Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2012-04

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Warning! Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in April 2012, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index.

Proposed additions[edit]

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

Being spammed globally. Snowolf How can I help? 00:54, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Added Added Snowolf How can I help? 00:54, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

It's a redirectsite on domain matching on (global) blacklisted rule '\bart3w\.de\b' ½τr2 (tc) 17:16, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Added Added Snowolf How can I help? 17:23, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

Used primarily by George Reeves Person, the cross-wiki vandal who edits boxing and Rocky Marciano related pages. A search for this site on google brings up a lot of his trolling (especially the results after the first page). I'm not sure if this is enough for blacklisting, but we probably shouldn't be letting GRP add this spammy link. ½τr2 (tc) 03:34, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Added Added. --Trijnsteltalk 10:36, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

XWiki page creations on multiple occasions. πr2 (tc) 01:42, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Added Added Snowolf How can I help? 05:17, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

URL shortener being used in enwiki spam. πr2 (tc) 03:50, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Added Added Snowolf How can I help? 03:51, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

This site was just used as a source, when I went to check it I got a threat warning. Darkness Shines 06:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

adding it to the blacklist will just mean that it cannot be added, however, it will not remove it
Comment Comment Avast throws warning
Declined Declined no current issues from site, nor usage at WMF wikis billinghurst sDrewth 12:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

New URL of, previously added to spamlist. Saint Johann (ru) 21:48, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Added Added confirming new url of billinghurst sDrewth 22:32, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

New domain of the spammer. πr2 (tc) 17:48, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Added Added. Heavily spammed crosswiki. --Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 18:05, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

The same spammer has also been using (example). Please blacklist that as well. Jafeluv (talk) 18:09, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Added Added too. —Marco Aurelio (audiencia) 18:12, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
This is more Dusan Uzelac spam. This guy is a prolific spammer. He creates new users every time just to spam wikipedia. EdBever (talk) 12:13, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

URL shortener used for template vandalism. πr2 (tc) 02:56, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Added Added billinghurst sDrewth 05:36, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

Cross-wiki LTA (the "Apizza" vandal).--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:32, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

You can't blacklist this globally, because "every non-blank line is a regex fragment which will only match hosts inside URLs". πr2 (tc) 04:47, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Since it's all regex, I'm pretty sure that the video string A4jgXQQns8A can be caught and blocked.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:49, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Declined Declined As was explained to me, and has been attempted, the blacklist only works for the base domain, not for all components of a url. It differs from local blacklist in that extent, so I am led to believe. billinghurst sDrewth 05:40, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Commons affected too - abuse filter likely the most useful however based on his past performance it will simply be reuploded on youtube and so have a new "id" --Herby talk thyme 05:55, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
If you could help me construct a filter on, we can share the details among sysops on affected wikis so we can effectively have a global filter.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:59, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I've now created bugzilla:35986 for this.--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:03, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

So, what are all those youtube regexes actually blocking? --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 06:23, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Seems to work fine, I tried to add this link to a sandbox on enwiki and got notified that it was blacklisted. Also, the code for the extension appears to use the same function to create the regular expressions from the text of the local blacklist and from this page, so I can't see where there would be any difference. Anomie (talk) 19:52, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

Redirect site to globally blacklisted πr2 (tc) 03:57, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Added Added Snowolf How can I help? 03:59, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

From COIbot:

  • 16 records; Editors who have added FrankAndProust (6), Cloudswrest (2), (1), ChristeneDoss (1), (1), (1), (1), (1),, (1).
  • 16 records; Links added between 2012-04-05 11:45:45 and 2012-04-20 15:05:14; Days when was added: 2012-04-20 (7), 2012-04-05 (4), 2012-04-06 (4), 2012-04-19 (1).
  • See this diff and this diff: user is spamming wikipedia with apparently random text. NOTE: diffs might "disappear" when page gets deleted. Other similar pages have already been deleted.

EdBever (talk) 15:52, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Added Added. --EdBever (talk) 15:52, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Victory Ads[edit]

An Indian internetcompany running a whole load of websites seems to have been placing excessive numbers of links. The owner requested whitelisting of one of the links that I reverted yesterday.

