the English-Language wiki on the PIPR party, which until yesterday was stripped of the link stemming from the same page that expounds on that party, i.e. the Wiki entry on the PIPR.
How can you say that this may not be a case of unfair selectivity and out-of-context argumentation?
I sincerely hope to hear from you and receive your input because I think this matter has adversely affected other Wiki-Entries that have lost the enriching information-filled possibilities that are offered by people searching for more information and alternative points of view! At first glance, and after a more thorough review, I agree with the gentelmen and ladies that have written to questio whether this was a mistake or a case of assuming spam when it doesn't seem to fit the extreme-extent test (of a particular website link abuse) that should be taken into account before Blacklisting.
I think that a Reconsideration is in order. Again, on the basis of what has been discussed and the product of my own investigation (and I admit I am not an expert on Puerto Rico or the PIPR), I am awaiting your pondered response because this is important to all Wiki entries and future precedents on this wonderful free-information portal that is Wikipedia and the rest of the Wikimedia portals,

SuomiHombrougui 22:55, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Reply


Maybe this sock puppet case of editors on the English Wikipedia should be taken into account too when concidering this case. --Jorunn 10:26, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Wow, I see that one of the most prolific spammers also was repeatedly warned about vandalizing the English Wikipedia. That's pretty bad and it puts a whole new complexion on this discussion:
--A. B. (talk) 16:24, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
I agree, I think some people are taking very lightly what the terms "Spam" and "Vandalizing" mean. This seems to have been stretched to try to apply these terms to cases that are really not in conformity with the severity of what those concepts signify in Wikipedia.

This case and various others should definately be reconsidered.

Gogggggle 16:32, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

For what it's worth, other than Gogggggle, none of the accounts complaining about this blacklisting have participated in any Wikimedia project in any language other than to comment here.
Gogggggle on just started editing on en.wikipedia; his edits include some unreferenced, POV changes to Puerto Rico-related articles[66][67] and the creation of three new categories:
--A. B. (talk) 16:59, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
There's a big difference between sloppyness and actual spamming or vandalizing, so why confuse them and loose credibility?~
BeautifulFeminine 15:18, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
If you add more than 200 links to your website crosswiki by mere sloppyness obviously something has to be done to stop you. --Jorunn 21:58, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Wait a minute A. B. (and Jorunn), out of the 71 or so examples of supposed SPAM related to this website (added as examples by A. B. above), a whopping 31 refer, either to Puerto Rico, or to ...guess what... the Wikipedia entry on the Puerto Rican Independence Party itself. Most of all of the rest of the links I've seen had a rational link to the subject of the respective Wiki entry.

If 31 of the above 71 cited are so clearly valid, why do you expect us to seriously consider the rest of your arguments.

Why are you jeapardizing the trustworthiness of this Blacklist by implementing trigger happy questionable calls without a consensus based decision making process? Turning the Blacklist into a forum accusable of Witch Hunting only serves to hurt Wikipedia's value, usefulness and reputation.

Please take the appropriate actions to rethink this and other questionable calls.

Yours truly,

12.45.230.3 03:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

What I want to add as a follow-up comment to A. B. and Jorunn's fiasco is that it certainly seems to be a travesty and it is unacceptable under the definition and rules established for defining spam.
Nontheless, this is --after all-- only a "Proposed Blacklist", right?
So, I say, before piling on to demonstrate how this is one of the worse examples --IF NOT THE WORST-- of all the occasional editors' "jumping-of-the-guns", we should recognize that everyone is human and can make honest mistakes as they did with this independencia.net site.
That said, this is a golden opportunity to investigate who elects persons like Jorunn and A. B., who supervises and oversees that they follow the rules on the REAL AND TRUE definition of SPAMMING (i.e., extreme, out of control, etc.), and who sees to it that they don't overstep their boundaries as they clearly did here.
It's easy to point to an obvious mistake such as the one Jorunn and A. B. commited here, but what we can learn from Jorunn and A. B.'s mistake is what we should have in mind the importance of supervising the supervisors. It is quite possible they were overeager. Also some of their arguments display some ignorance and narrow-mindendness when it comes to explaining their logic and attempts at justifying their actions. Even though that's not excusable, it happens all the time and good people should have a chance at improving at what they do. It's a tough job they have to do and anybody can make a mistake as they have done so here. So, let's criticize them when they make a mistake, but let's not lose perspective that we need to use every step of the way to build a better, more user-friendly Wikipedia that's sticks to the rules and guidelines that can continue to make this a great and fun place to learn and work in.
Let this serve as a heads-up not only to A. B. and Jorunn but to everyone else out here that it's everyone of us' responsibility to learn from mistakes to improve Wikipedia day-by-day.
It's in our hands, let's help build the Wikipedia road one brick at a time; it's up to Jorunn, A. B. and any other responsible person to correct this mistake.

KeepingEditorsHonest 04:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Spammer in en wiki

This http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/82.163.37.175 user was warned but still keep to add yours websites (check w:Telescope historic):

  • www.binoculars-uk .org.uk
  • www.uk-metal-detectors .co.uk
  • www.uk-telescopes .co.uk
  • www.go-kart .org.uk
  • www.airguns-online .co.uk
  • www.orbital-welding .org.uk

Is there a way to block these sites? Carlosguitar 00:12, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Please, do not use direct links, or this page will be locked up when they will be blacklisted. Thanks. --Brownout(msg) 01:45, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
  • Comment Since your request is concerned with only English Wikipedia, you are better to ask an Enwiki sysop to blacklist those websites locally at first? --Aphaia 21:33, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
These are a recurring problem dating back to 2005. Since the en.wikipedia hasn't decided on any rules or procedures for managing its blacklist (and most en.wikipedia admins don't yet understand blacklisting or spam), can you perhaps go ahead and list these? Here are a few more sample edit histories:
  1. en:Special:Contributions/213.218.238.88
  2. en:Special:Contributions/82.163.144.17
  3. en:Special:Contributions/82.163.34.215
  4. en:Special:Contributions/82.163.44.223
  5. en:Special:Contributions/213.218.227.44
  6. en:Special:Contributions/213.218.229.89
  7. en:Special:Contributions/62.41.132.230
  8. en:Special:Contributions/82.163.125.169
  9. en:Special:Contributions/82.163.137.245
  10. en:Special:Contributions/82.163.183.11
  11. en:Special:Contributions/82.163.189.105
  12. en:Special:Contributions/82.163.91.115
Here are 3 additional Evergreen Internet Services domains:
  • bb-gun.org.uk
  • holidaycottage4u.co.uk
  • uk-holiday-cottages.net
--A. B. (talk)
Reference:
--A. B. (talk) 05:41, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Sorry no, I am not an enwiki sysop, I cannot therefore list them. --Aphaia 06:57, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
My point was, can someone list them here in lack of consensus (or even discussion) yet on the role of local vs. global blacklisting? Thanks, --A. B. (talk) 13:07, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

library.cshl.edu, students.hsc.unt.edu, students.hsc.unt.edu, www.e.kth.se, www.psfc.mit.edu

More spam of a similar nature to those sites blocked here

Examples 1, 2, 3

The Puppeteer 03:03, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply


julebyen.com

Cross-wiki spam:

--Jorunn 08:31, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done --Aphaia 17:01, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

apocalyptism.ru

Cross-wiki spam

197 links in the 57 largest Wikipedias

IP's adding the links:

Sample edits:

--Jorunn 16:29, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done--Aphaia 16:59, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

dolmen.es.iespana.es

Cross-wiki spam

AntiSpam Search: 39 links

IP's involved:

Sample edits:

--Jorunn 23:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done --Aphaia 16:58, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Turkish forum/chat sites

Widely and persistently spammed despite warnings and requests:

  • ahsap.gen.tr
  • burunestetigi.biz
  • burunestetik.com.tr
  • esiteekle.com
  • estetik.name
  • estetikameliyat.org
  • estetikcerrahi.biz
  • estetikforum.net
  • fixarkadas.com
  • gogusestetigi.com
  • iyi-sohbet.com
  • iyimirc.com
  • iyisohbet.gen.tr
  • KralSiteler.Com
  • psclinic.biz
  • Sohbete.net
  • Sohbetli.net
  • teomandogan.com
  • trcafe.com

See en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#vandalspam - more Turkish forum/chat stuff (Permanent link) --A. B. (talk) 19:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

formatted for the list:
\bburunestetik\.com\.tr\b
\bestetikforum\.net\b
\bestetikameliyat\.org\b
\bestetik\.name\b
\bestetikcerrahi\.biz\b
\bgogusestetigi\.com\b
\bburunestetigi\.biz\b
\bpsclinic\.biz\b
\bteomandogan\.com\b
\bkralsiteler\.Com\b
\besiteekle\.com\b
\bahsap\.gen\.tr\b
\bfixarkadas\.com\b
\biyimirc\.com\b
\biyisohbet\.gen\.tr\b
\bsohbetli\.net\b
\biyi-sohbet\.com\b
\bsohbete\.net\b
\btrcafe\.com\b

--Versageek 11:40, 22 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done --Aphaia 16:58, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

nedcruise.info

Persistently spammed on nl.wikipedia and en.wikipedia:

References:

--A. B. (talk) 21:51, 21 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

  1. I don't know how to get someone blocked on other Wikipedias. Can you please block nl:Gebruiker:Haco? I note that he continued spamming nl.wikipedia after being warned and blocked on en.wikipedia[68]
  2. On en.wikipedia, admins seldom block an IP or an IP range for more than a few weeks. In this case, an en.wikipedia admin actually blocked the IP for 6 months.
  3. In my experience, someone this persistent will simply reset their modem and/or get a new user name.
Nevertheless, it's your call as an admin and I'll support however you want to handle this. Thanks, --A. B. (talk) 17:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Among us, there are several meta-nlwiki admins including Andre Engels. They will handle this user better than me inactive there. Also, I noticed your request were a bit old, the situation may vary since then. If they think global blacklisting is better regarding the uptodate situation, I'll be easily persuaded. --Aphaia 17:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

bossanovamusic.net

Cross-wiki spam

antiSpam Search

IP involved:

Sample edits:

--Jorunn 23:41, 21 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done --Aphaia 16:57, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

au-feminin.blogspot.com (& au-masculin.blogspot.com)

Cross-wiki spam

Some IP's involved:

Sample edits:

--Jorunn 00:31, 22 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done --Aphaia 16:57, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

millionnairedeluxe.com

Cross-wiki spam

AntiSpam search

IPs involved:

Sample edits:

--Jorunn 01:00, 22 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done --Aphaia 16:56, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

cavalierhealth.org

Cross-wiki spam

IPs involved:


Sample edits:

--Jorunn 09:06, 22 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done --Aphaia 16:56, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

praguedailyphoto.blogspot.com

Cross-wiki spam

IP involved:

Sample edits:

--Jorunn 11:48, 22 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I noticed on pms that he did insert the official prague site, too. Maybe this part should be left in place :) I understand they use it to mimetize spam, but why not to use those things that can be saved? :) --Bèrto 'd Sèra 13:54, 22 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

elrelojdesol.com

Please delete in Spam blacklist (duplicate): 

\belrelojdesol\.com\/classical-music-online\/wolfgang-amadeus-mozart
\belrelojdesol\.com\/classical-music-online

and add 

\belrelojdesol\.com

This domain is hosting similar pages to those already blocked, and not only in those "directories/folders". Take a look at that domain and see the pages. We can see other links not blocked in es.wikipedia, en.wikipedia, fr.wikipedia, de.wikipedia, pl.wikipedia and many others. More info about previous accepted proposals in Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2007/03#elrelojdesol.com and Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2007/04 (section 1.14 in "Additions: Done"). Mosca 16:56, 24 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Partly Done - duplications still remain. --Aphaia 16:52, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

sportsinjuryclinic.net spam

Domains:

  • sportsinjuryclinic.net
  • physioroom.com

Ed histories:

Reference:

--A. B. (talk) 19:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

truthroom.com spam

References:

Edit histories:

Domain:

  • truthroom.com

--A. B. (talk) 03:05, 25 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Caique spam

Edit histories:

Domains:

  • caiquecrazy.us.tt
  • caiquecrazy.spreebb.com

OTRS tickets:

~Kylu (u|t) 04:16, 25 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

bowtrol.org.ua and others

Domains:

  • bowtrol.org.ua
  • bowtrolcoloncleanse.org.ua
  • buyhghproduct.org.ua
  • chronicpainrelief.org.ua
  • egipt.org.ua
  • hairrestoration.org.ua
  • melatrol.org.ua
  • nitka.org.ua
  • quitsmoking.org.ua
  • thyrominethyroid.org.ua

Edit histories:

Reference:

--A. B. (talk) 12:09, 25 July 2007 (UTC)Reply


askyourdronline.com

Domains:

  • askyourdronline.com

Edit histories:

and many more - multiple one-time new accounts, continually being created. Long term.

Reference:

-- Proto 14:04, 25 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

iPhone and iPod software linkspam

Domains:

  • dvdtoiphoneconverter.net
  • dvd-ipod.biz
  • dvdtozuneconverter.net
  • dvdvideoconverter.com
  • soft29.com

Edit histories:

References:

--A. B. (talk) 02:55, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

totaltf2.com

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Team_Fortress_2 is beginning to get the "up and coming" links, but these guys keep adding it via an IP (no account) including 72.189.208.139 and 87.74.128.86 and will not use talk to justify. Otherwise, there will be 1000 "fan websites" all that have "just as much right as the other links". 3rd strike for these guys. Pharmboy 13:38, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Now it seems a new puppet, [[69]] is doing the same. Three Four times adding without a summary after being asked. Person is very determined to get his link. I have added notes in his talk as well, just keeps adding link, no summary that justifies. Appears not interested in policy. Total of 7 relists at this time with no summary or response at talk. Pharmboy 00:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

I am completely sorry for spamming this site. I have not been trying to spam you, just include our site in the list of communities? I registered but have been unable to email you as your link is turned off and have been unable to work out how to explain what has been going on. As you can tell I'm really new to wikis..?!!?

I have removed our link myself now I can see that its an admin removing the link. Someone on my site was saying this happens by competeing websites so I presumed that was what was happening.

On one occassion I left my email address on the link in the hope someone would contact me.

Anyway, I see now that I've got 3 strikes without even knowing it :(

Hoping you will reconsider, my appologies. I will leave it upto you to include our link. I hope very much you do. We're a non-profit making fansite with probably the most TF2 and a great community.

Sorry again

CK

The problem is that EVERY site like your wants to be linked on Wikipedia, and there are policies as to what sites are or are not "link worthy". It isn't about how cool your site is, or about your worth, it is about an objective standard. It is about what is recognized by others, over time, and new sites just don't fit that bill. Actually, there have been 7 times someone has posted against a request to talk. I don't use email on Wikipedia because that is the reason that the TALK exists. I don't need private messages, all debates about a site should happen in plain site, open to all. I kept leaving you messages, in your talk, their talk, in the summary of the edit, but you refused to talk or learn the policy. Since I don't see the site being link worthy soon, I would maintain that the potential for abuse exists and would maintain my position in the matter. Pharmboy 23:00, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Like I said it was my mistake. I appologise.

Some of use arent so up on the wiki law and I still have no idea how to "talk" via wiki, which I know is my bad.  :( As far as the links go we have the most uptodate info anywhere esp. compared to whats already linked so maybe you will reconsider in the future. I was re-adding as I thought it was being removed by another website admin. I had not noticed any warnings and had registered a few days ago here to try to sort this. It was completely my bad wiki skills that got me in this mess. I have also had some of my webby users add the website as they think its the "only" real all-in-one TF2 resource about. I really hope it'll appear sometime, I really didnt try to spam your site on purpose. Perhaps as totaltf2.com grows and becomes the main TF2 hang-out it'll get reconsidered.

Sorry for any hassle I caused and all the best.

CK

Still people trying to add this new site and I can only see solution as banning. Pharmboy 00:09, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Pharmboy, I have asked in my forums that NO ONE tries to add this site as we've been banned. This is not my actions. I really feel that this is a harsh action against my site especially as one of the sites listed has such out of date info. No other site has the detail we have on our site about TF2.

I am no longer adding my site here and I really dont see why the site needs banning. Sure dont list the site but dont stick me on the blacklist. I cant stop ppl adding the site. I'm sure you can see the submitting IP's and will be able to tell it is not me adding the site now I know you dont want it linked.

I hope you can appreciate when you put hundreds of hours into coding and collating the latestest info on a game, then your users think you should be wiki-listed and are adding it themselves, it can be quite frustrating to be threatened with being banned. I think this is really harsh action against the best TF2 info site and I'd apprciate an alternative wiki admin to review this problem.

Thanks

CK —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.74.128.48 (talk • contribs) 09:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Single purpose accounts adding this link just in the last week:
--A. B. (talk) 13:40, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I can confirm the 87. IP range is myself including the totaltf2 name I registered here to try and get in contact with an admin. The 74. ip address and the kamulako account are unknown to me.

Like I said im not going to touch this wiki page again... its really frustrated me that my site is being classed as spam when its the best TF2 community going.

CK out...