I am looking at these links and deciding what to do with them. EdBever (talk) 08:39, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
My conclusions:
  • All links seem to be owned by the same person or company. The owners uses, so I can not further identify the owner.
  • Pages were added by the following IP's:
  • Each link was placed a few times, but in all many links were placed. COIbot has an incomplete count but gets to at least 54 additions
  • 54 records; Top 10 domains on server ( (7), (5), (5), (4), (3), (3), (3), (3), (3), (2)
  • mentions all these sites and says: " - Innovative Advertising in English, தமிழ் [Tamil] & മലയാളം [Malayalam]"
I can only conclude that this company or person is using wikipedia as an advertising vehicle. Since there are so many sites and so many IP edits crosswiki the only way to stop this spam is by blacklisting all these sites. EdBever (talk) 09:14, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
Added Added. --EdBever (talk) 09:35, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

As mentioned by EdBever , I do request for the DeBlackList of the Sites, I Will not and Shall not link the sites to and from Wikipedia anymore. Please remove the sites from the blacklist. I have explained everything in page.

And I never do this in future. Please remove the above sites from the blacklist.

Thank You.[edit]

Used by the Holiday-infos spammer. Jafeluv (talk) 15:33, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Added Added billinghurst sDrewth 15:39, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

This is for local blacklisting, not global, by Wikipedia rules. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Justiceandfair (talk • contribs) 15:41, 22 April 2012‎ (UTC)

To which rule(s) are you referring? If we said that we have evidence of xwiki spam on a continuing basis, would that make a difference? Can we ask your interest in the matter? billinghurst sDrewth 16:42, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

For example, this rule:

  1. - Only blacklist for widespread, unmanageable spam.

So, not one or two wikis, but multiple wikis.

As I understand wiki rules, "exceptions include malicious domains and URL redirector/shortener services" and this is not a case. If you have evidence about this, then OK, but then it should be presented here. Justiceandfair

Comparison: why this site is not on the Spam blacklist: It was added on more local wikis than Justiceandfair

This link may not have been spammed often enough to warrant blacklisting, but this site's owner (Dusan Uzelac) has a long record of spamming and is known as the holiday spammer. All his sites should be blacklisted globally as soon as we find them. This guy is a pest. EdBever (talk) 16:51, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Comment Comment The above account was apparently only created to discuss this link; Dear Dusan please stop spamming wikipedia! EdBever (talk) 18:42, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok, than all wikipedia rules about spamming should be dismissed and administrators should use their own opinions for blacklisting some sites or not. Justiceandfair

This spam is widespread and unmanageable, thus warranting blacklisting it globally. The user involved has clearly showed malicious intent. So Dusan please stop spamming. EdBever (talk) 19:41, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the extra site ( We will add it to our tracking. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:01, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
On investigation, this medical domain has been managed and removed by the community, and has not been a problematic as the domain named in the section.

To the comment about our use of the rules, if a site repeatedly adds its url to multiple wikis and does not stop when asked, or when it sees that it is being removed, AND it changes domain names to avoid blacklisting, then I fail to see that we are in breach of our guidance and we are clearly operating within the expected principles. That we add a spam url when it has only been added on one wiki rather than when 4 or great (guidance for spam blacklist) is a technical issue, and one that is considered as the best approach at that time. Scum of the earth spammers who just look to profit out of someone else's site, and someone else's valued work should be blocked on sight, and I will go to all ends to try to prevent or remedy such scum attacks. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:21, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

More holiday spam[edit]

EdBever (talk) 18:08, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Added Added. --EdBever (talk) 18:08, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


EdBever (talk) 18:32, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Added Added. --EdBever (talk) 18:33, 24 April 2012 (UTC)'s mirrors[edit] is already meta blacklisted (User:COIBot/XWiki/, however since that time they are now spamming their related mirror sites;

Google Analytics ID
UA-18824147 - (Track - Report -

Already blacklisted on See WikiProject Spam Item --Hu12 (talk) 02:28, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Added Added. –BruTe talk 07:10, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

An anonymous user insists on adding this website to multiple Persian projects and also Meta-Wiki. Meta1, Meta2, FA.WB1, FA.WB2, FA.WQ1, FA.WQ2 and various other places that I can't remember now. Thanks. Americophile 19:48, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