I just removed it again, and the fact remains that it is a new, unknown site, and a variety of individuals are continuously adding in a way that is spam. The case for delete is just as strong, as it is obvious that someone (you or whoever) will continually be adding this link that doesn't belong. I lose count of how many times it has been added and removed and EACH time a reason is given for removal, and EACH time there is no legitimate summary and all the owners/fans/whoever are showing a complete disregard for policy. That total strangers with no vested interest are just contiuously monitoring and re-adding for no reason doesn't make sense to me. Pharmboy 15:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
  • Comment Since the alleged owner can't stop people from adding it, and understands that it doesn't belong here because it is a new site, and giving him the benefit of the doubt under Wikipedia:Good Faith, then the only logical conclusion is to finally ban the site. Banning it won't hurt the site as it isn't a legitimate link for any article (per the owner saying he is not adding the site here anymore above.) Continuing to allow it causing a series of edits back and forth, sometimes a few times in a day, and is disruptive. Lets please just be done with it. Pharmboy 15:41, 31 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

I have continued to ask my users in the forums to NOT add the site. Perhaps its being added because its the only uptodate fansite on the game. TFportal.de is listed yet has false and almost laughable information. I appreciate we are fairly new but has anyone actually compared these sites. The majority of TFportal.de is NOT TF2 related and yet ours is. Perhaps another TF2 site admin is adding the site daily to get me banned or perhaps its just being added by users because it should be listed on the wiki. It is completely out of my control and yet I get penalised by being banned.

Does this mean the site will not get added in the future?

Thanks

CK

PLEASE sign your posts correctly, with four ~ marks in a row instead of "CK out..." and such. It will autoadd you name/date, etc. You can read about signing posts and format stuff at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_edit_a_page.
Final Comment Calling other linked websites "laughable" is an opinion, and demonstrates part of the problem. The purpose of the submission is to determine if the website is being improperly added in a disruptive way, which it clearly is and the history demonstrates this. I'm not going to argue about which site is better or worse, as I don't care and it is not relevant.
I think we are beating this horse to death: You blame others, you say you aren't adding it, you more or less admit the site is too new to be notable within the community yet, but you say it is punishing you somehow if the system blocks others from adding it to prevent edit wars. Your continuing edits show distain for other websites and indicate that you will continue, and I'm not going to enter a pissing match. The history speaks for itself. It is in the admins hands now. Pharmboy 21:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

The only admin who has commented so far is Pharmboy.?!

I have no idea with the etiquettes of wiki-rules which I have applogised for from the start of this. I am not a Wiki user.

If ppl want to add my site then I have no control over it. PLEASE continue to check the IP's to see its not me. I'm UK based.

I am not adding the site to wiki.

Will this site appear on the wiki eventually when it becomes obvious this is the main TF2 community?

CK

"I don't care and it is not relevant" - I thought the whole idea of wiki's was to list correct information. I think this IS the problem. I have asked if this site can be submitted in the future yet still no answer. Where can I submit a complaint about this redicoulous decision?

84.9.146.190 09:25, 1 August 2007 (UTC)totaltf2Reply

CityWeb.gr spam

Domains:

  • hotelsinweb.com
  • cityweb.gr
  • yahotels.gr
  • heraklio.gr
  • mykonosweb.gr
  • astipalea.gr
  • delmar.gr
  • kithnos.gr
  • alexandros-skopelos.gr
  • yahotels.net
  • yahotels.eu
  • stripshowclubs.com
  • nissiros.gr
  • findhotels.gr
  • travelsites.gr

Edit histories:

References:

--A. B. (talk) 16:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Also:
  • Another domain:
    • kardamilivillas.com
--A. B. (talk) 22:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Still spamming.[70][71] --A. B. (talk) 13:24, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done with addition. --Aphaia 16:51, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

More Universe Daily (Wayne Smith) spam

Here are some more from our favorite spammer/vandal at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Long_term_abuse/Universe_Daily:

  • myspace.com/universedaily
  • ericapacker.com

Thanks in advance, Antandrus 04:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Reply


Polish city spam

  • wroclaw-online.eu
  • warsaw-online.eu
  • poznan-online.net
  • cracowonline.com
  • gdansk-online.eu
  • zakopane-online.eu
  • allkrakowhotels.com
  • krakaddict.com
  • torunonline.com
  • hotelewkrakowie.pl
  • krakowlife.pl
  • hotelewtoruniu.pl
  • hotele-warszawa.eu
  • noclegi-wroclaw.pl
  • hotelewgdansku.eu
  • zakopane-noclegi.eu

Egregious cross-wiki link spam. See en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam/2007 Archive Jul#Polish city spam. Spammers were 83.238.123.3, 213.134.160.234 and 213.134.160.229. 124.178.147.52 04:21, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Still spamming.[72] --A. B. (talk) 13:18, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

webtv-club.com tv-cb.com

Domains:

  • beelinetv.com
  • wwitv.com
  • webtv-club.com
  • tv-cb.com

Edit histories (partial list):

Reference:

--A. B. (talk) 20:35, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

sova-center,ru

Please add sova-center.ru to spam black list. It is being readded after removal attempts from several articles [73],[74],[75]. Also, that site is advocating racial hatred towards Russian people and is offensive. The leaders of that center have been indicted by Russian authorities for covering up ethnic mafia's gang members.--Ram2006 14:50, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

thai-sexygirls.blogspot.com and their friends

Cross-wiki spam:


Spammed domains:

  • alexandre-pato-fanclub.blogspot.com
  • cristianoronaldoworld.com
  • fernando-torres-fan.info
  • francesc-fabregas.net
  • japan-sexygirls.blogspot.com
  • sergio-aguero.blogspot.com
  • thai-sexygirls.blogspot.com
  • wallpaper-football.com

References:

--A. B. (talk) 01:43, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Fiorano Software spam

This has been an ongoing PR effort on Wikipedia for over 18 months involving both spam links and spam articles.

Domain:

  • fiorano.com

Accounts:

Links also appear on German, French and Chinese Wikipedias.

Spam articles created as blatant advertising and deleted by Wikipedia administrators:

(Note how spammer overlooked commas when cut-and-pasting articles.)

Reference:

--A. B. (talk) 15:01, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

yourglobaltv.com

Cross-wiki spam. I've removed links from 6 wikis, mainly from HBO and MTV pages: [76], [77], [78], [79], [80], [81]. Please, add to the spam blacklist. --Priortheir 16:37, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

www.myperpignan.com and www.perpignanfr.com

Various IP addresses constantly adding back the link to these sites. Look at en:Perpignan history to have an idea.