This link has been Added Added earlier today. EdBever (talk) 19:38, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposed removals[edit]

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

Presumably blocked because of the "dogsex" sequence in the URL (which actually stands for "Pedigree Dogs Exposed"), this link is quite useful to illustrate some points in discussions and therefore should be unblocked. --Cú Faoil 10:50, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Dogsex is not on the blacklist. I am not sure what does trigger the blacklist, but I do not feel like looking for all instances of sex on the list. I suggest you request local whitelisting for this website if you really want to add it to an article. EdBever 19:21, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
It's a site related to a movie generated quite some reactions (see en:Pedigree Dogs Exposed and interwiki) that is maintained by the director of that movie, so I think it would actually be quite useful to be able to link to this globally. When I try entering the URL, the output is that "pedigreedogsex" triggered the spam filter. --Cú Faoil 23:52, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Then it may just be in the blacklist at enWP. If it is in their blacklist, then you will need to ask there;, if you want it in their whitelist, you will need to ask there. w:en:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard billinghurst sDrewth 23:57, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
You can use the tool to check, where (and why) a link is blacklisted. In this case, "dogsex" is on the meta blacklist. I'll modify the regexps in the next few minutes, s.t. will be linkable. -- seth 20:58, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Declined Declined not on global blackilist, only on enWP revertlist billinghurst sDrewth 12:48, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

This page is a site which supports the music band called Outlandish in Turkey and broadcas.And hope you can remove this site from blacklist The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs) 13:07, 13 January 2012‎ (UTC)

It is a fansite, less authoritative than a reputed news site, at the same time, the User:COIBot/XWiki/ indicates that it is only on two wikis, which would usually mean that it should be handled locally rather than at meta. I would prefer that this was handled locally by the enWP/trWP communities than the overarching list. All that said, there does seem to be some overlinking, and I would encourage to limit any link addition to the main article page, rather than wider adding of the url through multiple pages. billinghurst sDrewth 11:08, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Declined Declined nothing further heard billinghurst sDrewth 12:46, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

This website is somehow in the blacklist. This website is a product/brand website that had been spammed by another brand in the same market. There's no malicious software, there's no spam or publicity in the site. Please remove it from the black list. Thank you for your attention 21:15, 28 March 2012 (UTC) Veronique

If it is not going to be "linked to" from our site, then what is the issue whether it is on the blacklist or not. Our blacklists are about preventing addition, not a reputation nor provenance guide. billinghurst sDrewth 05:13, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Declined Declined nothing further heard billinghurst sDrewth 12:44, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

I'm the owner of the site It's a recent site and it's part of a research project of Valladolid University. There's no malicious software, there's no spam or publicity in the site. It could be relevant for entries as I'm a professor and the web is part of our university work.

We had the same problem with SiteAdvisor of McAfee. With them the problem was there was a site called with malicious software, but there's no relation betwen and, our site. McAfee has rectified. You can see our request here:

Please remove our web of black list.

Thank you for your attention Xuarez project.

As is problematic for WMF sites, I would suggest that the means to get around this is to have the site whitelisted as esWP. billinghurst sDrewth 05:15, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your help, billinghurst sDrewth I'm going to try...

Xuarez project.

Declined Declined at this point in time, nothing else heard billinghurst sDrewth 12:45, 6 April 2012 (UTC)


This line in the blacklists should be changed/redesigned, because it blocks a lot of other domains as well, like "", a website by a journalist.

Second that. I guess it should block golf-secret.Everydomain, but in fact it blocks evrything beginning with "golf-", so even websites about the most popular Volkswagen. --32X (talk) 07:52, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Removed that component. billinghurst sDrewth 12:34, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

I recently added the site to the blacklist (As I was confused where to put this) but I was told to defer here. The reply stated that the domain '' was blocked globally, not the actual domain I am concerning about. In my opinion the site should be whitelisted because this site in its own rights has specifically not been blocked but rather the root domain itself. I will benefit my Article writing of the SocialFire article. The Domain is currently attempting to be used in my sandbox. If this does not meet the specific requirements, just state the failing requirement and I would be more than happy to solve the issue. Connor Savage (talk) 16:03, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Declined Declined at this point in time. * has been one of those regularly abuse second level domains. At this time there is nothing at your site, and as the Wikipedias are encyclopaedias I cannot presently see a reason to either remove or modify the blacklist. Also the way that you are discussing this matter, it would be worthwhile for you to read about the notability requirements and the conflict of interest statements at the requisite wikis. 12:43, 6 April 2012 (UTC)billinghurst sDrewth[edit]