IP involved:

and many others.

Vincent Lextrait 16:38, 1 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

*.bypainters.com and *.jeditoo.com

Numerous additions of links to these two web sites on various articles. They have all been reverted on the English and French pages at the time of writing. They have invaded several other Wikipedias. The second one, identified as spam was later renamed into bypainters to avoid detection. Vincent Lextrait 16:38, 1 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

*.reisbegeleider.com

Matches found through the linksearch-tool from eagle: en (32), fr (2), pl (1), nl (1), it (1), pt (3), sv (2), es (9), ru (1), fi (2), no (1), eo (1), cs (2), tr (1), da (2), ro (2). De.Wikipedia results are missing because I removed the before looking for other WPs. -- 86.56.176.252 19:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

IP's involved:
81.71.82.82
81.71.82.54 --Jorunn 22:31, 1 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Proposed removals

Latest comment: 16 years ago26 comments15 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.

Site under Title: Brass India

If you look at sites listed there then you will find all site belongs to one city and different vendor. List provided here is with malicious intention by some competitors only. Request for removal of

  1. Brass India

aksharmetal\.com
appleeou\.com
appleinternational\.com
appleinternationalenggworks\.com
appleinternational\.co\.in
appleinternational\.in
appleworldwide\.com
autobrassonline\.com
brassbuildinghardware\.com
brasscableglands\.com
brasselectrical\.com
brasselectricalaccessories\.com
brasselectricalcomponents\.com
brassfastenersindia\.com
brass-fasteners\.com
brass-fasteners-india\.com
brassfittingcomponents\.com
brassinsertsbrassnutsbrassbolts\.com
brass-inserts-fasteners-india\.com
brassneutrallinks\.com
brassnuts-brassbolts\.com
brasspartsindia\.com
brassparts\.ind\.in
brassprecisionparts\.com
brass-screws-bolts-nuts\.com
brassterminalconnectors\.com
brassturnedcomponents\.com
cableglands-india\.com
cable-glands-asia\.com
cableglandsworldwide\.com
hindustanimpex\.com
jamnagaronline\.com
rathodind\.com
sahajanandbrass\.com skynetindia\.info
siliconbronzefasteners\.com
shivombrass\.com
webnettechindia\.com
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yogeshsoni (talk) 17:34, 30 July 2007


Do you have any evidence to support this? Also, what connection, if any, do these sites have to Trafficpullz(permanent link)?
I don't have time to track this down (I'm traveling), but I set up a page of spam link tools for these domains at a user subpage at en:User:A. B./Sandbox14 (permanent link) others can use to check these out. In particular the "domain tools" links may be useful. From a 30-second spotcheck, it seems like some of these domains share similar Metadata tags. --A. B. (talk) 18:29, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Are there any specific articles that would benefit from linking to these pages? (whose design is well-suited to improve search engine rankings, by the way...) Regardless of who spammed these sites, the purpose of the blacklist is to protect Wikipedia from further spam, not to provide a "fair" battleground for you and your competitors.
The links were blacklisted because of the spamming from en:Special:Contributions/122.169.30.47, en:Special:Contributions/202.159.233.33, en:User:Brasskingofindia and en:User:Applebrass (userpage spam deleted). Which appears to be in continuation of this case http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist/Archives/2006/12#Conex_India_linkfarms with lots of socks, and with lots of brass/jewelry/jamnagar-related domain names after the same pattern as these ones. Femto 16:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
I appreciate this topic being reopened. I checked domain ownership using various tools and determined that where ownership was published, many of these domains seemed to be closely related to Conex:
  • animations-games-india.com
  • brascomponents.com
  • brasparts.com
  • brass-components-india.com
  • brass-copper-castings.com
  • brass-fastener-india.com
  • brass-fittings-india.com
  • brass-inserts.com
  • brass-nuts-screws-fasteners.com
  • brass-parts-india.com
  • brassfast.com
  • brassfittingsindia.com
  • bronze-castings-fittings.com
  • cableaccs.com
  • cableglandsindia.com
  • conexindia.com
  • conexmetals.com
  • conextechno.com
  • diamond-earrings-india.com
  • diamond-jewellery-india.com
  • diamond-pendants-india.com
  • diamond-ring-diamond-rings.com
  • diamond-ring-rings.tripod.com
  • diamond-rings-india.com
  • elecaccs.com
  • electrical-brass-components.com
  • electricalbrass.f2s.com
  • engagement-rings-india.com
  • fittingsindia.com
  • jambrass.com
  • jamnagar-brass-parts.com
  • myjewelz.com
  • pipefitindia.com
  • primemumbai.com
  • screwfastindia.com
  • stainlesssteel-fittings.com
  • stanlesssteel-fittings.com


I also investigated the widespread spamming of these Conex-related links by multiple accounts:


In the process, I found these additional Conex-related domains that have not yet been blacklisted:
  • 1fasteners.com
  • auricjewels.com
  • brass-components-copper-terminals-cable-lugs.netfirms.com
  • brass-copper-parts.com
  • brass-fittings-brass-fittings.netfirms.com
  • brass-fittings.co.uk
  • brass-hinges-fittings.netfirms.com
  • brass-nuts-bolts-screws.com
  • brass-pipe-fittings.com
  • brass-products-jamnagar.com
  • diamond-jewelry-india.com
  • hose-fittings-hose-fittings.netfirms.com
  • hosefittingsbrassstainlesssteelhosefittings.undonet.com
  • india-brass-components.com
  • mycomponents.co.uk
  • stainless-steel-fittings-ss-fittings.netfirms.com
  • stainless-steel-fittings-stainless-steel-fittings.netfirms.com
  • stainless-steel-fittings.netfirms.com
I will list these in the "proposed additions" section above.


The contested links do not appear to be related to Conex:
  • aksharmetal.com
  • appleeou.com
  • appleinternational.com
  • appleinternationalenggworks.com
  • appleinternational.co.in
  • appleinternational.in
  • appleworldwide.com
  • autobrassonline.com
  • brassbuildinghardware.com
  • brasscableglands.com
  • brasselectrical.com
  • brasselectricalaccessories.com
  • brasselectricalcomponents.com
  • brassfastenersindia.com
  • brass-fasteners.com
  • brass-fasteners-india.com
  • brassfittingcomponents.com
  • brassinsertsbrassnutsbrassbolts.com
  • brass-inserts-fasteners-india.com
  • brassneutrallinks.com
  • brassnuts-brassbolts.com
  • brasspartsindia.com
  • brassparts.ind.in
  • brassprecisionparts.com
  • brass-screws-bolts-nuts.com
  • brassterminalconnectors.com
  • brassturnedcomponents.com
  • cableglands-india.com
  • cable-glands-asia.com
  • cableglandsworldwide.com
  • hindustanimpex.com
  • jamnagaronline.com
  • rathodind.com
  • sahajanandbrass.com
  • skynetindia.info
  • siliconbronzefasteners.com
  • shivombrass.com
  • webnettechindia.com
These links, however, were spammed by other accounts as noted above by Femto; also by 221.135.135.22. I don't see any reason any of them should be added to any Wikipedia pages.


References:
--A. B. (talk) 19:02, 4 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Suite101.com

This website has many useful articles worth citing. Unfortunately its on the blacklist and I've seen many articles written in wikipedia using the articles published in this site from suite101. The reason being there is no mention of where the source came from is because this site is blocked. Just look at the Cambodian Cuisine page first paragraph and compare it to some of the lines in Cambodian Cuisine article in suite101 and you will see some relevancy.


www.belarussolidaritycampaign.co.uk

blocked for "not having any content", when it clearly does. This is abuse by an administrator. From the alexander Lukashenko article. It is certainly relevant and objective.

It's on the local blacklist of the English Wikipedia, not on the central blacklist, so you'll have to make your request on en:MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#Proposed_removals rather than here. - Andre Engels 01:37, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

judicial-inc.biz/MiscPics.htm

I don't see why this should be blocked. The wiki article its only one sided and the above link gives a different angle to the issue.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Frank [82]

ultra-star.dl.am

I have seen, that on the german SingStar-Thread, the URL of ultra-star.dl.am is blocked. WHY? http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/SingStar For all non-german-speaking people: There is a fanproject called UltraStar. This is a SingStar Clone and has a huge fan-base. The problem is, that it isn't soooo easy as SingStar. So there has to be some help for newbies. ultra-star.dl.am is the biggest and most competent Tech-Help Forum for UltraStar in GERMAN (It has ca 75% of all UltraStar-Users in it). So I think it has absolutely it's right to be in the URL-List. Sure there is some advertising power in having this link there. But that is NOT the reason why I have put it there. It is absolutely important to get a good community and tech-help for UltraStar. And ultra-star.dl.am is the best with that (in Germany). So please Unblock the site and add the Link again.. THX!

If you want to link to this url, you can link to http://ultra-star.newsit.es/ instead. - Andre Engels 01:37, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Reply


myfendi.com

There were 3 or 4 links included by the usual socks (the 110 more deep crosswiki spam domains case), but the domain apparently changed owners since then. It's currently registered to the 'real' Fendi corporation and a simple redirect to fendi.com. No longer an immediate spam danger. Femto 15:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

  • Plausible. Can you show any evidence of the change of owner in the domain registries? I agree it looks legit now, I just want to be sure we're not being had. Thanks, JzG 21:22, 29 June 2007 (UTC)Reply
    • Current whois lists Adele Fendi, 00189 Roma, Italy, same physical location of the en:Fendi company. (The earlier spamsites are all registered to someone called Lim, based around New York, Philadelphia, and the Philippines) Femto 16:29, 31 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

refspace.com

Why is this blacklisted? It is used in en:Linus Torvalds.--205.205.248.91 12:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

It looks like the domain was blacklisted due to this request: http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Spam_blacklist&oldid=556445#refspace.com . Cheers, Tangotango 12:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

asociacionjacob52.com

Hi, I repaired my failure. There's only one link left, one I didn't put. Please remove it so I can put the link in es:Jacob 52, the page of the association.Gons 02:51, 25 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

www.isbn-check.de

No reason for blacklisting, but a helpful ressource. Purodha Blissenbach 13:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

fisheaters.com/emberdays.html

I am trying to add the above URL to the Wiki entry "Ember Days" but am told that the site triggers the spam filter. This can't be right. Could this be remedied? Thank you. 66.235.22.204 20:12, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

zmesh.com

this site has no links on wikipedia and is not a spam site consider removing please. Thanks

bizorigin.com

Please unlist. This is a business blog that I would like to use as a reference in an article. Not sure why it is listed.

  • Not done now. Since the appeal is unsigned, the legitimacy of this appeal cannot be proved. Also the blog is not considered a legitimate source in the project in many cases. The interested users can however submit their appeal in any time. --Aphaia 08:51, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

superjoe.hopto.org

Not all *.hopto.org websites are bad. This one is my website and occasionally I want to add a reference in a wiki article to a page on my site. 68.167.224.139 21:48, 21 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

  • Not done personal website is anyway not recognized a good source which you can include into an article. Also you can ask your local sysop to whitelist the website. --Aphaia 17:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Can't Find Blacklink

The spam protection will not let me make an edit to the talk page of the article w:Charles Enderlin. My username on English Wikipedia is w:user:Oneworld25. 69.251.13.239 17:59, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

languedoc-france.info

I'd like to edit this page, but can't do so because of the blacklist. The link seems to be ok on first sight, so could you please remove it from the list (also see above]. Thank you. --132.195.10.109 10:47, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

If you remove the blacklisted link from the article the page can be edited. --Jorunn 11:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

tutorialspoint.com

I'm a webmaster of tutorialspoint.com. My site is purely related to free education and training. I have put very good computer tutorials online by putting my lot of effort. But due to some wrong elements this site had been put in blacklist. So my humble request is to remove this site from blacklist for the benefit of computer professionals specially for beginners.