Blacklisting was never sufficiently substantiated. Now it is interfering with registering that site as a semantic wiki with (see -- 15:11, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

If I'm not wrong, this pertains to an external (non WMF) wiki. Why don't you just add the said links to your spam whitelist (MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist)? Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 15:23, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
So I did, but the wrong ought to be corrected. -- 13:38, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Comment Comment It has been a number of years since this was blacklisted, I think that we should be willing to reconsider the blacklisting. At the same time, I would like to hear from the proponent why it should be removed beyond "it is problematic elsewhere". It presumably was spammed or inappropriately added here at WMF previously. billinghurst sDrewth 15:56, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes, my opinion is that it was blacklisted inappropriately (there was a conflict within Russian sector of Wikipedia, which I wouldn't like to revive or propagate here). -- 12:16, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
  • This website still contains a big number of insults against ru.wp users. For example take a look on "Category:Администраторы Википедии" (Category:Wikiedia adminstrators) - nearly all articles there are abusive. This website is blacklisted because it was used to harass wikipedia users (incl. placing links to this abusive articles) and I can't find any changes there now. --DR (talk) 20:19, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
  • Decline. Attack site links are as inappropriate now as they were two years ago. vvvt 20:31, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Declined Declined. Attack website, no need to be removed from blacklist. Issue at hand solved anyway. --Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 10:27, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
OK OK Its a RuWikipedia problem, not others. I believe it shouldn't be blacklisted just because it have something against RuWikipedians. It doesn't insult other Wikipedias, does it?-- 16:49, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Maybe not, but it can still be used on non-Russian projects to insult Russian admins and I'm not willing to remove a site used to abuse Wikimedians from the blacklist unless I see any real use for it in our projects (as Billinghurst says "It is problematic elsewhere" is not a valid reason). Any other admin can feel free to contradict me/override my decision of course. I'll be willing to reconsider the blacklisting myself if I see some valid reason provided in support of its removal. Regards, Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 17:32, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Can you specify where else is problematic? Thanks. Here is an example, on Russian Wikipedia they block some sites about film industry. Its not a download site, just the bios, with no offensive remarks toward anybody. It doesn't even have viruses, or adds to porn sites, checked. Another thing, as mentioned previously on the blacklist talkpage, the more we block sites that Wikipedia doesn't like, the more we alienate ourselves. We should work together! Plus, we don't live in China or North Korea, where even Wikipedia itself is blocked. Your thoughts on that?-- 23:26, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
To Pmlineditor: So what if the insults to the Russian Wikipedians are not baseless, lets say that it was the Wikipedians that did something wrong. The reason for it to be unblocked is because lots of people who are blocked on Russian Wikipedia probably will better off go there, that solves their nerves and out nerves as well. I know that you will say that even this reason is not valid.--Mishae (talk) 20:41, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[edit]

VK is now the largest social network in Russia and 58th site in Alexa ranking. Site was added to spam list in 2009, when it was very little. Now is no need to spam it in WM projects, the site is well-known. See also: en:VK (social network). AndyVolykhov (talk) 19:57, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Removed Removed. Agreed. Even I know (as a Dutch user) VK/VKontakte. Removed from the spam blacklist. --Trijnsteltalk 20:08, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[edit]

I have no idea why this website is blocked. The website is the official site of Linsey Dawn McKenzie--Wikien20091 (talk) 19:35, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Declined Declined. It's not - only locally on the English Wikipedia in June 2009. You should ask them to remove it at en:MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist. --Trijnsteltalk 19:55, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Victory Ads[edit]

VictoryAds and it's sites are added to the blacklist with the little misunderstanding.