Thank you very much for understanding.

Tutorialspoint, Webmaster

  • Not done crosswiki spammed website, harmed non English wikis in particular. See also Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2007/04/Removals: Not Done. You could ask a particular wiki sysop to whitelist your website, but it is solely on their discretion based on their community consensus. --Aphaia 16:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC

Hi Aphaia!

Could you give me a clue how to apply to a particular wiki sysop ??

Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tutorialspoint (talk • contribs) 13:46, 31 Jul 2007 (UTC)

plasmatics.com

I'm working on the Plasmatics article, and I need to list the official web site for refrences. For some reason, it's blacklisted. (69.249.228.69 03:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC))Reply

Troubleshooting and problems

Latest comment: 16 years ago33 comments19 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).

Strange black listing

Anything starting with h t t p : / / w w w . s (remove spaces between letters) seems to be causing problems - every website starting with s is getting blocked! -- enochlau (talk) 14:14, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Also, anything starting with h t t p : / / s (remove spaces between letters) too. I can't even add a link to sporting news, a major sports magazine in the U.S. Royalbroil 14:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
I'm getting that too, on Robert Byrd and Huntington, West Virginia on en.wikipedia. Youngamerican 14:24, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

I can confirm this. It left me with no choice but to edit someone elses post on an AfD in order to leave my own comment. (See diff) —81.86.64.69 14:27, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

I can also confirm this on en:Comparison of layout engines (HTML5) this is a very serious problem that needs to be fixed immediately -- Gudeldar 14:30, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Update -- it appears that the problem has gone away, at least on the page I mentioned -- Gudeldar 14:31, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes, looked fixed. enochlau (talk) 14:36, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

It works now for me too. Thanks for fixing it! Royalbroil 14:57, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

700 URL redirection links to clean up

As a matter of policy, domains such as tinyurl.com are routinely blacklisted since they not only can be used innocently as URL shorteners but also as a means of bypassing our spam blacklist. I keep the en:URL redirection article on my watchlist since someone adds another site to the external links section every week or two that I list for blacklisting. These additions are not necessarily spam -- some folks post them just to be helpful.

Today we had an editor add several links that, when linksearched across 57 Wikipedias, present major cleanup challenges:[83]
1. http://fd.tc

  • no links

2. freedomain.co.nr

  • 610 links

3. surl.co.uk:

  • no links

Mindless blacklisting will create chaos across hundreds of gridlocked articles so the links need to be cleaned up for each domain before blacklisting. Mindless link deletion in turn will delete many useful links and references since most probably were added in good faith by editors using these domains for short URLs. The right thing to do is to find and substitute the actual site link for the redirect URL.

As each domain is cleaned up, I suggest listing it in the Proposed additions section above. --A. B. (talk) 23:40, 8 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedias with .co.nr links to be removed

Wikipedias with .co.nr links to be removed:

Links remaining in the 57 largest wikipedias: about 730
(That includes about 290 outside mainspace).
Last updated: --A. B. (talk) 16:10, 13 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

co.nr links removed from mainspace on these Wikipedias

co.nr links removed from mainspace on these Wikipedias:

I have also deleted all co.nr links on the 200 smallest Wikipedias (those not listed above) Last updated: --A. B. (talk) 16:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

cais-soas.com

This discussion moved to here, please continue discussion there. --Versageek 21:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

No idea what the 'Red' link was about, it wasn't something I wrote & it made no sense so I've removed it. The discussion I had linked above has since been archived to here. It says basically what Andre summarizes below. --Versageek 07:53, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
What? I don't understand 1) what you mean and 2) Why that site is blocked ... Flammifer 07:22, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
I don't understand (1) either, but I can help you regarding (2): The site was used much as a source by one person, who might have been the site owner, but was found to be very rich in copyright violations and a bit of fringe material. It was therefore declared unusable as a source. In most cases, links to cais-soas.com should be replaced by links to http://www.iranica.com. If you specify the exact page you want to link to, we could make a search for a better link instead or ask a page-specific whitelisting. - Andre Engels 07:41, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
OK, thanks for the info; I wanted to put www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Architecture/ayvan_e_khosrow.htm in the external links for the Taq-i Kishra article], because it has loads of information. Since that page is indeed taken from the encyclopedia iranica, what should I do? Not use it a sa source? Directly reference Iranica? I found Iranica's version of the page, but it uses a weird character encoding system (fonts instead of unicode, it seems?), and has no pictures ... Flammifer 08:24, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Hmmm... That's a problem, yes. - Andre Engels 08:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
If the "site was used much as a source by one person.." why is it blacklisted here and not in the specific project? --DaB. 21:25, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

workforall

I understand why this site was blacklisted and am not requesting to have it lifted as this link was littered throughout Wikipedia. However, I do actually have a legit use for it as a reference but can not add it. I was trying to undo this change. Morphh 19:08, 13 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Please request local whitelisting of that specific page of that site. Thanks. —— Eagle101 Need help? 21:41, 13 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Anonymous IP claims Workforall think tank repudiates workforall.net domain and spamming

See this note posted on en:user:BozMo's talk page:

Public workforall.net registration record:

owner-contact: P-MJG120
owner-organization: P. Vreymans
owner-fname: MFPH
owner-lname: Geurts
owner-city: Wingene
owner-zip: 8750
owner-country: BE

Public workforall.org registration record:

Registrant Name:Eric Verhulst
Registrant Organization:Lancelot research nv
Registrant City:Leuven
Registrant Postal Code:be-b3010
Registrant Country:BE

--A. B. (talk) 17:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Also see this disclaimer posted on workforall.org:
WorkForAll as an independent thinktank maintains the website www.workforall.org
WorkForAll.org has nothing to do with workforall.net...
--A. B. (talk) 22:38, 22 May 2007 (UTC)Reply


cais - wrong spam alert

Hi, I'm mainly working in the German wikipedia in the field of Iranian Culture. Whenever I come across sites with a link to a very honorable and internationally acknowledged Centre of Ancient Iranian Studies, namely www.cais-soas.com, the Circle of Ancient Iranian Studies, I get a spam-blacklist alarm - and thus am not able to save my changes (e.g. the article on Bishapur or Gundishapur in the German Wikipedia). As I was told in the alarm-notice, I had a look at the spam list and actually found a similar link to the one mentioned above - only with an initial b added to it - so: www.bcais-soas.com. Could you kindly do something not to get the above mentionned cais-link mixed up with the bcais-link. Hope, it's not too confusing ;o) ... with kind regards J Safa 19:10, 30 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

010897078278572180631

It seems this filter doesn't work [84]. Only works for domains. For example (note: last number changed):

Spammer uses links similar to the last one ([85] [86] and others). Can't be blocked? Mor information at Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2007/05/Additions: Done#010897078278572180631. Mosca 07:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

overflow: <space> auto; <space> height:

Please ignore the <space> tags, I had to put them in to get past the filter. I don't know why this particular string has been blacklisted, as I've never seen it used in a spam attack. This string (as part of a <span> tag) is quite legitimate on any User page and I use it to great effect on mine. Unfortunately I keep having to change this string in order to fool the filter so that I can save my User page. It is also preventing me from editing my Talk page as a whole as previous discussions mentioning this string are blocked by the filter.

—gorgan_almighty (on wikipedia), 81.86.64.69 10:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
I've had this problem, too. It's something in $wspamregex (or whatever it's called). The string is blacklisted because spam IPs apparently use it. I would suggest that you simply use the overflow items in a different order.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 08:36, 7 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Problems with News Link URLs Showing Invalid in Wiki

Hi, I am working on a page involving a current news event. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_homestead_exemption When I use actual URLs, they work fine, until I do a preview of the page and attempt to test the URL. At that point, I am given a failure on most of the news URLs. When I change the news links to tinyurls, which I did not know was not allowed until I finally did a "save page," I discovered that the tinyurls allowed the news links to be accessed successfully through Wiki.

I can write the section without any citations, but I have 14 citations. All but one URL site requires tinyurl to work. Many of the External Links I added also would not connect to the News sites (online newspapers, etc.) without tinyurl. Should I write it without citations, or how would you like me to proceed? Should I request local whitelisting of that specific page? Thank you.72.40.99.152 11:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

tinyurls have been abused in the past as a means of bypassing the blacklist, so that's why all URL shortener/redirect sites of that sort are blacklisted as we find them. If you go to the tinyurl address you're interested in, you should be able to determine the "real" web address for that site. Just use that "real" address instead of the tinyurl link. --A. B. (talk) 13:17, 5 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hello, and thank you.

Last night, the page worked fine with tinyurls, but would not work with regular URLs.

I was the one who created the tinyurls from the original URLs, because the original URLs were not responding properly once they were entered into the wiki page.

I have put up the new section "Controversy - Proposed Constitutional Amendment Would Phase Out Save Our Homes Florida" using original URLs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_exemption_in_Florida#Controversy_-_Proposed_Constitutional_Amendment_Would_Phase_Out_Save_Our_Homes_Florida

Currently, the original URLs are working properly. Last night this was not the case. If I have any more problems with original URLs returning 404s -- and tinyurls working properly as substitutes in preview mode -- I will let you know. 72.40.99.152 [on wikipedia] 72.40.99.152 [on meta.wikimedia.org] 22:00, 5 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

avoiding blacklist through section editing

An editor at the new English Wikipedia blacklist states that they can get around the blacklist by section editing, which is apparently not checked. Can anyone confirm this and, if correct, take whatever steps are needed to rectify the loophole? Thanks, BanyanTree 09:29, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Viartis.net

This site has been blacklisted before on two occasions. The site is the brainchild and plaything of Keith Bridgeman, a British man who claims to be the world's expert on Parkinson's disease. He initially edited enwiki as en:User:General Tojo, but was blocked for personal attacks, pushing his own theories without discussion, and spamming URLs to his website. He has taken to using innumerable sockpuppets to achieve the same goals, as well as reverting all the recent edits of any editor who dares to challenge him. Needless to say, he remains under a community ban. en:WP:TOJO is a summary of his malversations.

User:XX7 has made representations in the past that the link is bona fide. It is not. I should point out that en:User:XX7 is blocked on enwiki for behaviour consistent with TOJO activity.

It is vital that viartis.net is added to the blacklist and remains there for good. JFW 21:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Help on history of Russsia (wikipedia)

This spam list won't let me revert vandalism - and I can't find the link causing the problem, major help needed as it's pretty serious vandalism - here's the dif: [87]- (User:Danielfolsom on en)68.33.74.27 22:41, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Solved - admin used rollback button.--68.33.74.27 22:52, 29 July 2007 (UTC)Reply


Blacklist Bug?

There is something wrong with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_raider, it won't let me edit it, saying there is a blacklisted link: http://www.s

Discussion

Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments3 people in 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)Reply

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)Reply
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)Reply

S

Latest comment: 16 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Apparently there is a blacklist entry forbidding the URL http://www DOT S (the single letter S)! This will surely cause a lot of legitimate page edits to fail, because a lot of articles legitimately reference URL's that begin with the letter S. 67.182.244.157 14:25, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes. This is already causing problems. Does anyone know why this should be happening? It must be a recent change. At the moment, perfectly good links are having to be removed ([88], [89]). Whatever the cause, this must be solved now. --Stemonitis 14:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

http://www.s

Hm, I have no problem. You must speak with your local admin. It is supposed to be blacklisted locally, not on this list. --Aphaia 14:59, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
"You must speak with your local admin." I am a "local admin" on de.wp. We also have this problem. (test http://www.spd.de ) We assume that it is a global problem, not a local. In our local spam blacklist there is no entry that can cause this problem. --BLueFiSH ✉ 15:29, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
it seems, that the problem is solved. i can now save pages with www.spd.de. --User:BLueFiSH.as 15:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Spam_blacklist&oldid=640821"