Here is the full details of the domains

EdBever's Reply :

You can request removal from the blacklist here: m:Talk:Spam_blacklist#Proposed_removals. EdBever (talk) 16:05, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

So, Remove the Above domains from the "Spam BlackList"

Some of the sites are even not found or linked on wikipages or in any wikimedia project globally

Here are the Few sites or Domains


Thank You,

Victoryads (talk) 18:25, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

We do not de-blacklist unless a good faith non-COI editor needs it. Your username suggests that you have a huge conflict of interest here, and you are editing on behalf of that website. If you didn't want this to happen, you shouldn't have allowed your links to be added to Wikimedia projects. Links do not have to be exactly "commercial" to constitute spam, sorry.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:40, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Hello Jasper Deng,

Sorry for your misunderstanding. Actually one of the site is added to a particular school's page to provide the Relevant data. But unfortunately, Which has triggered the Wiki"Bot" [m:User:COIBot] to show that, the site [www. Erode District .com] is listed morethan once in wikipedia. After that I have contacted Mr.EdBever

First, He misunderstood and BlackListed all the Sites in the VictoryAds Home page. Then I have explained in detail. You can read it here

After that, He understood and told me to request for the Removal of Spam_BalckList

Were the sites are very relevant to the pages

For Example:

   * www. ErodeDistrict .com to Added on 19 October 2011
   * www. CoimbatoreDistrict .com to Added on 17 November 2011
   * www. SivagangaiDistrict .com to Added on 22 November 2011
   * www. DharmapuriDistrict .com to Added on 16 January 2012

None of the site is for commercial purpose. It is 100% Free to Public and It doesn't need any login or membership to access the data.

No site is linked to wikipedia otherthan relevant and more than one link or one page. It was added since past 1 to one and Half year in span and nearly 15 sites have not listed or linked to wikipedia or in any other wikimedia project. Which is listed in the above.

It was just the misunderstanding of Mr.EdBever

Sites are not related to spam in anyway. You can Contact Mr.EdBever to get a Good Faith about the sites.

I hope you have understand, what have gone wrong.

[m:User:COIBot] Showed, that is liked to wikipedia for more than once. So, I have contacted Mr.EdBever. He misunderstood first and blacklist all the sites, which is not realted or lined to wiki in any way, After my explanation [1] He told to request for the removal from the blacklist.

So I am able to restore it and remove the particular School's Link [Which caused the COIBot to trigger this]

Thank You,

Victoryads (talk) 21:19, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Either way you are clearly only acting to promote your website(s), and we do not take requests from users with obvious COIs like you, only third-party editors; basically you can't do anything about it. I found the links to be of little value to the articles they were added to.--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:36, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
The Wikipedias are encyclopaedias referencing citation material, for an example see en:Wikipedia:External links and en:Wikipedia:Citing sources. I have not reviewed the circumstance of the evidence for linking, however, I see no compelling reason to remove the sites; and your approach more seems to think that the Wikipedias are a linking service, and should link to sites are topic-associated, which is not the case. I would direct you to read the article en:Wikipedia:Conflict of interest as it should provide clarifying information that supports our argument. There may be local language equivalents at wikis of your native language, and they would normally be wikilinked on the left of each of those pages. — billinghurst sDrewth 22:55, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Hello Jasper Deng,

Thanks for the reply. It's not about little article. More articles in Tamil and English and Providing Exact Valuable Data to the person's expectation and more relevant to Wiki's user's experience. It was just the little misunderstanding of Mr.EdBever at first and soon he understood, what have gone wrong. You can Contact Mr.EdBever to get a Good Faith about the sites.

Yes I know, Wikipedias are not a linking service. All the sites are listed above and it's primary language is English and Additionally Having the Local Language as Tamil and Malayalam. Just added more value to the page.

After Understanding the situation, Mr.EdBever [2] told to request for the removal from the blacklist. Because, He have added these sites to the "Spam_BlackList" by little misunderstanding.

Thank You,

Victoryads (talk) 05:43, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Declined Declined inadequate justification for removal, your cited discussion clearly indicates that EdBever believes that the domains should not be removed from the blcklist, and thereupon provided this place as the place for any such request. It did not account to any endorsement of the validity of the request — billinghurst sDrewth 08:16, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Troubleshooting and problems[edit]

Symbol comment vote.svg This section is for archiving Troubleshooting and problems.


Symbol comment vote.svg This section is for archiving Discussions.